Why all this Cutler Talk? [Archive] - BillsZone.com

DraftBoy

03-16-2009, 10:38 AM

Regardless of these two reasons the talk makes it seem like the Bills are in active talks with Denver. I have not read 1 thing that tells me that.

Its all baseless rumors and conjectures at this point Thurm, but with Cutler asking for a trade the idea is one that's worth discussing.

trapezeus

03-16-2009, 10:41 AM

i think the talk is based on the fact that cutler and mcdaniels met over the weekend and the prognosis wasn't good. The pundits are saying he will be moved by draft day. i also think Cutler said the same thing. he also put his house and his parents house in denver on the block.

As for him coming to buffalo, it's just random chatter. but since TO got signed i think a lot of fans just assume anything can happen.

i fear, for whoever takes cutler, will give up too many picks to acquire him and the broncos will get the better end of the deal. just like dallas did with trading hershel walker.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:04 AM

Why would a non-Bills fan come on here and want Cutler to be a Bill?

I don't know. It's amazing all the haters around here.

THATHURMANATOR

03-16-2009, 11:13 AM

Its all baseless rumors and conjectures at this point Thurm, but with Cutler asking for a trade the idea is one that's worth discussing.
Again I am all for discussing it but I was confused by many of the threads acting as if the Bills were close to doing it.

feldspar

03-16-2009, 11:14 AM

People are talking about Cutler because this is the offseason and there is not much more to talk about...T.O., Peters' new contract or lack thereof, the holes on our team, who we should draft, how will we do next year...a lot of the real topics have been beaten to death, especially by the people that visit the board the most.

It's just something to talk about. But I think anyone with a brain realizes that Cutler won't be coming to Buffalo this year...not even a possiblity. His situation is one of the more interesting ones happening this year, though. I personally think that he will remain in Denver. I think that McDaniels entertained the idea of bringing in Cassel, and since that didn't happen, the Broncos would be fools to trade Cutler since they have absolutely nobody to replace him with. After the trade for Cassel didn't happen, McDaniels didn't tell Cutler what he wanted to hear...didn't give him reassurance that his job was completely safe...didn't give him that comfort zone. This made Cutler unhappy, but being unhappy doesn't give him any power to take his ball and go home. He'll be in Denver.

HHURRICANE

03-16-2009, 11:14 AM

The Bills are sold on Edwards. Cutler is not an option here.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:21 AM

The Bills are sold on Edwards. Cutler is not an option here.

IMO that's stupid. Edwards hasn't proven anything, and has looked downright horrid at times.

Now, I'm not saying the Bills should be desperate to bring in a QB, or that QB should be a priority. They have far bigger priorities at the moment.

But, if someone like Cutler becomes available via trade, they should at least see if it's reasonable to obtain him.

Personally, I'm not sold on Cutler, but at this point he's better than Edwards and I wouldn't mind picking him up for the right price ("right price" being key- if they want Jason Peters, they can **** off).

DraftBoy

03-16-2009, 11:26 AM

Again I am all for discussing it but I was confused by many of the threads acting as if the Bills were close to doing it.

I merged a few together. People just hear a new name and get over excited.

X-Era

03-16-2009, 11:29 AM

IMO that's stupid. Edwards hasn't proven anything, and has looked downright horrid at times.

Now, I'm not saying the Bills should be desperate to bring in a QB, or that QB should be a priority. They have far bigger priorities at the moment.

But, if someone like Cutler becomes available via trade, they should at least see if it's reasonable to obtain him.

Personally, I'm not sold on Cutler, but at this point he's better than Edwards and I wouldn't mind picking him up for the right price ("right price" being key- if they want Jason Peters, they can **** off).

I think Cutler is on a better team than Edwards.

Cutlers attitude kills the deal for me. I dont care how strong his arm is. Edwards is plenty accurate and has shown he can get the ball deep to Evans.

If Edwards never had the concussion and lost his composure for those 4 or 5 games, we wouldnt even be talking about this and the majority of the board would think Edwards is better.

