Cutler?

[lennie75 0]

How is this guy possibly the best QB in the draft. I just think if you are a QB that is being valued higher than V. Young or Lineart...you had better be winning some games...I don't care who you play for and who your WR's are.

 

But, I haven't seen him play very much. Is this guy for real??

[LavarIsAnAnimal 0]

Doesn't look to hot on the NFL network.

 

I think he'll fall out of the top ten

[Captian America 0]

With all those announcers saying how great he is, I wasn't impressed.

[Trainer1 0]

Hard to say, but put Cutler on a team like USC and I think he is better than the other QBs because of talent. If he was coached Norm Chow we would be saying Leinart who. He has better accuracy and better arm strength. However, because he isn't been on a winning team it dampered his ability to work on his mechanics, and teams don't know if he can win. He carried Vandy to a pretty good season and beat the Vols for the first time in many years.

[football_scooter 0]

Ron Jaworski said he's watched film on all 3 of the top Qbs (Leinart, Young & Cutler) and he stated that while Young & Leinart have great upside and are good young QBs, Cutler is the "most NFL ready" of the three.

 

One of the main points of his argument was that with inferior line, receivers and running game, he produced.

 

That he has had to struggle a lot more in his college career than Leinart or Young, and managed to put up solid numbers as a result. That if he had the RBs in Bush/White and the receivers that Leinart had, he'd have been able to perform better.

 

You know, it's not that outrageous of a statement considering that's the big knock everyone has on Leinart now which could have him out of the top 10....that on the USC teams he played on, he had receivers wide open because they were that much better than everyone.

[ellisonb11 0]

i personally think the guy is great. he did not have the luxury of a great o-line and great athletes surrounding him like vince and leinart did. cutler had bad receivers and had to do it all himself. i saw him bring back a mediocre vandy team against the gators in overtime. i believe that hes gonna be a star.

[Sportslitter 0]

I think Cutler will fall in a similar way that Aaron Rogers and Big Ben fell. Those guys had the tools but didn't play on premier teams. We know what Ben can do... only time will tell for the other two.

[Sho Nuff 720]

How is this guy possibly the best QB in the draft. I just think if you are a QB that is being valued higher than V. Young or Lineart...you had better be winning some games...I don't care who you play for and who your WR's are.

 

But, I haven't seen him play very much. Is this guy for real??

 

Good arm...good footwork...good leadership ability...can make every throw you want a pro QB to make...and is highly intelligent.

[Ignition Technition 0]

I just think if you are a QB that is being valued higher than V. Young or Lineart...you had better be winning some games...I don't care who you play for and who your WR's are.

 

Which is why John Elway never had a winning season, let alone a bowl game despite starting 3 years at Stanford.

[DaveJ 0]

Out of all of them Young has the most upside I think for pure talent.... Leinart is the most polished right now.. and Cutler has the better overall skillset for a QB (running not included). Young and Cutler have the bigger learning curve though and are a year or two away.

[swamp dog 0]

his hype is his pro day (very good in awful conditions) and his demeanor (warrior-type). peopple keep making the comparisons of his makeup to favre, which also helps his stock.

 

i don't know one way or the other...but it seems odd to me, given the hype and the buzz, that we're also simultaneously hearing rumors of him free-falling. that just doesn't make sense. i'll be stunned if he's still there after pick 10. by pick 9ish teams will be actively looking to trade up for him if he's still there.

 

i think if anyone should free fall it'd be young. but who knows.

[Captian America 0]

I would take Whitehurst over Cutler.

[toofunny 0]

I would take Whitehurst over Cutler.

 

And that's why you play FANTASY football and work at Denny's.

[CA_7 0]

Cutler is the f'n man. Get on the bandwagoon now or get run over by it real soon

 

I think Cutler will fall in a similar way that Aaron Rogers and Big Ben fell. Those guys had the tools but didn't play on premier teams. We know what Ben can do... only time will tell for the other two.

 

 

 

I have Cutler going to AZ.

 

Fitz + Boldin ====> Jay Cutler =

[kraziness 0]

BTW, something that's NEVER mentioned but fits right along side the argument for Cutler (played with less talented players, did well) is that he'll be going into the same situation. He's perhaps the most NFL ready because he's already used to making QUICK decisions, he's already used to placing throws RIGHT ON THE MONEY. Plus his polish, he might be the most NFL ready QUARTERBACK, plus he can run.

 

Leinart's success speaks for itself, he's polished, and used to a normal NFL offense.

 

Young can make the most impact right away because he can run so easily/naturally, even when a play breaks down he can make a BIG play.

 

All that being said, I want all 3 QBs to go in the top 5 (I know it won't happen). I want someone to get infatuated with Cutler. The more guys move up (like Cutler, Bunkley, Justice) the more guys slip to the Browns at 12 (NGATA!!!).

[Sho Nuff 720]

his hype is his pro day (very good in awful conditions) and his demeanor (warrior-type). peopple keep making the comparisons of his makeup to favre, which also helps his stock.

 

i don't know one way or the other...but it seems odd to me, given the hype and the buzz, that we're also simultaneously hearing rumors of him free-falling. that just doesn't make sense. i'll be stunned if he's still there after pick 10. by pick 9ish teams will be actively looking to trade up for him if he's still there.

 

i think if anyone should free fall it'd be young. but who knows.

 

His hype started before pro day...senior bowl was starting it...pro day just confirmed the hype.

[Zap 0]

His hype started before pro day...senior bowl was starting it...pro day just confirmed the hype.

 

it started last October when Mayock said on the NFL Network that he was the best QB coming out. He already had big fans around here. Me, Wildman, Tusekan Raiders and Ignition Technician all agreed we liked him better than Leinart. We weren't four voices in the wilderness. It just took a couple months for the media to catch up with what was being said by those paying close attention to college football games.

[Wildman 0]

The thing people need to be careful about is the over-used term "NFL ready." What does that really mean? I think it means the guy that's going to screw up the least in the first few years. But you can take it to mean some other things, which are quite valid.

