PDA

View Full Version : Urlacher on the difference between Orton and Cutler


Pages : 1 [2]

jhns
12-01-2009, 11:07 AM
"We haven't come close to the top half of the league in scoring this season. The offense, especially in early games, has been going 3 and out constantly. The o-line suddenly got worse as did all of our recievers. I do not understand the blind love fpor Orton."


What's so hard to understand? You point out offensive shortcomings and direct the finger at Orton. My post responding to this points out how the Bears are doing worse than last year - most importantly in the standings.

Maybe it's just coincidence that Cutler goes from one team to the next, and each time his team did better without him.

Ok... Now show me when I argued that Cutler is the answer to our problems.... Why do I care what Chicago is doing? I pointed out the BRONCO offense is not getting it done. Your argument is that they are getting it done because Chicagos offense got worse?....

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 11:18 AM
I'm not sure how you get that from his post but maybe I am just reading to much into it. I see a lot here acting like Orton has actually been good and they defend everything Orton. He has been great at not turning the ball over but very below average everywhere else. If Cutler, Plummer, or Griese looked the same way, tons of people would get on them about it. Now I just read excuses for all the bad play. That or a long spin into it really being good play. Maybe you guys aren't saying he is the answer. You are still all giving him far more slack than any Denver QB has ever gotten and it is only because you are butthurt about Cutler. The simple fact is, our offense is not producing. What it did last year has nothing to do with anything. They aren't producing now.

Wow, you seem really confused.

Orton has been good at limiting turnovers. Which was a major problem for us last year. It's relevant. That's the key to winning games, frankly. You don't turn the ball over, you win a lot more games than if you do turn the ball over.

As for giving more slack, I'd say nobody got more slack than Cutler did last year, or than he is getting this year in Chicago. Good god.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 11:18 AM
So it all balances itself out huh? Why is it that you are comparing who our offense has played between the two years again?....

Again, because you said this:

The offense has not pulled its weight. Either the scheme, play calling, or Orton are not getting it done. Those are the only three things that have changed and can make our o-line/recievers look like they have dropped off from last year.

I think the train of thought here is pretty clear.

When you say that ONLY 3 variables have changed, while ignoring 1 HUGE variable (as well as several others I won't get into now), I'm going to call you out.

jhns
12-01-2009, 11:30 AM
Again, because you said this:



I think the train of thought here is pretty clear.

When you say that ONLY 3 variables have changed, while ignoring 1 HUGE variable (as well as several others I won't get into now), I'm going to call you out.

You may want to bold the rest of that sentence to get what I was saying. You are saying out o-line and receivers dropped off because of who we play? We played some very good pass rushers and a some good defenses last year. I don't remeber our o-line having trouble in pass protection against any of them. There is no way you can convince me the opponents have created this kind of dropoff for the recievers. Guys like Royal seem to be half of their former selves.

jhns
12-01-2009, 11:33 AM
Wow, you seem really confused.

Orton has been good at limiting turnovers. Which was a major problem for us last year. It's relevant. That's the key to winning games, frankly. You don't turn the ball over, you win a lot more games than if you do turn the ball over.

As for giving more slack, I'd say nobody got more slack than Cutler did last year, or than he is getting this year in Chicago. Good god.

He has been good at limiting turnovers. That is the one area he has been above average.

Cutler is getting slack? Could have fooled me.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Are you really arguing that players can't look worse against better teams? Odd.

We played some very good pass rushers and a some good defenses last year. I don't remeber our o-line having trouble in pass protection against any of them.

Maybe you should re-watch some of the games again, then. And don't cite sack numbers. Hurries mean just as much, if not more, when discussing the concept of pressure. Sack numbers can be skewed very easily based on a number of factors.

There is no way you can convince me the opponents have created this kind of dropoff for the recievers. Guys like Royal seem to be half of their former selves.

I NEVER said that scheme, etc. should be ignored and that opponents alone cause this. I said very clearly that the opponents' defensive rankings were ONE significant variable that you overlooked. That is all.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 11:38 AM
He has been good at limiting turnovers. That is the one area he has been above average.

Cutler is getting slack? Could have fooled me.

Are you serious?

He was second in the league in picks last year with 18. Yet people overlook this fact in their desperation to claim that we were trading away a "franchise QB".

He has problems with his mechanics and his decision making. He routinely stared down his receivers. He had more red zone picks than anyone else in the league. Yet we were absolute fools to even consider trading him elsewhere.

yes, I'd say Cutler got quite a bit of slack.

jhns
12-01-2009, 11:43 AM
Maybe you should re-watch some of the games again, then. And don't cite sack numbers. Hurries mean just as much, if not more, when discussing the concept of pressure. Sack numbers can be skewed very easily based on a number of factors.


I have every game from last season recorded. Let me know which ones made you think we hasd problems with our pass protection and I will rewatch them.

It is pretty simple. Our receivers and o-line were thought of as some of the best in the league last year. O-line has become a "problem" and our receivers are far less productive this year. Chalk it up to whatever you want. There is a problem with the offense riht now.

Also, how are you going to tell me that the offenses a defense faces have no affect on how the defense and players look but it is true the other way around?

jhns
12-01-2009, 11:47 AM
Are you serious?

He was second in the league in picks last year with 18. Yet people overlook this fact in their desperation to claim that we were trading away a "franchise QB".

He has problems with his mechanics and his decision making. He routinely stared down his receivers. He had more red zone picks than anyone else in the league. Yet we were absolute fools to even consider trading him elsewhere.

yes, I'd say Cutler got quite a bit of slack.

Well, you guys just don't know what a franchise QB is for one. Listen to how teams and analysts use that term. It is simply a term used for a player that a team invests in and builds their team around. It has nothing to do with their actual skills. I'm not sure why you get offended by Cutler being called a franchise QB.