But woulda, coulda, shoulda... Edwards has this year to step up, or we will be searching again.

And I disagre that Edwards has every reason to succeed, whos starting at LG again? And its not like our new C is a slam dunk either.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:32 AM

Personally, I'm not sold on Cutler, but at this point he's better than Edwards and I wouldn't mind picking him up for the right price ("right price" being key- if they want Jason Peters, they can **** off). lol, not willing to give up a LT for a franchise QB. Some Bills fans wonder why it's been so long since the playoffs. :rolleyes:

Maybe Denver will agree to take the Bills 6th round pick.

X-Era

03-16-2009, 11:34 AM

Philagape

03-16-2009, 11:37 AM

since TO got signed i think a lot of fans just assume anything can happen.

That was the case before TO signed too. Having it actually happen, the one in a thousand, just encourages it.

Recognizable name = next Buffalo Bill. That's all it takes for threads to pop up here. Dozens every year.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:37 AM

lol, not willing to give up a LT for a franchise QB. Some Bills fans wonder why it's been so long since the playoffs. :rolleyes:

Maybe Denver will agree to take the Bills 6th round pick.

You've got that completely backwards. Peters is a franchise LT and the reason why this team loses is because we always let top-tier talent walk so we don't have to pay them.

And Cutler isn't necessarily a franchise QB. At this point he's better than Edwards, but he was also on one hell of an offense and has a bad temper. I'd be willing to take a chance on Cutler for the right price, but what's the point in paying for Cutler if we have Walker and Chambers attempting to protect him?

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:41 AM

If franchise QB means hes the clear and only starting caliper QB then I agree... but hes not a star by any means.

The last 2 years, 8023 yards, 45 TDs, 32 Ints, Comp% over 62, 38 sacks, with basically less weapons than what either JP or Trent had.

I agree Cutler is not franchise QB material and Denver should just give him to the Bills. /sarcasm off

Mudflap1

03-16-2009, 11:42 AM

Look, I'm not the biggest Edwards fan in the world. However, Edwards outplayed Cutler head to head last season, in Denver. And Cutler has more weapons. Furthermore, I think Cutler and T.O. could have major chemistry problems, whereas I think Edwards would be more amenable. The downside to all of this is Edwards' being injury-proned. Cutler is more durable. That's the biggest difference at this point.

Jon

FlyingDutchman

03-16-2009, 11:45 AM

You've got that completely backwards. Peters is a franchise LT and the reason why this team loses is because we always let top-tier talent walk so we don't have to pay them.

And Cutler isn't necessarily a franchise QB. At this point he's better than Edwards, but he was also on one hell of an offense and has a bad temper. I'd be willing to take a chance on Cutler for the right price, but what's the point in paying for Cutler if we have Walker and Chambers attempting to protect him?

what top tier talent do you speak of? Clements? yeah bc he was really worth that kind of money right?

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:47 AM

You've got that completely backwards. Peters is a franchise LT and the reason why this team loses is because we always let top-tier talent walk so we don't have to pay them. It's already been proven that most of the talent the Bills let walk don't go on to be stars elsewhere. There is always the exceptions like Pat Williams, Winfield, Clements, the last 2 most Bills fans didn't want to pay so can't really use that in any argument.

And Cutler isn't necessarily a franchise QB. At this point he's better than Edwards, but he was also on one hell of an offense and has a bad temper. Cutler and Marshall was Denver's offense.

I'd be willing to take a chance on Cutler for the right price, but what's the point in paying for Cutler if we have Walker and Chambers attempting to protect him? Cutler is mobile and doesn't take a lot of sacks. He's the anti-JP. Whether you want to believe it or not, Chambers/Walker played well in Peters absence.

X-Era

03-16-2009, 11:49 AM

You keep saying this

"Whether you want to believe it or not, Chambers/Walker played well in Peters absence."

Prove it.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:51 AM

what top tier talent do you speak of? Clements? yeah bc he was really worth that kind of money right?

