NFL 2009

[Maxx]

I think its going to be a few years before we can really see who got the better deal here. Right now, its the Broncos as its always good when you can stockpile first rounders, especially when it involves getting rid of a player that doesn't want to be there. Cutler is an upgrade for the Bears, but the Bears don't have much of a recieving core to speak of. If Berrian was still in Chicago I'd say Bears fans have something to be excited about. But Cutler is the kind of guy that needs a few good WRs to be most effective. Of course maybe his ability to the throw the deep ball will impact Hester's production.

I'd be willing to be the Broncos get better faster, as they were the more complete team to begin with. If the Bears can find a big play WR to hook up with Cutler, my opinon may change, but the Bears have never been very adept at finding WRs.

I will say if the Lions draft Stafford and he busts, their fans will probably never forgive them for not making a deal for Cutler. They could have given up their second first rounder and their first next year for Cutler and still had the first overall pick to take an OT.

[MyKILLv2.0]

I can’t understand this trade at all. Why would the Bears trade for Cutler? Sure he is a talented QB, ranking in the top ten of QB’s somewhere between 5 and 10. But Chicago doesn’t need that style of QB. Kyle Orton was the perfect fit for them. They have a strong defensive, and Forte arrived last year as their running game. While Cutler is obviously a better QB, the passing game isn’t as important to a team like Chicago who builds its team around defense and a running game. I don’t understand why a team would pay so much for a player that doesn’t fit into their system.

Future more, I don’t understand at all how people and ESPN analyst can say with a straight face that “Denver is better” after this trade. REALLY? Their defense is one of the worst in the league, and as DMN pointed out, their running game and run blocking is no where near as good as it was during Shannon’s glory years. The only thing Denver had going for it last year was a group of talented WRs, lead by a talented gunslinger. I don’t understand how you take the only good piece of your team, weaken it…and somehow make yourself better.

…if anything Denver is worse off now then before; with Cutler I thought the team had a chance to get to 7 or 8 wins. After the trade, I struggle to see how they are going to muster more then 4 or 5 wins. On the flip side Chicago is probably only about the same. With their aging defense, I still wouldn’t put them above Green Bay or Minnesota. So again, I don’t understand this trade. Chicago isn’t any better and Denver worse.

[naiwf]

Stafford won't be anything special because Detroit needs an OL before they can worry about protecting their skill position players. It'll take Stafford at least 2-3 years before he hits his stride (if he ever does) and they could probably have acquired Cutler for less monetary compensation than Stafford and the picks they didn't give up will cost. It feels nice having a competent GM.

[Maxx]

Colin Cowherd just said that the QB of the Chicago Bears is one of sports glamour positions, on par with the star player of the Lakers.

[naiwf]

Colin Cowherd just said that the QB of the Chicago Bears is one of sports glamour positions, on par with the star player of the Lakers.

Is his drug addiction public knowledge? It's been at least 20 years since the Bears had a name QB, and Jim McMahon was pretty much worse than Orton or Grossman. His career highs were 2,392 yds and 15 TD and he rarely played more than 10 games in a season (5 times in 15 seasons). That may be the single dumbest sports related comment ever. It's such a glamor position that the Bears have changed the guy filling it more than 40 times since the early 1990s. How does Cowherd have a job again?

[MyKILLv2.0]

Colin Cowherd is a complete idiot. I will always hate him for remarks he made about Eddie Guerrero the morning after he passed away....bastard.

[VerbalPuke]

Stafford won't be anything special because Detroit needs an OL before they can worry about protecting their skill position players. It'll take Stafford at least 2-3 years before he hits his stride (if he ever does) and they could probably have acquired Cutler for less monetary compensation than Stafford and the picks they didn't give up will cost. It feels nice having a competent GM.

If they draft him, they ought to sit him this year and let Culpepper take the beating. Hopefully improving the offensive line a bit this year, and perhaps in next years draft/free agency.

I don't see a problem with the Lions not giving up two first round picks for Cutler, with the holes in the defense and offensive line, they shouldn't be offloading picks for Cutler. Cutler is certainly a good QB, but if he's as bitchy as people are saying, how happy would he have been playing for the shittiest team in the league? He'd have Calvin Johnson certainly, but the offensive line is still disgusting, even if we were to draft the Jason Smith, it's still fairly poor across the board. I'm in favor of keeping the picks and continuing to try and improve across the board.

[naiwf]

I'm just thinking about how much money it's going to cost to draft Stafford + others relative to Cutler. Favre Jr. may be a whiny bitch, but at least we know what he can do at the NFL level. Stafford is as much of a crap shoot as any other 1st round pick. If the Lions miss here, they're looking at at least another 5 years of complete futility.

[Maxx]

Giants have released Plaxico Burress.

[naiwf]

Took long enough, now if they would be so kind as to sign a # 1 AND a # 2 WR we might not lose 5 out of 6 to start next season too.

[sahyder1]

Keep hearing Britt linked to them in the draft. Plus they're pretty high on Manningham (sic?). Still need someone else....who's available?

[naiwf]

I have no idea. They passed on T.O. and Housh, I doubt they'd be interested in Ocho Cinco, and I don't think they could get Boldin in a trade. There are a couple of possession receivers available like Harrison or Holt, but unless they draft a stud our receiving corps will be terribly weak.

[Cactus Drags]

I can't understand this trade at all. Why would the Bears trade for Cutler? Sure he is a talented QB, ranking in the top ten of QB's somewhere between 5 and 10. But Chicago doesn't need that style of QB. Kyle Orton was the perfect fit for them. They have a strong defensive, and Forte arrived last year as their running game. While Cutler is obviously a better QB, the passing game isn't as important to a team like Chicago who builds its team around defense and a running game. I don't understand why a team would pay so much for a player that doesn't fit into their system.