 

Playing (drafting) "not to lose." Brad Johnson is the consummate game manager. Brad Johnson has played for the Vikings, Redskins, Bucs, and now returning to the Vikings. He's efficient and smart. He checks down well and can hit the deep ball when a team bites on play action or is surprised by a 1st down deep pass. He also has enough mobility to roll out of trouble and throw the ball away. Sound familiar to those of you that watch USC football? Maybe not if you've only casually watched the games, but I promise you that the Trojan's QB exhibits these qualities. Brad Johnson won't cost your team a ball game very often, but he needs a great team around him to do more than fizzle in the playoffs. I seriously doubt Brad Johnson has anywhere near the performance he had in the SB if Jon Gruden didn't know his Raiders team inside and out. The Bucs were a good team with an great defense and I don't mean to take much away from them, but when your coach built the team across from you and he knows what plays are going to be called offensively, you can't underestimate how much of a comfort that is for the offense to be aggressive.

 

"The guy you have to develop the least to do an adequate job." Let's use an everyday business example. You have a chance to hire one of two people for a job as say, a manager of a team of people. Candidate A has an MBA from a great business school, has a great GPA, and interned at a Fortune 500 company. His mommy and daddy are rich, and looks the part. He knows all the right phrases and has been groomed to interview and give answers for most "stock" questions. Candidate B has two years of college and management experience in something not related to your company and has not participated in any of the other "prep" courses to learn how to jump through hoops with the right thing to say and do. But person B has extraordinary talent and potential, although in some areas not nearly as refined in some ways as Candidate A.

 

The best companys evaluate the person's talent and potential rather than the pedigree. People repeatedly don't get this fact. I have a friend that works for one of the most prestigious corporations in the world. They are the only orginzation to have won a prestigious quality award twice. An award that requires a rigorous application process to judge them. Royalty, CEO's, top government officials, and celebrities regularly use their services.

 

This company regularly hires Candidate B-types. In fact, they prefer these types over people with 20 years of experience and a great pedigree in the industry. Why would they make such a decision? Because they believe you can't create talent, but you can train it and harness it into greatness. They play to win. They don't play "not to lose." Think about it some more: Candidate A has all the pedigree, but they may not really have the great talent--they've just been prepared to do the "right" thing in all the known situations. The problem is business/reality/live fire/game day conditions are won or lost on making decisions based on situations that aren't known! Greatness comes from having the talent to execute a task that few people can do or goes against the known standard, but applies perfectly for the situation that cannot be anticipated. The philosophy is if you take a person with great instincts and talent to do things naturally that even the most learned people can't do and teach them the desired techniques you get the best person for the job.

 

You can't teach someone to have great determination, persistence, will, heart, courage, and instincts. You can't teach personality. You can shore up weaknesses in personality to a point, but you can't develop it in 2-3 years. You have to have it already...

 

 

This is why in football many teams pick these guys with great talent that fail. The problem is they have the right idea, but only half the equation to make the right choice. They judge the player by his physical gifts, but not all evaluators have an accurate way to evaluate the space between that player's ears or in his chest cavity. Some do, and they are the great talent evaluators.

 

JP Losman, Ryan Leaf, and Rob Johnson had great physical talent. They didn't have the mental/emotional talent to be good leaders and decision makers. Losman may still have a chance, but the signs of him being a malcontent with his teammates have been apparent since college.

 

On the other hand Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb, Brett Favre, and John Elway had great physical skills and the emotional make up to learn and lead...these are all players that could carry a team in their prime. When I look at Leinart, he doesn't have those special skills to carry a team. I know he's compared to Brady, but Leinart has to prove he can still grow both physically (arm and athleticism to some degree). Brady did it...

 

Young has great physical tools and despite the wonderlic, probably the most misunderstood and misapplied tool in this evaluation process, has a great mental/emotional makeup as a leader. He needs to work on his drops, reads, and to some extent his delivery. But he's a phenomenal athlete and much better passer than credited. I think may turn out to be the best QB in the draft.

 

But I give Cutler the slightest edge. Cutler has all the natural tools and instincts in the pocket that Leinart lacks. I'm not saying Leinart is lacking instincts in the pocket, he just isn't as good at avoiding the rush and making plays happen as Cutler. Cutler also has the kind of arm to make last second throws to the far side of the defense that Leinart hasn't shown. Young has shown the skill--he's just not as polished as Cutler in this year. Cutler in my opinion has the best combition of Young and Leinart's game. He leans much more toward's Leinart's play style and skills set, but has an arm, instincts, and escapability like Young. He's not as poised as Young and takes more risks but coaching should aid this to an extent. Plus you want an aggressive player at QB that can make things happen when the situation is something no one prepared for...Again, a team believes they should be able to teach a QB to read the LOS and change to a better play. But they can't teach a QB to throw a bullet off their back foot to a wide open receiver 50 yards downfield after instinctively ducking a blindside sack attempt from a future HOF DE that comes off the line unblocked.

 

Elway, Favre, McNair, Young, and McNabb have that skill.

[uubeee 0]

The thing people need to be careful about is the over-used term "NFL ready." What does that really mean? I think it means the guy that's going to screw up the least in the first few years. But you can take it to mean some other things, which are quite valid.

 

Playing (drafting) "not to lose." Brad Johnson is the consummate game manager. Brad Johnson has played for the Vikings, Redskins, Bucs, and now returning to the Vikings. He's efficient and smart. He checks down well and can hit the deep ball when a team bites on play action or is surprised by a 1st down deep pass. He also has enough mobility to roll out of trouble and throw the ball away. Sound familiar to those of you that watch USC football? Maybe not if you've only casually watched the games, but I promise you that the Trojan's QB exhibits these qualities. Brad Johnson won't cost your team a ball game very often, but he needs a great team around him to do more than fizzle in the playoffs. I seriously doubt Brad Johnson has anywhere near the performance he had in the SB if Jon Gruden didn't know his Raiders team inside and out. The Bucs were a good team with an great defense and I don't mean to take much away from them, but when your coach built the team across from you and he knows what plays are going to be called offensively, you can't underestimate how much of a comfort that is for the offense to be aggressive.

