I've been thinking about Tebow's situation, and while I think he could eventually learn to be a drop back passer, I don't think he will ever be as good in that as being a spread qb (counting the pistol as a variation of the spread). Which kind of leaves where he goes as kind of a mystery. I think if you go to the spread you have to do it all or nothing. And Cutler in no way, shape, or form can run the spread. I don't know much about Trestman, he might be inclined to try it. But since the Bears have Cutler under contract, and have a lot invested in him in a lot of ways, I don't think Tebow really fits there.
If this is being based on the fact that Trestman helped prep Tebow for the draft, it's overlooking a lot. Most of all, it ignores the fact that (according to Trestman's own website) Trestman ALSO coached up Jay Cutler and Jason Campbell for their Pro Days and NFL Combines. Cutler and Campbell are the 2 QBs already on the Bears roster and that probably influenced Trestman a lot in deciding to take the Bears' head coaching gig. I sincerely doubt that the possibility of acquiring Tebow (who isn't actually available right now) had any bearing at all on Trestman's decision...
That is entirely possible, but I think the point that some have made is that Trestman, in addition to having worked with Tebow before the draft, has specifically said some very pointedly positive things about Tebow's abilities as a QB when many others have not, and the Montreal team that Trestman was head coach of until a week ago also held Tebow's rights in the CFL. I could be wrong, but I assume that Trestman had something to do with that. Doesn't mean he's going to trade for Tebow to come to the Bears, not this year, anyway.
I guess a lot depends on Jay Cutler. He has as much arm as anyone could ever want, but I dunno. There is something he lacks so far. Maybe coaching? But he just doesn't put up the kind of numbers you expect from a guy like that, nor does he seem to have good judgement. That offensive line doesn't help either.
Yep, he's got a whale of an arm, but there's been plenty of guys like that who were busts or at the least weren't ever great in the NFL. Personally, I don't think Cutler has what it takes, between the ears, to be even a consistently good NFL QB, much less a great one. I'm not talking about smarts, either, because anyone who graduates from Vanderbilt is pretty smart. I'm talking about mentally, I just don't think he has the competitive drive and the burning desire and the leadership intangibles. His career numbers are kind of ho-hum. Most years he ranks in the 15-25 range in most categories, among all starting QB's in the NFL. I hear what you're saying about the offensive line and sacks, but consider that Aaron Rodgers has a few more sacks in 5 years as a starter than Cutler has in 7 years as a starter. Then look at how much better of a Defense Cutler has had for a majority of his career, and Rodgers numbers, including wins, look a whole lot better. With there being such a major coaching shake-up in Chicago, it will be interesting to see both how good the Defense is this year, and if Trestman can help make Cutler into something of a more consistent QB. If Cutler has another year of ho-hum, it wouldn't shock me to see Chicago trade him. Isn't he a free agent after this year anyway?
I have a point I'd like someone to address. I'm starting to believe that "elite" quarterbacks are the quarterbacks that get the chance to play on the "elite" teams. Look a few years ago Tom Brady went down. They plugged in Matt Cassell and didn't seem to drop off. The year before last Rogers missed a few games in Green Bay, and Matt Flynn looked very, very good. Before that Rogers took over when Favre retired (yeah :lol and the Packers didn't miss a beat, if memory serves. Alex Smith is having the best years of his career when Harbaugh went to Kaepernick. SF is a better team for it, but still... What I'm saying is the team around the quarterback, and especially the coaching are things I'm coming to believe matter more than the quarterback in some ways. Take Terry Bradshaw. Put him on Cleveland instead of on the Steelers in the 70's. Think he would have won four Super Bowls? Put Jim Hart, Craig Morton, or any of a number of other guys on that team as qb. Think they would have still won a couple at least, even if not all four? The same teams seem to continually be at the top of the heap in the NFL. Occasionally a new one comes along, but the movement is usually slow. And these same teams are usually the ones with the ballyhooed qb's and are the Super Bowl winners. Maybe they are that way because they have front offices that are good and get the right players for them. Or maybe there is any number of guys the Packers could plug into qb from around the league, and they would have the same numbers Rogers has. We have teams that are consistently bad, that consistently pick high in the draft. Maybe the qb's they get suck because they can't scout. Or maybe the guys they get would light things up if they played for a better franchise. It's not going to happen, but put Sam Bradford in San Francisco or New England. Heck put Matt Ryan on either team (just pretend Brady or Kaepernick isn't there for this purpose). I have a sneaking hunch both teams would still be playoff teams, and possible Super Bowl teams. Put Brady in St Louis for his career (I'm talking the post Vermeil teams). I don't think he sniffs the hall of fame. He'd probably be out of the league due to getting hammered in the pocket. In other words, it doesn't matter who the Jets put at qb. They will suck. Maybe not as bad as Sanchez, maybe they win a couple more games. But no threat to win the Super Bowl, because they don't have the coaching and front office to achieve this. Elite teams make qb's elite. It isn't the other way around. If your goal is to win Super Bowls and make the Hall of Fame, you have to make sure you go to the right team. Otherwise you can waste your whole career in San Diego, Miami, Kansas City, or a host of other places while people talk about other guys like they are champions who elevate their teams through force of will, instead of guys that won the draft lottery personally (ie the team that drafts them).
