Rewatch the game again. He wasn't getting it out any faster and Hoyer had loads of time in the pocket. Even the commentators noticed that several times. That's why he looked so composed in the pocket. Had you put Hoyer in during the Texans game he would have had all the same issues and possibly more as Cutler had to deal with as the Texans were in the backfield all game. You cannot compare their performances when the environments they had to deal with were very different.
Does anyone remember the 2011 season when Cutler went down and Hanie and then McCown came in? Because before that people were saying much the same thing. I even remember the CBMB post that proclaimed we would be just fine without Cutler and then team promptly lost the next 5 games and ended the season 8-8. I heard the same thing with Clausen. How'd that work out?
If Hoyer had come in and just lit it up I would be all for letting him start, but he didn't. It just blows my mind that people are willing to change things up based simply on rather mediocre performances in 2 games.
I did watch the game, and it was talked about in the post game, he WAS getting the ball out more quickly. When he did hold onto the ball for 4+ sec's it was a role out or he was getting pressure/sacked.
And btw, who has Houston beaten to get to that to deserve all this praise? The beat the Bears(1-3), Titans(1-3), Chiefs(2-3), their loan loss? Patriots where they got worked over. Philly? Beat the Bears(1-3), Browns(0-4) and Stealers(4-1). Of those, only the Steelers were good. Those Def's are good, but maybe we should wait for wk 8 to really decide who's who when it comes to best b/c those schedules are looking warm butter soft outside of 2 teams and between those 2 teams those great defenses are .50. We'll get to see how good Philly is tonight vs GB.
+1 He definitely has better pocket-presence than Jay Cutler. He definitely gets the ball out quicker when needed. He definitely protected the ball when he WAS hit and didn't fumble. He definitely did not throw the game ending killer interception that we've come to expect from Jay Cutler. He has a better touch on his passes than Cutler too. He throws a beautiful pass. The only thing I can see where Cutler is better, is that Jay has a true cannon for an arm... but if I had to choose between the two QB's for the rest of this season, I'd go with a lessor arm guy who is a little bit better with all of the other QB attributes. Then the Bears need to (finally) get serious about a new QB for the post-Cutler era. Hoyer isn't that guy. We all know that. But between now and then, Hoyer is the guy I want to watch play on game-day.
It's been time for Cutler to go for years. He isn't going to bring a SB here. So you upgrade the position. How ever, Hoyer the Hope Destroyer is worse than Cutler. It's not even arguable. Today going against a bottom DEF missing key players and with an OL improving and with a running game, and with a DEF giving him field position Hoyer only managed 17 points.
I agree the offense only put up 17 points (although if we had a legit kicker we would have had more). But Cutler put up 14 points a game. Hoyer helped the OL as much as they helped him today. Hoyer had better pocket-awareness than Cutler has shown, he got the ball out quicker, the entire offense seemed to flow better. I liked how Hoyer went through progressions instead of locking in on one player like Jay often does.
No, Hoyer isn't the permanent answer at QB. But Cutler sure isn't either.
I just think Hoyer is the better QB right now. He doesn't have the cannon arm that Jay has though. But I'll take the lessor arm strength if the rest of the attributes are better.
It is possible that Cutler is the better QB but Hoyer fits in better for what the Bears need now. Cutler is a gambler and a risk taker Ia nice way of saying he makes bad decisions). But Hoyer appears right now to be the better game manager. With the DEF still finding its way, a game manager might have more value than a gambler.
But I'm telling you, there is a reason no one, including teams that didn't have a QB didn't sign Hoyer. Because he is not a good QB. Hoyer the Hope Destroyer will make an appearance. He is capable of out Fitpatricking Fitpatrick.
I want a QB who can make the long throws, I'd start Cutler. But I can also see and support the decision to start Hoyer.
I agree the offense only put up 17 points (although if we had a legit kicker we would have had more). But Cutler put up 14 points a game. Hoyer helped the OL as much as they helped him today. Hoyer had better pocket-awareness than Cutler has shown, he got the ball out quicker, the entire offense seemed to flow better. I liked how Hoyer went through progressions instead of locking in on one player like Jay often does.
No, Hoyer isn't the permanent answer at QB. But Cutler sure isn't either.
I just think Hoyer is the better QB right now. He doesn't have the cannon arm that Jay has though. But I'll take the lessor arm strength if the rest of the attributes are better.
It is possible that Cutler is the better QB but Hoyer fits in better for what the Bears need now. Cutler is a gambler and a risk taker Ia nice way of saying he makes bad decisions). But Hoyer appears right now to be the better game manager. With the DEF still finding its way, a game manager might have more value than a gambler.
But I'm telling you, there is a reason no one, including teams that didn't have a QB didn't sign Hoyer. Because he is not a good QB. Hoyer the Hope Destroyer will make an appearance. He is capable of out Fitpatricking Fitpatrick.
I want a QB who can make the long throws, I'd start Cutler. But I can also see and support the decision to start Hoyer.
Those are good points, but in all honesty I figure the "Hall of Fame" hope destroyer of all time, is probably Jay Cutler. I've never seen a QB break fans hearts like he has done here in Chicago, repeatedly, spanning several years. You are right though, in that Hoyer isn't an answer either, but this is the situation we find ourselves in. Hoyer may be a better band-aid guy to fill in until the Bears get a long-term replacement. It's a bad situation to be in... no question. I also agree with you in that Jay has a stronger arm. Here is Brad Biggs take on the situation, FWIW.