 

"The guy you have to develop the least to do an adequate job." Let's use an everyday business example. You have a chance to hire one of two people for a job as say, a manager of a team of people. Candidate A has an MBA from a great business school, has a great GPA, and interned at a Fortune 500 company. His mommy and daddy are rich, and looks the part. He knows all the right phrases and has been groomed to interview and give answers for most "stock" questions. Candidate B has two years of college and management experience in something not related to your company and has not participated in any of the other "prep" courses to learn how to jump through hoops with the right thing to say and do. But person B has extraordinary talent and potential, although in some areas not nearly as refined in some ways as Candidate A.

 

The best companys evaluate the person's talent and potential rather than the pedigree. People repeatedly don't get this fact. I have a friend that works for one of the most prestigious corporations in the world. They are the only orginzation to have won a prestigious quality award twice. An award that requires a rigorous application process to judge them. Royalty, CEO's, top government officials, and celebrities regularly use their services.

 

This company regularly hires Candidate B-types. In fact, they prefer these types over people with 20 years of experience and a great pedigree in the industry. Why would they make such a decision? Because they believe you can't create talent, but you can train it and harness it into greatness. They play to win. They don't play "not to lose." Think about it some more: Candidate A has all the pedigree, but they may not really have the great talent--they've just been prepared to do the "right" thing in all the known situations. The problem is business/reality/live fire/game day conditions are won or lost on making decisions based on situations that aren't known! Greatness comes from having the talent to execute a task that few people can do or goes against the known standard, but applies perfectly for the situation that cannot be anticipated. The philosophy is if you take a person with great instincts and talent to do things naturally that even the most learned people can't do and teach them the desired techniques you get the best person for the job.

 

You can't teach someone to have great determination, persistence, will, heart, courage, and instincts. You can't teach personality. You can shore up weaknesses in personality to a point, but you can't develop it in 2-3 years. You have to have it already...

This is why in football many teams pick these guys with great talent that fail. The problem is they have the right idea, but only half the equation to make the right choice. They judge the player by his physical gifts, but not all evaluators have an accurate way to evaluate the space between that player's ears or in his chest cavity. Some do, and they are the great talent evaluators.

 

JP Losman, Ryan Leaf, and Rob Johnson had great physical talent. They didn't have the mental/emotional talent to be good leaders and decision makers. Losman may still have a chance, but the signs of him being a malcontent with his teammates have been apparent since college.

 

On the other hand Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb, Brett Favre, and John Elway had great physical skills and the emotional make up to learn and lead...these are all players that could carry a team in their prime. When I look at Leinart, he doesn't have those special skills to carry a team. I know he's compared to Brady, but Leinart has to prove he can still grow both physically (arm and athleticism to some degree). Brady did it...

 

Young has great physical tools and despite the wonderlic, probably the most misunderstood and misapplied tool in this evaluation process, has a great mental/emotional makeup as a leader. He needs to work on his drops, reads, and to some extent his delivery. But he's a phenomenal athlete and much better passer than credited. I think may turn out to be the best QB in the draft.

 

But I give Cutler the slightest edge. Cutler has all the natural tools and instincts in the pocket that Leinart lacks. I'm not saying Leinart is lacking instincts in the pocket, he just isn't as good at avoiding the rush and making plays happen as Cutler. Cutler also has the kind of arm to make last second throws to the far side of the defense that Leinart hasn't shown. Young has shown the skill--he's just not as polished as Cutler in this year. Cutler in my opinion has the best combition of Young and Leinart's game. He leans much more toward's Leinart's play style and skills set, but has an arm, instincts, and escapability like Young. He's not as poised as Young and takes more risks but coaching should aid this to an extent. Plus you want an aggressive player at QB that can make things happen when the situation is something no one prepared for...Again, a team believes they should be able to teach a QB to read the LOS and change to a better play. But they can't teach a QB to throw a bullet off their back foot to a wide open receiver 50 yards downfield after instinctively ducking a blindside sack attempt from a future HOF DE that comes off the line unblocked.

 

Elway, Favre, McNair, Young, and McNabb have that skill.

 

 

You had me at "hello"

[Captian America 0]

And that's why you play FANTASY football and work at Denny's.

 

Let's look at the Senior Bowl and compare the two.

 

Cutler 6 for 19 and 1 TD and 1 Int for 69 yards and 1 sack

 

Whitehurst 7 for 9 and 1 TD and 0 Int for 90 yards and 0 sacks

 

This is what is called in the Law Profession as Case Closed.

 

Oh and I will take Fries with that.

[onejayhawk 3]

Let's look at the Senior Bowl and compare the two.

 

Cutler 6 for 19 and 1 TD and 1 Int for 69 yards and 1 sack

 

Whitehurst 7 for 9 and 1 TD and 0 Int for 90 yards and 0 sacks

 

This is what is called in the Law Profession as Case Closed.

 

Oh and I will take Fries with that.

When Whitehurst is on, he's as good as anyone. The knock on him is that he didnt come to play every game, and when he's off, he's OFF. He does not have a reputation of finding a way to beat you, like say Vince Young does. Also his ball handling is not what you expect from an elite player.

 

J

[swamp dog 0]

Let's look at the Senior Bowl and compare the two.

 

Cutler 6 for 19 and 1 TD and 1 Int for 69 yards and 1 sack

 

Whitehurst 7 for 9 and 1 TD and 0 Int for 90 yards and 0 sacks

 

This is what is called in the Law Profession as Case Closed.

 

Oh and I will take Fries with that.

 

so...the senior bowl performance is definitive data for proving what kind of nfl career a player will have?

[lennie75 0]

so...the senior bowl performance is definitive data for proving what kind of nfl career a player will have?

It is when someone else tries to say someone played better then gets called out on it!!