I don't think there's a pat, across the board answer for your question. Look at Dilfer. Anyone think he was elite because the Ravens won the Super Bowl? Does anyone really and truly think that Alex Smith, after floundering in the league for, what, 6 years, is now elite because Harbaugh coached him up and ran a great offensive plan and constructed an elite defense? Alex Smith is being bandied about quite a bit as a potential QB for some other team this year now that Kaepernick is obviously "the man" in San Francisco. My guess is if he went somewhere similar to San Francisco, he might do okay or even be good. But how many teams are there like San Fran who don't already have a really good QB? I think what will probably happen is Alex Smith will end up going to a poor to fair team that needs a QB, and I personally think he will revert back to being a very "average" QB. I think an "elite" coach has a lot to do with whether the team is elite or not. Personally, I think more often than not we see who is an "elite" QB not necessarily by what they can do right away with an atrociously bad team, but how much better can they make an intermediate team that can't ever quite seem to get over the hump? Can they take an intermediate team to the play-offs? I think there are very, very few "elite" QB's in the league. My personal list would include: Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers. That's it. I think there are a few more just a notch below, like Ben Roethlisberger and Drew Brees. Then there are quite a few guys in the category of "good", but not "elite", in my opinion. That list would have guys like Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, Tony Romo, and Matt Ryan on it. There's several young guys I might include on one of these lists in the future if they keep up their current performance, but I'm not going to put a rookie on any of these lists just yet.
My point is that is exactly what Harbaugh has done with Kapernick. I think Kaepernick has definitely done better than Alex Smith did. If Alex Smith were still the qb, they might not be going to the Super Bowl. But they just might have still made it with Smith. I think the odds are lower, but I can still see them making it. To reiterate something, I think if Harbaugh had RGIII, Luck, Wilson,... Tebow he would have them producing at the same level Kaepernick is. And if Kaepernick were on the Jets instead of Tebow, the guys on this board would be bitching about him, because Ryan would have made a sow's ear out of a silk purse, instead of using the player to his best effect. Out of the three rookies I've mentioned, I think RGIII played the best. That is an eyeball thing, not based on stats. I can definitely see all the physical tools Luck has, but RGIII made the biggest difference to his team I think. I think Luck had the worst rookie year of the big three rookie qb's. If Sanchez were the Niner qb, I'd expect him to be worse than Smith, but SF would still be a playoff team. And yes, wherever Smith plays next year, I think he has worse stats. Probably not as bad as Gabbert or Sanchez will, but pretty bad. But honestly he'll perform about average for the NFL. How many teams don't suck at qb? Jets - S Pats - DS Bills - S Miami - TBD Pittsburgh - DS Baltimore - Mostly DS Bengals - Mostly DS Browns - S Titans - S Colts - Mostly DS (opinion, though you have pilloried CC with his comparison stats) Jags - S (I actually watch them to see how badly Gabbert S) Texans - Mostly DS (Schaub is obscure to me though he has been around a few years. I just have no interest in watching this team. I think his stats are pretty decent though) Raiders - S Broncos - Mostly DS (personally I think Manning drops off next year, but we will see. I think his arm is going, and he never was cannon man anyway.) Chargers - S (I think), some will say DS Chiefs - S Just my opinion, but right now in the AFC I have two qb's Rothlisb-whatever and Brady as definitely DS. Smith will fit right in. I think the NFC is similar, but they have the good rookie qb's, Rogers and Brees. Plus Stafford. Heck stick Stafford on the Niners... But again, if some of the qb's I dismiss as being awful were on the Patriots or Niners I'm not so sure I would think they were bad.
Personally, I think Kaepernick is just better than Smith. Does that mean if he were QB of the Jets they would be in the Super Bowl? No, but I think he would take them farther than Smith would.
Cutler is the Sanchez of Chicago. He's not getting benched, even though Tebow's presence would expose his mental fragility. He'd crumble just like Sanchez did. As far as the Broncos 2011 defense... we've been through this all before. But what nobody talks about is game flow/rhythm and the overall game plan of the coaching staff. John Fox was not trying to win by blowing anyone out. He wanted to stay conservative and win by 1-7 points. That was his philosophy. The few higher scoring wins the Broncos had were due to having to match the output of the opposing team, i.e. flow of the game. If the other team scored 10 points, the Broncos were trying to score 11. If they scored 27 points, the Broncos were trying to score 28. It was the coach's game plan.