Pat Williams, London Fletcher, arguably Antoine Winfield, I wouldn't call Grier "top tier" but he was quality and we let him walk when we could have kept him for a very reasonable price.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:52 AM

It's already been proven that most of the talent the Bills let walk don't go on to be stars elsewhere. There is always the exceptions like Pat Williams, Winfield, Clements, the last 2 most Bills fans didn't want to pay so can't really use that in any argument.

Cutler and Marshall was Denver's offense.
Cutler is mobile and doesn't take a lot of sacks. He's the anti-JP. Whether you want to believe it or not, Chambers/Walker played well in Peters absence.

You knock Peters but you completely neglect Denver's OL in your analysis of their offense. Their OL was far better at both run blocking and pass blocking than ours. Chambers held his own for 2 games but I doubt he will maintain that level. Remember, those two games were against teams that turned out to be pretty crappy.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:53 AM

. However, Edwards outplayed Cutler head to head last season, in Denver. And Cutler has more weapons. Denver didn't have any running back with more than 350 yards. They relied on their passing game.

Do you think Edwards would have put up Cutler like numbers in Denver? I doubt it.

FlyingDutchman

03-16-2009, 11:54 AM

ill give you williams and winfield, but fletcher? cmon, top tier?

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:55 AM

Pat Williams, London Fletcher, arguably Antoine Winfield, I wouldn't call Grier "top tier" but he was quality and we let him walk when we could have kept him for a very reasonable price.

Most fans agreed with not paying Fletcher and Winfield. Sorry, can't use them in your argument.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:56 AM

ill give you williams and winfield, but fletcher? cmon, top tier?

Being in DC, I see him on TV all the time and I saw him live last year. The dude can flat out play, and most Skins fans say he's the MVP of their defense. We can argue all day about whether that makes him "top tier", but there is no doubt in my mind that our D would be significantly better with Fletch in the middle and Poz in Ellison's spot.

madness

03-16-2009, 11:56 AM

You keep saying this

"Whether you want to believe it or not, Chambers/Walker played well in Peters absence."

Prove it.

Prove that they didn't. :D

One thing is for sure.... neither/both gave up 11.5 sacks. I remember reading an article last week that said the line was playing better as a whole unit before Peters came back and that it was all downfield from that point on. I'd say I have to agree with that.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 11:57 AM

Remember, those two games were against teams that turned out to be pretty crappy. lol, the crappy 11-5 Patriots, the crappy 8-8 Bronco, the 1st game of the season Seahawks, and parts of the Jag game, damn I wish the Bills were that crappy.

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:58 AM

Most fans agreed with not paying Fletcher and Winfield. Sorry, can't use them in your argument.

First, I didn't agree with getting rid of Fletcher.

Second, who cares what the fans thought? How does that make one iota of difference whatsoever? The point is that they were top tier, the FO didn't pay them, and they went on to excel elsewhere, while we got stuck with crap (well, we recovered at CB but we're still hurting from losing Williams at DT). The fans opinion doesn't matter.

And even if it did, how do you know that most fans agreed with not paying them? Do you have a statistically valid survey? Or is that just your personal recollection of what people on this message board said?

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 11:59 AM

lol, the crappy 11-5 Patriots, the crappy 8-8 Bronco, the 1st game of the season Seahawks, and parts of the Jag game, damn I with the Bills were that crappy.

The Broncos were pretty crappy, especially on D. Seattle was one of the worst teams in the league last year, and Jax was mediocre at best.

Mudflap1

03-16-2009, 12:00 PM

Denver didn't have any running back with more than 350 yards. They relied on their passing game.

Do you think Edwards would have put up Cutler like numbers in Denver? I doubt it.

I'm not denying that Cutler has talent. I'm saying that there are some things you have to consider.

1. He's abrasive. Not good a good fit with Terrell Owens.

2. He put up good numbers last year, but he had Brandon Marshall, Eddie Royal, Tony Scheffler, and Mike Shanahan coaching him, etc. That's a nice supporting cast in the passing game department.