[Captian America 0]

so...the senior bowl performance is definitive data for proving what kind of nfl career a player will have?

 

Well let's see since every Pro Scout are there and probably most of the NFL Coaches. Since the players are there to showcase their skills, and the QBs only have a week of practice to get their timing down I guess this would probably show who has the most talent. I hope that answers your question oh and also Whitehurst was ranked 41st while Cutler was ranked 61st maybe that is why Whitehurst clearly out played Cutler. You know they have an old saying if you shake the bottle the cream will rise to the top, translated put the players to the test and the best one will rise to the occasion, therefore this is why the Coaches and Scouts

go to the Senior Bowl to see the players in action not just running some combine. So is the Senior Bowl away to gage the players YES or why bother to play it.

[gatorbait7391 0]

O yea, this guys def for real. A brett Favre type guy. Tough, smart, strong.

[Zap 0]

Well let's see since every Pro Scout are there and probably most of the NFL Coaches. Since the players are there to showcase their skills, and the QBs only have a week of practice to get their timing down I guess this would probably show who has the most talent. I hope that answers your question oh and also Whitehurst was ranked 41st while Cutler was ranked 61st maybe that is why Whitehurst clearly out played Cutler. You know they have an old saying if you shake the bottle the cream will rise to the top, translated put the players to the test and the best one will rise to the occasion, therefore this is why the Coaches and Scouts

go to the Senior Bowl to see the players in action not just running some combine. So is the Senior Bowl away to gage the players YES or why bother to play it.

 

Whatever. 90% of the scouts leave before the game is played. It's the week of practice where they get to put these guys through the wringer and see what they have, and it was the week of practice where Cutler clearly established himself as the best QB there. This is why his stock continued to rise despite the disappointing performance. If you were making any sense or had any idea what you were talking about then Whitehurst's stock would be skyrocketing and Cutler's would be plummeting. The game is mostly meaningless and every scout, GM, coach, etc will tell you the same. That's why most of them leave before the game. I have no idea what you 41st and 61st rankings are-- other than wrong at any time during the last season and any time after.

 

[Captian America 0]

Whatever. 90% of the scouts leave before the game is played. It's the week of practice where they get to put these guys through the wringer and see what they have, and it was the week of practice where Cutler clearly established himself as the best QB there. This is why his stock continued to rise despite the disappointing performance. If you were making any sense or had any idea what you were talking about then Whitehurst's stock would be skyrocketing and Cutler's would be plummeting. The game is mostly meaningless and every scout, GM, coach, etc will tell you the same. That's why most of them leave before the game. I have no idea what you 41st and 61st rankings are-- other than wrong at any time during the last season and any time after.

 

 

Does the word Hype mean anything to you if not just look at Michael Vick. I don't MAKE UP STATISTICS.

Go to ESPN College Football and look up statistics, go to quarterbacks and look at the rankings. These are for Quarterback Ratings and Whitehurst is ranked 41st while Cutler is ranked 61st. So you see I know what I'm talking about and you sir don't. Here's a hint before you make any remarks take time to look up your facts instead of just giving your opinion on something that way you won't look so ignorant of what your talking about.

 

PS I got two words for you Ryan Leaf

[Zap 0]

Does the word Hype mean anything to you if not just look at Michael Vick. I don't MAKE UP STATISTICS.

Go to ESPN College Football and look up statistics, go to quarterbacks and look at the rankings. These are for Quarterback Ratings and Whitehurst is ranked 41st while Cutler is ranked 61st. So you see I know what I'm talking about and you sir don't. Here's a hint before you make any remarks take time to look up your facts instead of just giving your opinion on something that way you won't look so ignorant of what your talking about.

 

PS I got two words for you Ryan Leaf

 

I provided you with facts about your beloved Senior Bowl. You come at me with...

 

You scout college QBs by the silly college QB rating stat?

 

Do you have 40 guys above Whitehurst??

 

You need to hustle off to NYC and share this genius approach to scouting with GMs!!

 

Thanks for the laughs.

[t.j 35]

Whatever.

 

Now there's a clever argument!

[Zap 0]

Now there's a clever argument!

 

It seemed appropriate.

 

For the record, I'm a Whitehurst fan. I think he's a clear QB4 even though Wildman likes Croyle better. Let's face it, none of us do 1/1000th the scouting the teams do, and Wildman did 100xs more than most. I read an article about the Steelers calling a nice safety (Anthony Smith) from Syracuse to find out if he really blocked 6 kicks. They could only find 5 after watching four years of Orangmen football!

 

They missed the 6th. He told them the game to watch again. They watched it and flew him out for a visit.

 

Point is due diligence is done in the scouting process and still fails all the time. Cutler looks to be the better prospect than Whitehurst (according to reliable sources within NFL franchises), but he could be a complete bust and Whitehurst could be great. I like Charlie about the same as Leinart.

[Captian America 0]

I provided you with facts about your beloved Senior Bowl. You come at me with...

 

You scout college QBs by the silly college QB rating stat?

 

Do you have 40 guys above Whitehurst??

 

You need to hustle off to NYC and share this genius approach to scouting with GMs!!

 

Thanks for the laughs.

 

What are you talking about you haven't proven anything, all you do is make stupid accusations.

First I listed the Senior Bowl Stats, Second I gave the Quarterback Ratings Stats where Whitehurst was ranked 41st and Cutler was ranked 61st. Now you say you presented Senior Bowl facts WHERE? Oh I see you said the scouts and coaches all went home and didn't bother to watch to see how the players performed. Now your accusing me of scouting out Quarterbacks by their ratings when I merely just pointed out the rankings. Do I have 40 other Quarterbacks ahead of Whitehurst get serious, if you wish to debate something don't fabricate crap. As far as the laughs it seems the only joke is you. To say who will get drafted first I will say Cutler because all through the combines all I heard is Cutler. Well I watched him

and all he did was throw in the dirt or behind the receivers, let me guess you love Vick also. I'm going on record and saying that Whitehurst will be the better player. Are you one of those guys that argued with me last year when I said Vick wouldn't rush for more than 600 yards (597) and that LT would have around 55 receptions ( 51 )? Oh here is another STAT for you Cutler led Vanderbilt to a 5-6 season while Whitehurst led the Clemson Tigers to an 8-4 season. So Einstein if your going to come back with anything please don't fabricate it in your head but put the facts on the table.

