Early Game Thread

Answer the question who do the Bears have at QB that's a better option than Cutler?

That. Was. Never. The. Debate. Genius.

Your first counter-argument to me was that he had a big arm and inconsistent. So, again, he produces like a backup.

I don't know if you're now upset because your initial argument was rather poor or what. So answer a question that is actually relevant to my original post, should the Bears have tried to replace him at some point?
 
Manziel is playing well, albeit against a terrible 9ers Defense. Now 21/30 for 270 yards, 1 TD & 1 INT.

Browns lead 17-7.
 
You think the Bears would have been better off with Manziel? LOL

And there you go, missing the point.

The point being here, they had options in the 2014 draft they could have looked at. Didn't have to be Manziel, Bridgewater and Carr were good prospects. They were two QBs with potential to be franchise QBs, Cutler is a QB that has proven he's simply not productive enough to lead a team anywhere.

Haha, I can't believe you're struggling with this. :lmao2:
 
That. Was. Never. The. Debate. Genius.

Your first counter-argument to me was that he had a big arm and inconsistent. So, again, he produces like a backup.

I don't know if you're now upset because your initial argument was rather poor or what. So answer a question that is actually relevant to my original post, should the Bears have tried to replace him at some point?

Someone asked why he's starting and I explained why. Once again who do the Bears have at QB that would be a better option than Cutler? Asked the same question to someone else and no one can provide an answer. Nuff Said!
 
Manziel is playing well, albeit against a terrible 9ers Defense. Now 21/30 for 270 yards, 1 TD & 1 INT.

Browns lead 17-7.

He's playing for a contract from Jerry. After we finish with the 16th pick in the draft, extend Garrett, and sign Manziel, we're assured to be a bottom-dweller for the next decade.
 
And there you go, missing the point.

The point being here, they had options in the 2013 draft they could have looked at. Didn't have to be Manziel, Bridgewater and Carr were good prospects. They were two QBs with potential to be franchise QBs, Cutler is a QB that has proven he's simply not productive enough to lead a team anywhere.

Haha, I can't believe you're struggling with this. :lmao2:

You're the one missing the point and struggling I've been asking you repeatedly who do the Bears have at QB that's a better option than Cutler and you keep diverting. LOL
 
Someone asked why he's starting and I explained why. Once again who do the Bears have at QB that would be a better option than Cutler? Asked the same question to someone else and no one can provide an answer. Nuff Said!

Because your question is irrelevant, genius! They are locked into a lengthy, pricey contract with Cutler.

He's been the starter since 2009, you're here trying to argue a better QB hasn't popped up since then the Bears could have tried to grab. They could have drafted Bridgewater or Carr, Carr would have been a great fit for their offense.

Again, the debate is why the Bears haven't tried to replace at ANY point. Can they now? No. That wasn't the argument, never was.
 
You're the one missing the point and struggling I've been asking you repeatedly who do the Bears have at QB that's a better option than Cutler and you keep diverting. LOL

I'm not diverting, I am attempting you to get back on topic here, dude. You lost, throw in the towel.
 
Russell Wilson has 15 TD passes in his last 4 games so much for those on this board who said he would never be a productive QB.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,012
Messages
14,506,553
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top