3. Yes, Denver had injury problems with the running game last year. But what about the previous years? He had his best season last year with no running game. You have to put up some big numbers when there are no running backs on the roster. My point is, Cutler may have put up some good numbers last year, but his teams have proven nothing, and they have better personnel overall than Buffalo.

4. It would cost a lot to acquire Cutler. Buffalo wouldn't be the only team in the market for a young quarterback.

5. Edwards outplayed Cutler head to head, again, Cutler had better personnel.

Things against Edwards.

1. Injury problems.

2. Hasn't proven anything either.

3. Not as strong of an arm as Cutler.

I'm not saying Edwards > Cutler in every sense, but for what Buffalo is doing, they are probably better off sticking with Edwards for now, seeing what he can do with improved personnel, and using their draft picks, money, and overall resources beefing up the rest of the team.

Jon

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 12:00 PM

Prove that they didn't. :D

One thing is for sure.... neither/both gave up 11.5 sacks. I remember reading an article last week that said the line was playing better as a whole unit before Peters came back and that it was all downfield from that point on. I'd say I have to agree with that.

Where did this 11.5 sacks come from? Did they subtract the garbage time sacks that occurred when the game was out of hand? Did they subtract the sacks that occurred because JP or Trent held the ball too long? Did they know what the coverage was supposed to be?

People keep regurgitating that stat verbatim but no one seems to see the subjectivity of it or even care how it was obtained.

FlyingDutchman

03-16-2009, 12:02 PM

Being in DC, I see him on TV all the time and I saw him live last year. The dude can flat out play, and most Skins fans say he's the MVP of their defense. We can argue all day about whether that makes him "top tier", but there is no doubt in my mind that our D would be significantly better with Fletch in the middle and Poz in Ellison's spot.

having had season tickets when he was here, i watched him all the time. no doubt hes no slouch. it was more of buffalos crap d line that made him around the ball so much. hes a good player. top tier he is not. theres no arguement about that. so basically you named 2 players and are arguing to name a 3rd. hardly "always" letting our top talent go. especially when we just resigned evans, and are trying to resign peters but hes being a little pain in the ass.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 12:03 PM

Second, who cares what the fans thought? How does that make one iota of difference whatsoever? The point is that they were top tier, the FO didn't pay them, and they went on to excel elsewhere, while we got stuck with crap (well, we recovered at CB but we're still hurting from losing Williams at DT). The fans opinion doesn't matter. Pat Williams left 5 years ago. So out of all the players the Bills let walk just the past 5 years all you have is a list of 3 players? That shows just how pathetic the Bills drafting has been.

And even if it did, how do you know that most fans agreed with not paying them?
Do you have a statistically valid survey? Or is that just your personal recollection of what people on this message board said? I've been posting here just as long as you have been. Are you going to say the majority of the people on here wanted to pay Fletcher, Winfield and Clements?

X-Era

03-16-2009, 12:05 PM

Prove that they didn't. :D

One thing is for sure.... neither/both gave up 11.5 sacks. I remember reading an article last week that said the line was playing better as a whole unit before Peters came back and that it was all downfield from that point on. I'd say I have to agree with that.

In the Hawks game he was sacked twice, only threw for 232, and we barely broke 100 total rushing yards. Trent was also 4-16 or 25% on 3rd downs. I know we won, but this was far from a dominant performance.

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 12:05 PM

2. He put up good numbers last year, but he had Brandon Marshall, Eddie Royal, Tony Scheffler, and Mike Shanahan coaching him, etc. That's a nice supporting cast in the passing game department.

Would the support cast have mattered if Cutler turned out to be a bum? Do you think Marshall, Royal etc... would have put up similar #'s with Edwards throwing them the ball?

OpIv37

03-16-2009, 12:10 PM

Pat Williams left 5 years ago. So out of all the players the Bills let walk just the past 5 years all you have is a list of 3 players? That shows just how pathetic the Bills drafting has been.

I've been posting here just as long as you have been. Are you going to say the majority of the people on here wanted to pay Fletcher, Winfield and Clements?