[Zap 0]

if you wish to debate something

 

I don't debate tools like you.

 

Here, argue with these guys:

 

Jaworski:

 

“It’s not my decision, obviously. It’s a tough decision,” Jaworski said. “I have studied all the quarterbacks, and I like [Jay] Cutler the best of them.”

 

Jaworski says his preference for the Vanderbilt star is not to belittle the accomplishments of the more heralded Matt Leinart and Vince Young. He just believes that the Commodore quarterback is NFL-ready because of the circumstances he played under.

 

“I think Matt Leinart is going to be very good, and I think Vince Young is going to be very good. … Everyone has different opinions. What I like about Cutler is that he threw with pressure on him,” Jaworski said. “His offensive line wasn’t that good, and I saw throws that you have to make at the NFL level, people around him, bodies, throwing from different platforms, around people, sidearm, over the top, and taking hits looking down the gun barrel.

 

“I didn’t see a whole lot of separation from his wide receiving corps, so he was throwing through tight windows. He had to throw accurately with pressure on him. That projects well in the National Football League.”

 

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and even one of Jaworski’s ESPN cohorts regards Cutler as the draft’s most overrated player right now.

 

“Mel [Kiper] has his own opinion. I look at the game tape, and that doesn’t lie,” Jaworski said. “When you look at every pass Vince Young has thrown, every pass Jay Cutler has thrown, and every pass Matt Leinart has thrown, you get a pretty good idea. I don’t need anyone to tell me. I played 30 years at the quarterback position, so I’ve got a pretty good feel for it.”

 

Phil Simms:

 

I was very surprised when I watched Cutler on film for a couple of reasons. I didn't realize how good an athlete he is. He's big, very strong, and has an NFL body, especially for a quarterback.

 

He plays big and he plays strong. He can move around much better than I thought. He ran some option, ran the football well. He can stand in, and deliver the ball downfield with accuracy and power even when getting hit. His arm strength is exceptional -- tremendous. And what I like so much about his arm strength is that on short passes he gets the ball to his targets quick so they have a chance to run with it. It's not a high-effort throw. He doesn't have to work hard to get the ball somewhere with speed. It's natural.

 

I've read and heard from some NFL coaches that he tries to use his arm too much -- maybe tries to throw the ball hard when he shouldn't. I didn't notice that, but I did see him try to stick the ball into some tough spots. But I would look at that as a plus. At least a coach has the ability to tell a Jay Cutler to take something off his passes if he needs to.

 

Cutler probably played in an environment that was most NFL-like for a quarterback. I watched about five Vanderbilt games, and he got hit a lot. He's used to making decisions and throwing from a position that is more like what he'll see in the NFL.

 

There were a bunch of games that Vanderbilt would not have had a chance to win or stay close if he were not the quarterback. You could say that about Leinart and Young, but I'm not sure USC or Texas would have lost one or two games if their backup quarterbacks were in there. I don't know anything about the backup quarterback at Vanderbilt, but I know Cutler was always the best player on the field in their games.

[Captian America 0]

Oh Zap I'm tired of discussing this, good luck with Cutler and enjoy the draft. Catch you later.

[Zap 0]

Oh Zap I'm tired of discussing this, good luck with Cutler and enjoy the draft. Catch you later.

 

Bye.

[t.j 35]

Playing (drafting) "not to lose." Brad Johnson is the consummate game manager. Brad Johnson has played for the Vikings, Redskins, Bucs, and now returning to the Vikings. He's efficient and smart. He checks down well and can hit the deep ball when a team bites on play action or is surprised by a 1st down deep pass. He also has enough mobility to roll out of trouble and throw the ball away. Sound familiar to those of you that watch USC football? Maybe not if you've only casually watched the games, but I promise you that the Trojan's QB exhibits these qualities. Brad Johnson won't cost your team a ball game very often, but he needs a great team around him to do more than fizzle in the playoffs. I seriously doubt Brad Johnson has anywhere near the performance he had in the SB if Jon Gruden didn't know his Raiders team inside and out. The Bucs were a good team with an great defense and I don't mean to take much away from them, but when your coach built the team across from you and he knows what plays are going to be called offensively, you can't underestimate how much of a comfort that is for the offense to be aggressive.

 

Wow, talk about getting sidetracked! You can leave Brad Johnson out of this, and I am quite certain you can leave Super Bowl XXXVII out of it as well. I don't think there's any question the Buccaneers defense benefitted greatly from Gruden's knowledge of Gannon and the Raiders offense, but Brad Johnson benefitted little, if any. And it was hardly a career game for him if you look at his role in the game and his production in it. At any rate, you may think Brad Johnson is a comparable talent to Matt Leinart, but there aren't many people who do.

 

"The guy you have to develop the least to do an adequate job." Let's use an everyday business example...

 

The best companys evaluate the person's talent and potential rather than the pedigree...

 

This company regularly hires Candidate B-types...

 

These QB arguments crack me up. For as many times as I have heard Zap complain about Cutler being pigeonholed as a gunslinger, you guys sure don't hesitate to paint Leinart into the "system" corner! I think you guys are Cutler groupies.

 

You can't teach someone to have great determination, persistence, will, heart, courage, and instincts. You can't teach personality. You can shore up weaknesses in personality to a point, but you can't develop it in 2-3 years. You have to have it already...

 

I disagree with much of this. In many cases, a good coach can make a man out of a boy. That said, I find it interesting that you typed all that, yet I can't find anywhere where you question Leinart's determination, persistence, will, heart, courage, or instincts. Am I missing something? Or did you just post this paragraph to generate vague doubts about what's between Leinart's ears?

