I agree. I like Cutler, but I'm not sure I wanna trade up for him, depends on what we have to give up. I'd LOVE to have him on our team, but as QB is the easiest position to bust at, it's not a risk I'm willing to take in our "rebuilding" years. I'd be VERY happy with Jay Cutler in round 1 assuming we took him 16 or moved up one or two spots, and I'd be VERY happy with Huff in round one (I love that guy and want to see him on our team, he was in on like EVERY PLAY in the Rose Bowl, against the "unstoppable" USC offense) and Croyle in round two. Not Sure how I feel about Whitehurst, and I'm not even CLOSE to being sold on Jacobs, but I could go for Brodie. I go back and forth everyday though. Sometimes I think we can't wait any longer for a QB and Cutler is within reach and a great talent so lets do it, then other times I think, well, Gus ended up getting the job done for us with the win streak at the end and it looked like they finally found rhythm and we could get by with Gus for a little longer and the D, mainly secondary, got beat a lot which in a few games may have been a direct cause of our loss so we should get a DB with our 1st rounder.
Actually, Cutler's accuracy has been praised by many, it's not a weakness at all. I can't speak for his decision making though.
And Smith wasn't a winner, he was a product of a gimmick offense, I know that is a cliche or overused phrase but he was, Alex Smith on any other team or system would not have been a 1st rounder, nevermind the #1 overall. To say CUTLER can't win because his TEAM'S record was 5-6 is ridiculous, without Googling it, or looking it up aywhere, name me 3 more players from Vandy, hell, name me ONE more? The team was wretched and yet Cutler still got them wins and had good numbers, he carried that team on his back, and, to me, that is MUCH more impressive than anything Matt Leinart ever did with his "SUPER" team. To lead a miserable team to 5 wins basically by yourself shows leadership, poise, and skill, and that is a player I want on our team, especially as our leader. I'd much rather have a QB in that situation than one in Leinart's, who, with the exception of my Longhorn's beating him in the Rose Bowl, doesn't know what it is to lose. Who do you think is going to be more comfortable stepping into the role of a team that has some struggles, the "wonder boy" who never loses and had 2 1st round RBs, great WRs, great OL, and a great TE around him in college, or a guy who comes in already knowing how to deal with losses and struggles and who WASN'T surrounded by talent and still went ALMOST .500? I'd rather have a kid who had no weapons or help and GIVE him weapons and help to work with then have a kid who had every offensive weapon you could possibly want and then not be able to match that here. Yea, our offense got the job done, but ever single guy on it isn't a star like USCs.