I'm saying I don't know or care what the majority of people on this board wanted to do- that doesn't make it the right move. For example, the majority of fans (myself included) on here liked the Dockery signing- how'd that work out?

madness

03-16-2009, 12:25 PM

Where did this 11.5 sacks come from? Did they subtract the garbage time sacks that occurred when the game was out of hand? Did they subtract the sacks that occurred because JP or Trent held the ball too long? Did they know what the coverage was supposed to be?

People keep regurgitating that stat verbatim but no one seems to see the subjectivity of it or even care how it was obtained.

... or don't care about excuses. Apply that same garbage to his replacements and they look even better. Is it still appropriate to throw an INT in a blowout? Should we take away passing yards from Tom Brady because a decent chunk of them came when the Patriots were running up the score? A missed block on a broken play could mean 7 points for the other team. Play to the whistle, it's that simple.

Peters holdout hurt his game and it was obvious to almost everyone including him!

Mudflap1

03-16-2009, 12:32 PM

Would the support cast have mattered if Cutler turned out to be a bum? Do you think Marshall, Royal etc... would have put up similar #'s with Edwards throwing them the ball?

Look, what I'm saying is I think the Bills have bigger fish to fry right now than to spend high draft picks trading for a quarterback that is abrasive and got outplayed last year head to head by the guy that we would be getting rid of. Why is that so hard for you to understand? This team has a lot more holes to fill then to start getting rid of its resources, ie draft picks.

It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they did trade for Cutler. I wouldn't be crying about it. But I would rather shore up the offensive line, defensive line, and linebackers at this point.

To answer your question directly... I don't know if Edwards would have put up similar numbers or not. I think Cutler straight up is a more talented player. But I'm saying there are bigger holes to fill right now then to hedge all of your bets on Cutler, who isn't a proven commodity in his own right.

Jon

TacklingDummy

03-16-2009, 12:43 PM

Look, what I'm saying is I think the Bills have bigger fish to fry right now than to spend high draft picks trading for a quarterback that is abrasive and got outplayed last year head to head by the guy that we would be getting rid of. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Head to head doesn't mean crap. The past 2 years Cutler has 45 TD passes, Trent has 18. 8023 yards vs 4229.

It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they did trade for Cutler. I wouldn't be crying about it. But I would rather shore up the offensive line, defensive line, and linebackers at this point. I agree the D-line needs improvement and we need to sign another guard.

who isn't a proven commodity in his own right.

I disagree. I believe Cutler is a proven commodity. I just hope Trent doesn't fail because realistically the Bills will not be going after Cutler. And if Trent fails that will make it twice the Bills passed on him. I'd just hate to see another repeat of the past 10 or so years where one of the Bills biggest problems has been QB.

I'm sorry but a franchise QB is 10x more valuable than a "franchise" left tackle.

justasportsfan

03-16-2009, 12:49 PM

Mudflap1

03-16-2009, 01:03 PM

Head to head doesn't mean crap. The past 2 years Cutler has 45 TD passes, Trent has 18. 8023 yards vs 4229.

I agree the D-line needs improvement and we need to sign another guard.

I disagree. I believe Cutler is a proven commodity. I just hope Trent doesn't fail because realistically the Bills will not be going after Cutler. And if Trent fails that will make it twice the Bills passed on him. I'd just hate to see another repeat of the past 10 or so years where one of the Bills biggest problems has been QB.

I'm sorry but a franchise QB is 10x more valuable than a "franchise" left tackle.

I don't think we are that far apart in what we are saying, with the exception of the last statement. While I believe a franchise QB is the most important position in football, I don't think it's 10x more valuable than a franchise LT. If the team has good receivers (the Bills arguably have great receivers now), good running backs (the Bills have very good running backs), a real good offensive line (not there yet, needs beefing up), and solid defense (not that far off, need some additions), the team can do really well with a solid QB. We don't know if Edwards is solid (or better) yet. We shall know this year. I agree, he may turn out to be a big bust, or at least a guy that is injury-proned and will never be a healthy, stable quarterback.