 

On the other hand Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb, Brett Favre, and John Elway had great physical skills and the emotional make up to learn and lead...these are all players that could carry a team in their prime. When I look at Leinart, he doesn't have those special skills to carry a team. I know he's compared to Brady, but Leinart has to prove he can still grow both physically (arm and athleticism to some degree). Brady did it...

 

I know many people question Leinart's physical skills. Most I have heard from that have really followed him indicate that he does have the emotional make up to learn and lead, though. Are you saying that you don't think he does? Or are you just knocking his physical skills and making a general mention of the importance of emotional makeup?

 

you want an aggressive player at QB that can make things happen when the situation is something no one prepared for...

 

Here's your comment from your Strength's section of the Leinart Notre Dame game: "He demonstrates the courage and killer instinct to convert big plays in key situations." I'm confused... is your position that both Cutler and Leinart have this characteristic?

Furthermore, I don't recall Joe Montana doing anything aggressive or un-preparable for in the Super Bowl winning drive against Cincinnati. Or Brady in his big playoff drives against Oakland, St. Louis, etc...

 

I give Cutler the slightest edge. Cutler has all the natural tools and instincts in the pocket that Leinart lacks. I'm not saying Leinart is lacking instincts in the pocket, he just isn't as good at avoiding the rush and making plays happen as Cutler. Cutler also has the kind of arm to make last second throws to the far side of the defense that Leinart hasn't shown. Young has shown the skill--he's just not as polished as Cutler in this year. Cutler in my opinion has the best combition of Young and Leinart's game. He leans much more toward's Leinart's play style and skills set, but has an arm, instincts, and escapability like Young. He's not as poised as Young and takes more risks but coaching should aid this to an extent.

 

I moved your last two quotes out of order because I want to reply to this one last. Here goes my football reply about Cutler... I'm not sold on Cutler's accuracy. I was watching the NFL Network combine footage of Cutler like a poster mentioned above and was not impressed with his accuracy at all. Time and time again Cutler would badly miss on a ball and Mayock would blather about how he wasn't worried about the missed pass because he threw it so hard. I'm sorry but none of those throws were ok because of the velocity. Mayock reeks of lack of objectivity at this point.

I'm not sure about your objectivity here either. I've read about half of your QB prospect profiles, and I just read the ones for Leinart and re-read the one for Cutler. I have to say that for how much you back up your points throughout the profiles (and you do a great job), I wonder how fair you were to Cutler and Leinart. I couldn't help but notice that the game you reviewed for Cutler was the Florida game, considered by many to be his most impressive college performance. I couldn't help but notice that in your Leinart Hawaii-game profile, your entire section for accuracy didn't mention one thing about accuracy, instead questioning his arm strength and talking about his decision making in it. You mention that Cutler made a bad decision throwing into triple coverage but praise him for his footwork getting the ball off under duress on the play. You mention that a Leinart happened as a result of un-called defensive pass interference, but still choose the play as an example of an imperfectly thrown ball. You gave Cutler a full score for accuracy on the Florida game. I don't doubt he was on that game, but I have a hard time believing he deserved that good of an accuracy evaluation in very many of his games. In fairness to you, though, you're honest about what you're seeing, you mentioned Leinart's surgery as a possible reason for his arm strength related troubles in each profile. It's just that reading between the lines, in a variety of categories, I'm not sure the same standards are being applied to these two guys when it comes to the final judgements.

Now that said, I cannot claim to be any more of an expert from film review than you could from these six game film reviews. And I'm sure you've watched more than that in addition. I know Zap has watched tons of Leinart and is not impressed with his accuracy, and like you believes he has benefitted greatly from having wide-open guys to throw to, among other things. So what gives? Maybe I have watched the wrong games. All I can say is that from what I have seen, Cutler has not impressed me with his accuracy, and every time I have seen Leinart play, he has impressed me with his accuracy.

I also think Cutler is a huge question mark with his decision making, although he has convinced many fans that his productivity is evidence of his greatness despite a lack of wins throughout his career, despite high interception numbers early in his career, and low yards per attempt in his final year. And I don't think decision making is something that you can expect a guy to improve dramatically at the next level, some guys click and others don't. Some guys get it for a short time and then fall apart. Leinart has impressed scouts with his ability to manipulate a defense and not make big mistakes, and I guess I am a little more sold by that than you are. It seems like people consistently grade Leinart's college career higher in the decision's department, but the Cutler fans believe he will jump ahead in the as Leinart's time in the pocket likely decreases and Cutler's likely increases. I think there's more to it than that.

Leinart's durability is a big question IMO. As you mentioned, his ball handling is questionable... not what one would expect from a guy who has been coached up like he has. His arm strength is questioned by some and praised by others... being as it is that I don't have a job on the line to make the right call here, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on arm strength based on the fact that he came on stronger after healing from his surgery. Partly because Leinart had such better seasons as a sophomore and as a junior than he did as a senior. Either way, Cutler has the better arm for sure, but arm strength only gets you so far.

The questions are, I guess... does Leinart's arm even qualify as average? Does Cutler have the tools between his ears? Are the two guys comparable in terms of accuracy? Frankly I'm not satisfied with the answers I have seen to these questions, anywhere. But I'm eager to see where the two players land in the NFL, and how they turn out!

 

P.S. I laughed re-reading my paragraph that begins with "I'm not sure about your objectivity here either...." Imagine if we all were judged with the scrutiny that these superstars are!

 

It seemed appropriate.

 

I just remember you giving me the same reply to a "Whatever" of mine one time.

[Wildman 0]

Great questions and I'll do my best to address all of them.

 

1. I concede the Brad Johnson-Matt Leinart argument maybe a bit too dramatic there, but there are similarities in their game unless Leinart can beef up his arm strength over time. I'd say this is who I'd compare Leinart to if he winds up not being a special player at his position.

 

2. I don't have much of a problem painting Leinart into a system QB corner. I'm not ashamed of leaning in that direction. I don't see him having the skill set to carry a team.

