Cutler: a matter of opinion ?

[Titlestarved]

Hey Everybody,

Am I the only one here who thinks that the guy is being over-rated ?

I like Croyle a heck of a lot better than Cutler and I think we can get him towards the end of the second round. I think we should look at trading down in round one and maybe taking Gilles from Georgia. He was a beast !

Later.

 

[Nappy Roots]

Hey Everybody,

Am I the only one here who thinks that the guy is being over-rated ?

I like Croyle a heck of a lot better than Cutler and I think we can get him towards the end of the second round. I think we should look at trading down in round one and maybe taking Gilles from Georgia. He was a beast !

Later.

what games have you watched Cutler in?

 

[Caps]

Hey Everybody,

Am I the only one here who thinks that the guy is being over-rated ?

I like Croyle a heck of a lot better than Cutler and I think we can get him towards the end of the second round. I think we should look at trading down in round one and maybe taking Gilles from Georgia. He was a beast !

Later.

Is Cutler overrated? Yes, extremely. Is Croyle better than him? In my opinion, no.

 

[In_Flames]

I like both QB's and would be happy drafting either, however, I think we get a better value pick with Croyle in a later round say the 2nd, which allows us to draft a highly talented defensive player in the 1st...

 

[Vertical Limit]

Very overrated. Croyle is a better value pick.

 

[BrazForPhins]

I like both QB's and would be happy drafting either, however, I think we get a better value pick with Croyle in a later round say the 2nd, which allows us to draft a highly talented defensive player in the 1st...

I agree with that, imo if it's to trade up, then sell the farm for Leinart.

 

[finfan54]

You can tell Cutler is way overrated because thats how people react to someone like him on this board. Alot of people on this board were anamoured with Aarron Rogers last year. I watched the one bowl game that he was in and I was like "this guy is going #1? NO way."

Cutler will be a good one, in about 3 years. He has all the tools. I think he has a bit of ****iness in him because people have built him up. That is what I do not like about him because if your head explodes at that level, your in for a suprise in the NFL. But he will learn and grow. But he is not as good as people make him out to be. Coaches love him because they know that QB's are needed and they will just teach him the ways of the NFL, but it wont be overnight like some believe.

 

[Phishstix]

cutler is toolsy and is overhyped, but he has 1st round talent. croyle is not better than him from a measurables and talent standpoint, but is a solid prospect in his own right.

 

[Dolfan4life!]

They are both overrated. Cutler slightly because of all the pre-draft QB hype lately. I was a big Cutler supporter up until a few months ago when he was still considered a mid to late 2nd round pick. I don't believe he is a top ten talent. Croyle has been even more overrated lately. I have never been a big supporter of his, even when he was considered a mid to late 5th round pick (about a month ago).

 

[twg76]

Cutler has talent. I'm sure he will develop into a pretty good QB. Croyle seems like more of a question mark than Cutler. Although Croyle does have talent as well. Croyle will need more time to develop in the NFL than Cutler.The problem is with Cutler costing a first round pick when he is arguably only the third best QB in the draft. Miami may be able to get the best or second best player at another position with the #16 pick. There will be alot of good defensive players on the board at 16. Players that could make an immediate impact in 2006.I like the idea of Miami spending a lower pick on a QB and then developing that guy. There is less gambling involved. Miami could use a 2nd or 3rd pick on a QB. Whitehurst grabbed my attention in the Senior Bowl. I heard he played well against the tougher teams in his senior year of college as well. Miami could most likely get him in the 2nd round.

 

[Motion]

Cutler has talent. I'm sure he will develop into a pretty good QB. Croyle seems like more of a question mark than Cutler. Although Croyle does have talent as well. Croyle will need more time to develop in the NFL than Cutler.The problem is with Cutler costing a first round pick when he is arguably only the third best QB in the draft. Miami may be able to get the best or second best player at another position with the #16 pick. There will be alot of good defensive players on the board at 16. Players that could make an immediate impact in 2006.I like the idea of Miami spending a lower pick on a QB and then developing that guy. There is less gambling involved. Miami could use a 2nd or 3rd pick on a QB. Whitehurst grabbed my attention in the Senior Bowl. I heard he played well against the tougher teams in his senior year of college as well. Miami could most likely get him in the 2nd round.

So spending a 1st on a top 3 Qb is too much of a gamble, but a 2nd on a 5th-7th rated QB isn't?

 

[twg76]

So spending a 1st on a top 3 Qb is too much of a gamble, but a 2nd on a 5th-7th rated QB isn't?

Yes, exactly. The player you get in the first round can have the biggest immediate impact on the team. That is a hefty value. If it goes to the 3rd best QB in the draft, and he doesn't pan out, then you wasted a huge pick and set the team back another draft. If you get the best guy available with your first round pick, then that player can contribute right away and make a difference.It doesn't make sense to draft solely from having a need at one position. You have to take the best guy available when you pick. If it is a position that you have a surplus of talent in, then maybe you would look to the next best player available. Do you see what I am saying?So by taking a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round, you are still getting that immediate impact player in the first round while addressing the need at QB. I don't think Cutler stands out immensely from the other QBs like Croyle and Whitehurst. He is only marginally better. So why overpay for him?

 

[Motion]

Yes, exactly. The player you get in the first round can have the biggest immediate impact on the team. That is a hefty value. If it goes to the 3rd best QB in the draft, and he doesn't pan out, then you wasted a huge pick and set the team back another draft. If you get the best guy available with your first round pick, then that player can contribute right away and make a difference.It doesn't make sense to draft solely from having a need at one position. You have to take the best guy available when you pick. If it is a position that you have a surplus of talent in, then maybe you would look to the next best player available. Do you see what I am saying?So by taking a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round, you are still getting that immediate impact player in the first round while addressing the need at QB. I don't think Cutler stands out immensely from the other QBs like Croyle and Whitehurst. He is only marginally better. So why overpay for him?

I see your point. But I don't agree that one pick would set your team back a whole draft. Thats ridiculous, especially when you consider our 3rd and 4th round picks from last year started almost the entire season. I also think the QB postion is an exception to the rule, you have to do what you gotta do to get yourself a franchise QB. Its been too long since this team has even had a glimpse of one. Does that mean reach for one? Of course not but if the value/opportunity is there you take it.

 

[LIQUID24]

I watched the one bowl game that he was in and I was like "this guy is going #1? NO way."

This may shock you, but some people saw Rodgers play more than once.... that's why they liked him. You're a typical Finheaven poster. Watches one game and pretends to know what he's talking about. You're no better than some of the sheep here.

 

[Motion]

This may shock you, but some people saw Rodgers play more than once.... that's why they liked him. You're a typical Finheaven poster. Watches one game and pretends to know what he's talking about. You're no better than some of the sheep here.

Sad but true.