I can understand where you are coming from to an extent. But, you missed some blatant facts to back your argument. First off, Denver went through five running backs last year due to injury and were down to their fullback, Peyton Hillis as their starting RB. So to say that Cutler had a good running game to compliment his passing game...not a chance. Defenses were dropping back extra LB's into pass coverage because the Broncos had no running game. Secondly, the Bears have an established running game. Rookie RB Matt Forte was the 7th leading rusher in terms of total yards last season. And mind you, that was with defenses stacking the box because of Orton's inability to get the ball downfield. With Cutlers ability to scramble, avoid the pass rush (sacked only 11 times last season) and throw on the run, defenses will no longer be able to overplay the run. This brings up another point. Cutler can buy more time for our receivers to open up routes because of his elusiveness. No, I do not dislike Kyle Orton, but you have to be fair in your assessment. He is immobile and a solid back up NFL QB who won't make many mistakes but won't win you many games either. Cutler will make the Bears offense much more balanced and they will be very tough to gameplan against. Going for the veteran...no thanks. I'll take a soon to be 26 year old pro bowler who has only begun to show what he can do.
Orton almost got benched toward the end of his senior year at Purdue. Tiller had enough of him. He had a mediocre year last year and he overachieved to do that. And he can't throw the long ball. Good back-up qb. He doesn't have the potential for greatness and w/o a great one taking the snap, you won't go far.
Are you suggesting that the Bears will rally behind Cutler? If so ... why, exactly? Give me one example where a team brought someone into The Leadership position under such a cloud of bullshit, and stupidity, and that person went on to succeed?
There is an interesting dynamic in the Cutler circus concering his old coach , Mike Shanahan. There was considerable speculation that if the Redskins traded for Cutler, Shanahan would be part of the package, one way or another. How solid is Lovie in Chicago? Will he be looking over his shoulder if they struggle, particularly on offense? Would cutler prefer to be playing for Shanahan and executing his high-powered offense?
It is my opinion, that when a team sends a coupl of #1 choices plus other high picks, then the team is shooting itself in the foot. You need 45 good players. Trading away a lot of draft choices for one player is just asking for him to get injured or turn out to be a bust. Like when NY traded the rights to get Philip Rivers plus good draft choices to get Manning. Rivers is the equal of Eli Manning. If I had a team, I am looking for a lot of good players. Not a bunch of average players with a couple of stars who get hurt.
The gang I talk to sees it like this. When was the last time the bears did well with a first round draft choice? They blow it all the time. In short, they gave up nothing and got a better QB.
I don't believe that for a minute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Bears_Starting_Quarterbacks Scrolll down to "First-round draft picks". I see good players in that list in the last five years. Superstars? You have to go back to 2000 for that.
Huh? That is a terrible example. While the Eli and Rivers fiasco was weird...they were both collegiate QB's in the draft. Both unproven at the NFL level. And while that is where the differences between these two trades only begins, the Giants have won a superbowl and the Chargers have not. Pretty weak reasoning. Asking for him to get injured? While I understand the concern for injury, Cutler is considered one of the most durable QB's in the NFL. Hasn't missed a start in two full seasons as a starter in Denver, and four seasons in college at Vanderbilt.