 

3. I think a good high school, and possibly college coach, can make a man out of a boy. I think it's extremely rare for a pro coach to accomplish it, especially when the employees (players) are making way more than the managers (coaches). There are some exceptions, but these are the great coaches in terms of motivation. How many teams truly have a great coach? How many of those great coaches succeeded doing this with every player? Not many. This is why the NFL has such an extensive interviewing process and the most successful teams when it comes to drafting pick players that aren't manchildren.

 

4. I'm not questioning Leinart in the department of his emotional makeup. I find him to be a very tough player that has a highly competitive attitude. I just making this point to illustrate that Jay Cutler may not have Matt Leinart's college pedigree, but what he did in games demonstrated that type of mental toughness and comptetiveness we're looking for in a good player despite not having a Heisman or a great team around him. I can see how what I said may seem like I was alluding to Leinart as the Candiate A. I don't see him that way, but I do see Cutler as that Candidate B type.

 

5. I'm just knocking some of Leinart's physical skills--mainly arm strength and ability to break tackles in the pocket.

 

6. I am saying Leinart and Cutler both have the killer instinct. The problem I see with Leinart is that he will physically have a more difficult time making plays when the play breaks down in the NFL than he did in college. I'm glad you brought up the Montana/Brady argument. Honestly, I'm not sure I have a good reply to counter it. I think I have a good argument about Montana playing with superstars, but then again he didn't have that kind of offense when he was on his last legs in KC and still looked like the Montana of old. Brady? Brady's armstrength is much better than it was on college. In fact, I frequently make the argument that Brady was able to add weight and gain strength as a passer while Leinart already looks like he's reached his full size/weight ratio, which might indicate his arm strength won't improve much more.

 

7.I'll address these points in bold I moved your last two quotes out of order because I want to reply to this one last. Here goes my football reply about Cutler... I'm not sold on Cutler's accuracy. I was watching the NFL Network combine footage of Cutler like a poster mentioned above and was not impressed with his accuracy at all. Time and time again Cutler would badly miss on a ball and Mayock would blather about how he wasn't worried about the missed pass because he threw it so hard. I'm sorry but none of those throws were ok because of the velocity. Mayock reeks of lack of objectivity at this point. I believe its not as good to look at accuracy in a workout than in game conditions. Cutler demonstrates accuracy in game conditions. Alex Smith was hailed as the second coming after his controlled workout

 

I'm not sure about your objectivity here either. I've read about half of your QB prospect profiles, and I just read the ones for Leinart and re-read the one for Cutler. I have to say that for how much you back up your points throughout the profiles (and you do a great job), I wonder how fair you were to Cutler and Leinart. I couldn't help but notice that the game you reviewed for Cutler was the Florida game, considered by many to be his most impressive college performance. I couldn't help but notice that in your Leinart Hawaii-game profile, your entire section for accuracy didn't mention one thing about accuracy, instead questioning his arm strength and talking about his decision making in it. A lot of this had to do with the play calling and the level of competition. This was one of the first games of the season and Leinart wasn't even throwing accurate passes on 1-yard hitches (overshooting his receiver to make him work hard for the catch). As the game wore on, the play calling was so good that Leinart was throwing to wide open receivers and I was calling attention to the lack of armstrength demonstrated in this game to illustrate that he only completed his long throws because the coverage was completely blown or beaten badly.

 

You mention that Cutler made a bad decision throwing into triple coverage but praise him for his footwork getting the ball off under duress on the play. I felt it was important to point out that Cutler, while making a completely boneheaded decision, demonstrated the type of footwork and armstrength to make a throw under the type of duress he'll see in the NFL. Much like Phil Simms point from his film study.

 

You mention that a Leinart happened as a result of un-called defensive pass interference, but still choose the play as an example of an imperfectly thrown ball. I'm not sure which game you are referring to, so if you don't mind clarifying, I'll respond about this one later

 

You gave Cutler a full score for accuracy on the Florida game. I don't doubt he was on that game, but I have a hard time believing he deserved that good of an accuracy evaluation in very many of his games. In fairness to you, though, you're honest about what you're seeing, you mentioned Leinart's surgery as a possible reason for his arm strength related troubles in each profile. It's just that reading between the lines, in a variety of categories, I'm not sure the same standards are being applied to these two guys when it comes to the final judgements.

 

I have no problem admitting its possible my take on Leinart and Cutler could be off on the same standards. I sure hope that's not the case and it's a reason why I try to define everything as I do. BTW-thanks for the kind words about the RSP in general. I think the problem could come from some players having more evaluations than others. Next season I plan to have multiple evaluations on as many players as possible. I'm still building my game library so it was difficult in the first year. More evaluations might make it easier to show whether I caught Cutler on just one good game or he consistently showed these traits despite his stats. I've watched him before, though admittedly I didn't scrutinize him this much, and I felt he showed similar skills but without the same level of success. He often tried too hard to make things happen and made mistakes.

 

Now that said, I cannot claim to be any more of an expert from film review than you could from these six game film reviews. And I'm sure you've watched more than that in addition. I know Zap has watched tons of Leinart and is not impressed with his accuracy, and like you believes he has benefitted greatly from having wide-open guys to throw to, among other things. So what gives? Maybe I have watched the wrong games. All I can say is that from what I have seen, Cutler has not impressed me with his accuracy, and every time I have seen Leinart play, he has impressed me with his accuracy. [/b]That's the craziness of scouting games for NFL teams. Some scouts see a set of games or limited number of games that may not give them a clear picture. I felt Cutler was way more accurate in the sense of completing passes in small spaces but made more erratic decisions (throwing into triple coverage, etc). I attribute the first example to great accuracy and the other as questionable decision making. Leinart often made better decisions to throw into single coverage, but I felt his accuracy wasn't ask sharpe in tight spaces--of course, it didn't need to be when he was feeding the ball to a wide open receiver or a receiver winning the battle in man-coverage.