I did find this small excerpt interesting, and after it I included the full article:
"Ultimately, the conversation with Cutler eventually leads back to turnovers. He’s got 180 of them (143 interceptions, 37 lost fumbles) in 136 career games. What’s most fresh in the minds of Fox and offensive coordinator Dowell Loggains are the turnovers Cutler had in the Week 2 loss to the Eagles. The players surrounding the quarterback are not good enough for the Bears to win many games in which they lose the turnover ratio."
Jimmy Johnson was five days ahead of the official hiring in January 2013 when he announced on Twitter that Marc Trestman would be the Bears’ next coach. Now, Johnson says Jay Cutler, the quarterback Trestman was hired to fix and didn’t, is likely done playing for the Bears.
During halftime, the Fox analyst cited the leadership difference between fill-in Brian Hoyer and Cutler in suggesting the Bears will not return to Cutler when his injured right thumb is healed. He said Hoyer was “auditioning” for the job.
“I think there is a good chance Jay Cutler has seen his last snap as a Bear,” Johnson said.
Asked to clarify what will happen at the position if Cutler is cleared next week to play against the Colts at Lucas Oil Stadium, coach John Fox sidestepped the matter following the first victory of the season.
“We’ll cross that bridge when we get to it,” Fox said. “I’d like to enjoy this win at least for a few hours.”
You will recall last week that Fox was evasive in talking about Cutler reclaiming his job when he was healed, the kind of dismissive answer that usually doesn’t mean a whole lot. In this instance, there is evidence adding up in support of a permanent quarterback switcheroo.
“I don't think there are any givens. And that's no indictment on anybody,” Fox said last Monday after the bad loss at Dallas. “This is a day-to-day, week-to-week, what-have-you-done-for-me-lately league, and so we're just trying to get the best 11 guys out there regardless of the position to where we can play a full 60 minutes and get a victory.”
Where does this leave Cutler? Is Johnson patched into Halas Hall like he was Trestman, who worked for him as a quarterbacks coach at the University of Miami? I’m not going to pretend to have the answers to that right now but let’s first recognize Hoyer was extremely efficient, completing 28 of 36 passes for 302 yards and two touchdowns without a turnover. Hoyer’s final stats looked hollow in the loss at Dallas because he dropped back to chuck it 49 times and completed a lot of passes and picked up some worthless yardage against soft zone coverage when the Cowboys had a large lead.
Hoyer was pretty sharp against the Lions but we need to consider a few things. First, the Bears scored only 17 points, although they were in position for 20 had Connor Barth not pushed a 50-yard attempt wide right. The Lions have a weak defense that was made weaker by the absence of defensive end Ziggy Ansah and linebacker DeAndre Levy. Had the Bears put up 34 points, maybe it’s an easier change to explain.
Hoyer has done a better job of spreading the ball around in the last two games than Cutler did in the first two, involving tight end Zach Miller, who has three touchdown catches since Hoyer took over, and wide receiver Kevin White.
Ultimately, the conversation with Cutler eventually leads back to turnovers. He’s got 180 of them (143 interceptions, 37 lost fumbles) in 136 career games. What’s most fresh in the minds of Fox and offensive coordinator Dowell Loggains are the turnovers Cutler had in the Week 2 loss to the Eagles. The players surrounding the quarterback are not good enough for the Bears to win many games in which they lose the turnover ratio.
If the Bears do stick with Hoyer when Cutler is healthy, it would mark the second time he has been benched in three seasons. Remember, before Trestman was fired, his staff benched Cutler in favor of Jimmy Clausen.
Lions linebacker Tahir Whitehead said there really isn’t much difference between the choices.
“Hoyer is a veteran guy,” Whitehead said. “We expected him to run the offense just as if we expected Cutler to. They came in, they ran the ball, ran screens, ran play action and picked up big plays. They ran exactly the offense we expected them to run. I don’t necessarily think one guy is better than the other.”
Cutler remains a popular target and is low hanging fruit for those locally and nationally. He’s 50-49 as the starter for the Bears in the regular season and ultimately the fact that this is a discussion leads you to believe the chances of Cutler being the quarterback of the future – as in the quarterback in 2017 – are reducing.
It’s an easy leap for Johnson to make and analysts are paid to stir it up from time to time but Johnson has never struck me as a guy who slings stuff against the wall and waits to see what sticks. Cutler’s contract runs through 2020 but he doesn’t have any guaranteed money in the deal beyond this season and that, combined with those turnovers, might ultimately doom him after eight seasons.
It is possible that Cutler is the better QB but Hoyer fits in better for what the Bears need now. Cutler is a gambler and a risk taker a nice way of saying he makes bad decisions). But Hoyer appears right now to be the better game manager. With the DEF still finding its way, a game manager might have more value than a gambler.
+1 I went back and re-read your post. All good points. But this part in particular stood out to me as being a good explanation of the situation. I thought about it this morning after re-reading your post... maybe this is the "type" QB we need right now. Not permanently. But just right now. No sane person is going to believe Brian Hoyer (or Jay Cutler for that matter) is a great QB. They both have their faults and strengths. But maybe the type guy we need most right now IS a game manager type QB.