Future more, I don't understand at all how people and ESPN analyst can say with a straight face that "Denver is better" after this trade. REALLY? Their defense is one of the worst in the league, and as DMN pointed out, their running game and run blocking is no where near as good as it was during Shannon's glory years. The only thing Denver had going for it last year was a group of talented WRs, lead by a talented gunslinger. I don't understand how you take the only good piece of your team, weaken it…and somehow make yourself better.

…if anything Denver is worse off now then before; with Cutler I thought the team had a chance to get to 7 or 8 wins. After the trade, I struggle to see how they are going to muster more then 4 or 5 wins. On the flip side Chicago is probably only about the same. With their aging defense, I still wouldn't put them above Green Bay or Minnesota. So again, I don't understand this trade. Chicago isn't any better and Denver worse.

That's EXACTLY why the Bears made the deal. They're of the opinion that Orton can develop into a franchise QB, but the defense is getting on and the championship window for them is closing. Cutler arguably is/i] a franchise QB already, certainly in the upper echleon. I don't question the decision, perhaps the Bears gave up too much, but as I've already said, there's no real track record of doing well in the first round - Angelo has a pretty great history of picking decent players up in the later rounds (Alex Brown and Lance Briggs come to mind). To be honest, I don't see it as anything other than a good deal for both sides. Don't forget, Chicago's bigger need positions, like wideout, are positions that have pretty deep classes in this year's draft.

[bill_da_bill]

As a Lions fan it doesn't hurt my feelings that they didn't get Cutler. When it was first being rumored that it'd cost a 1st round pick, than I was for it. But 2 1st rounders and a 3rd and likely for the Lions another pick since we didn't have a Kyle Orton to include, thats to much. There are to many holes on the team to give up that much draft picks for one guy. Cutler would make us better, but not that much better with all the holes that would still be there and no way to fill them.

Draft Stafford cause Culpepper and Stanton are shit and if you wait you won't get a QB late cause this is a weak class. Than take a DE/OT/MLB with the next two picks. I wouldn't mind this...

1. Stafford

20. Lauranitis

33. William Beatty -or- Larry English

[I Love Pokemon]

The Lions would be retarded to draft Stafford first overall, the only thing worse would be taking Sanchez.

They should take a Lineman, and defense, forget drafting a big name QB, and get Rhett Bomar in the third round. Bomar is a good QB who could likely become a good NFL QB. or they can start Culpepper/Stanton for this year and get one of the "marquee" QB's next year.

Stafford might be good, and may do well in the NFL but he isn't worth the first overall pick.

I think the best place for Stafford would be Seattle. He would get time to adjust to NFL defenses while not being thrust into the spotlight,plus he could learn from QB Matt Hasselbeck who when healthy is one of the NFC's best QB's. On the other foot, i think Sanchez/Freeman would also be ideal for them.

I Think the lions should draft sort of like this,

1. OT from Baylor (Jason Smith i think)

20. James Lauranitis or Ray Malauga(sp?)

2nd Round. Not Sure really.

3rd. Rhett Bomar

[Vendetta]

So the Bears get a franchise QB and give up two first round picks and Orton.

This tells me that Chicago is going to overload on defense in the draft this year and I wouldn't be surprised if they traded one of their key guys to move back into the first round and a second round draft pick.

Urlacher isn't going any where but I wouldn't rule out a Lance Briggs trade.

[I Love Pokemon]

So the Bears get a franchise QB and give up two first round picks and Orton.

This tells me that Chicago is going to overload on defense in the draft this year and I wouldn't be surprised if they traded one of their key guys to move back into the first round and a second round draft pick.

Urlacher isn't going any where but I wouldn't rule out a Lance Briggs trade.

I can see what your saying. They should either get Robiske somehow or trade someone to get Maclin/Crabtree. I think Maclin especially would flourish with Cutler. I'm not sure they will and it's farfetched but not a bad idea.

Isn't Urlacher a free agent at the end of this upcoming season?

[VerbalPuke]

I'm just thinking about how much money it's going to cost to draft Stafford + others relative to Cutler. Favre Jr. may be a whiny bitch, but at least we know what he can do at the NFL level. Stafford is as much of a crap shoot as any other 1st round pick. If the Lions miss here, they're looking at at least another 5 years of complete futility.

You are right on that front, and I'd have been excited to have Cutler. It's just looking at the holes on our team, it'd be hard to justify giving up two first rounders. I'm trying to warm up to the idea of taking Stafford should that happen, but if it were me drafting, I'd go with Jason Smith, then defense the rest of the way. I think the Lions would like to get out of the top spot, but nobody wants to be saddled with the big money contract. I have been reading that Goodell would like to change the fact that rookies are getting paid large sums of money without playing a down of pro football.

Shockingly, I agree with I Love Pokemon's mock.

[I Love Pokemon]

Yeah, me and my friend were talking about it, and Bomar has alot of potential and will come relatively cheap. He won't cost as much Stafford/Freeman/Sanchez will but he could be a good QB, and a relatively safe QB, He has talent, and shown that he could do good at Sam Houston State and at Oklahoma, so that he wasn't just a system QB.

Plus, i think that all of the "big three" QB's will be prospect QBs, they will need seasoning as will Bomar, but will be more expensive, and Bomar has alot of upside aswell.

[VerbalPuke]

I should have clarified, but I'm more in tune with the two first rounders. If we don't take Stafford, I don't think it's a great idea to grab a QB in the third when the defense still has more issues.

Certainly getting a LB at 20 will help, but the secondary and defensive line are still atrocious.