 

I also think Cutler is a huge question mark with his decision making, although he has convinced many fans that his productivity is evidence of his greatness despite a lack of wins throughout his career, despite high interception numbers early in his career, and low yards per attempt in his final year. And I don't think decision making is something that you can expect a guy to improve dramatically at the next level, some guys click and others don't. Some guys get it for a short time and then fall apart. I agree decision making is his weakness. But my opinion differs in how it can be developed. For instance I don't think Cutler's rashness was motivated by losing his poise on a consistent basis but more out of trying to be aggressive in situations where he had less to lose because the team was already down by a lot. A player like Whitehurst had more issues with not maintaining his concentration in the heat of a heavy rush in his face and his bad decisions came more from seeming flustered. He seemed better this year, but I still saw evidence of him getting a little harried. I guess I believe it's easier to get more positive plays out of a super aggressive player that is reckless due to his confidence in his skills than a guy that seems to get flustered in the heat of batter (Leaf was an example of this in my opinion).

 

Leinart has impressed scouts with his ability to manipulate a defense and not make big mistakes, and I guess I am a little more sold by that than you are. It seems like people consistently grade Leinart's college career higher in the decision's department, but the Cutler fans believe he will jump ahead in the as Leinart's time in the pocket likely decreases and Cutler's likely increases. I think there's more to it than that. You're right, that's my point. I think Cutler has more skills to make bigger plays in terms of dealing with pressure versus live fire in the NFL. I am impressed with Leinarts smarts, I'm just not sure he'll be a special player because of it.

 

 

Leinart's durability is a big question IMO. As you mentioned, his ball handling is questionable... not what one would expect from a guy who has been coached up like he has. His arm strength is questioned by some and praised by others... being as it is that I don't have a job on the line to make the right call here, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on arm strength based on the fact that he came on stronger after healing from his surgery. Partly because Leinart had such better seasons as a sophomore and as a junior than he did as a senior. Either way, Cutler has the better arm for sure, but arm strength only gets you so far.

The questions are, I guess... does Leinart's arm even qualify as average? Does Cutler have the tools between his ears? Are the two guys comparable in terms of accuracy? Frankly I'm not satisfied with the answers I have seen to these questions, a

It's going to be fun finding out...and I think being scrutinized so much has to be very difficult if you tried to pay attention to it.

 

Nice responses, T.J. Tell me which Leinart entry you were referring to and I'll try to answer that one...

[t.j 35]

Nice responses, T.J. Tell me which Leinart entry you were referring to and I'll try to answer that one...

 

Thanks for the response. The part I was referring to was the Hawaii entry, Arm Strength section:

"Later, Leinart threw an INT in the endzone on a fade intended for Jarrett. While the DB clearly pushed Jarrett away, the pass was too low in the first place. If it were thrown high enough to take advantage of Jarrett's size, the result would have been an incompletion or TD, because Jarrett had at least a 5" height advantage."

 

Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption in reading that a play where defensive PI occurred but was not called?

[Wildman 0]

Thanks for the response. The part I was referring to was the Hawaii entry, Arm Strength section:

"Later, Leinart threw an INT in the endzone on a fade intended for Jarrett. While the DB clearly pushed Jarrett away, the pass was too low in the first place. If it were thrown high enough to take advantage of Jarrett's size, the result would have been an incompletion or TD, because Jarrett had at least a 5" height advantage."

 

Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption in reading that a play where defensive PI occurred but was not called?

 

That note really should have been in the accuracy section and not the arm strength section, my bad...it was a poorly thrown fade route. I was attempting to show if you took the DB out of the equation, the pass wasn't accurate. In hindsight, I believe Leinart was still struggling to regain his skills as a passer in the first 4-6 games this year and that game was really bad for him in the area of accuracy and arm strength. One did effect the other in this game.

[t.j 35]

Ok. Well thanks for clearing up the questions I had.

As a general response to your responses, I guess I didn't say it in so many words, but I like Leinart's potential to improve his arm strength better than Cutler's potential to improve his decision making. I'm sure both will improve some, and only time will tell how much. You noted that Brady's arm improved since he joined the NFL, and that has been in the back of my mind as well. I'm not sure why people seem to treat arm strength as a fixed commodity, which is generally only true of speed, in my opinion. You may be right about Leinart having little room to further solidify himself physically. A good scout or strength coach could probably make a pretty accurate assessment from a live visit. It's worth nothing that Leinart is slightly taller than Cutler and the same weight. They're the same age. So at a glance, from an untrained eye, they should be at a similar stage in their physical development, I guess.

On the decisions side, I like the fact that you differentiate between making mistakes under pressure in the pocket versus making mistakes due to being asked a lot of based on the circumstances of the game. But when it comes down to it, making a bad decision because you're trying to play catch up is still making a bad decision. IMO, the decision-making of a quarterback is the single-most difficult part of NFL football, I think it's right up there with the difficulty of hitting a baseball in the majors. There are so many things that go into being a good decision-maker, and being used to pass rush and solid coverage is a smaller part of it than I think people believe. It has so much to do with being well-trained, with being disciplined, with learning from your mistakes, and even with learning from the things you did well before the defense figures you out. I think a lot of the mistakes people make in the draft are believing that guys are going to level out on the mental side of things with experience.

[TomServo 0]

Well, whoever drafts Cutler... Good luck. Good luck with a guy who:

 

- Went 11-32 with 0 TDs and 2 INTS in a whipping by LSU.

- Completed less than 60% of his passes in well over half his games.

- Threw 5 TDs and 0 INTs in his best game... with 66 pass attempts... against Kentucky... and still lost.

- Only cracked 60% completion for the season once in 4 years of college.

- Was sacked a whopping 23 times in his senior season... the highest number in 4 years. Leinart was sacked 24 times in the year he won the Heisman and National Championship. Big disparity in OL...

 

Charlie Frye was better throughout his career with the Akron Zips talent surrounding him! Use your heads!

 

Draft hype bad!