Also, I didn't want to get rid of Cutler but I still saw and talked about his flaws. You act as though 3rd year Cutler and our offense of rookie-third year guys had all peaked and they had no shot at getting better. I have to laugh a little....

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 11:53 AM
Also, how are you going to tell me that the offenses a defense faces have no affect on how the defense and players look but it is true the other way around?

I NEVER said that.

Here's what I said, slowly this time for those in the cheap seats (you).

A team's "defensive" or "offensive" ranking can be tainted EARLY in the year if they face a few tough teams or creampuffs, sure. But this is not the case once you have played most of the season or the full season. Why? Because it is basically impossible to go more than 6 or 8 games without facing at least a few teams from the other side of the fence. We've played enough of this season to know who the good/bad defenses and good/bad offenses are. Unless you for whatever reason believe that all 6 or so of the top 10 defenses we've faced have all had ridiculously easy schedules, then you have to concede the point.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 11:57 AM
Well, you guys just don't know what a franchise QB is for one. Listen to how teams and analysts use that term. It is simply a term used for a player that a team invests in and builds their team around. It has nothing to do with their actual skills. I'm not sure why you get offended by Cutler being called a franchise QB.

Also, I didn't want to get rid of Cutler but I still saw and talked about his flaws. You act as though 3rd year Cutler and our offense of rookie-third year guys had all peaked and they had no shot at getting better. I have to laugh a little....

I know what a franchise QB is. Analysts discussed Cutler as if it was just a matter of time, based on his arm strength and his age. But to me, and I think most analysts would concur, a franchise QB is one that leads his team and wins games. Nobody ever called JaMarcus Russell a franchise QB (except moronic Raider fans), because he wasn't, and he isn't. Cutler isn't either.

Laugh a lot. A third year quarterback should be starting to eliminate the major flaws of a young player. He didn't do that in his third year (though admittedly, he got better), and has actually regressed in his fourth year.

Bottom line: A Franchise QB is someone who can win under less-than-optimum scenarios. Like an o-line letting pressure through (look what Rodgers is doing in Green Bay), or a defense letting the squad down (look what Manning was able to do with a porous D a few years back). Tom Brady has never had a super-strong running game, and he still wins games.

As for your argument about the term, I disagree. A Franchise quarterback, to me, is someone who has weapons invested in him and delivers. Not someone who has every opportunity to succeed (top notch wideouts, good running game, strong o-line) and manages a sub-.500 record.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:01 PM
I NEVER said that.

Here's what I said, slowly this time for those in the cheap seats (you).

A team's "defensive" or "offensive" ranking can be tainted EARLY in the year if they face a few tough teams or creampuffs, sure. But this is not the case once you have played most of the season or the full season. Why? Because it is basically impossible to go more than 6 or 8 games without facing at least a few teams from the other side of the fence. We've played enough of this season to know who the good/bad defenses and good/bad offenses are. Unless you for whatever reason believe that all 6 or so of the top 10 defenses we've faced have all had ridiculously easy schedules, then you have to concede the point.

Have you looked to be sure they haven't? How about last years teams? Did you look to make sure none of those defenses played a bunch of the top offenses? Don't come at me with this stuff unless you did all of your work. Picking some small portion that fits your argument as you tell me I need to be called out for not doing all of this is not good debate. If you want to break down every defense we have faced, and every offense those defenses have faced, I will accept your findings. I do agree the schedule can make a difference. I dint agree that anyone has actually broken it down enough to tell me it did.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:04 PM
Have you looked to be sure they haven't? How about last years teams? Did you look to make sure none of those defenses played a bunch of the top offenses? Don't come at me with this stuff unless you did all of your work. Picking some small portion that fits your argument as you tell me I need to be called out for not doing all of this is not good debate. If you want to break down every defense we have faced, and every offense those defenses have faced, I will accept your findings. I do agree the schedule can make a difference. I dint agree that anyone has actually broken it down enough to tell me it did.

Do all the work, Beantown! jhns doesn't know how to use teh googlez!

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:07 PM
Do all the work, Beantown! jhns doesn't know how to use teh googlez!

Yes, do all of the work on your theory. Sounds about right.

So, do you think our schedule is has a lot to do with our o-line and receivers being far worse this season?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:11 PM
Yes, do all of the work on your theory. Sounds about right.

So, do you think our schedule is has a lot to do with our o-line and receivers being far worse this season?

Yes, I tend to think that how good a defense directly contributes to how a team performs against it. Call me crazy.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:17 PM
Yes, I tend to think that how good a defense directly contributes to how a team performs against it. Call me crazy.

So what game last year did out o-line look like it was a weakness? Or is it that we didn't play any good defenses last year? How about the receivers? We are playing defenses that are so good compared to last year that it explains their production being cut in half?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:21 PM
So what game last year did out o-line look like it was a weakness? Or is it that we didn't play any good defenses last year? How about the receivers? We are playing defenses that are so good compared to last year that it explains their production being cut in half?

"So what game last year did out o-line look like it was a weakness?"

Don't know where this question came from. Doesn't make sense.

"Or is it that we didn't play any good defenses last year?"

We played some decent D's. Nothing like what we've faced this season.

"How about the receivers? We are playing defenses that are so good compared to last year that it explains their production being cut in half?"

yes, actually. See, a good defense is a good defense because they're able to limit an offense's effectiveness.

Why do I get the feeling like I have to explain to you how football is played?

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 12:26 PM
Alright jhns, here you go:

Tough defenses Broncos have faced this season and proof they are in fact tough:

#1 ranked Cincy: 6 games against offenses ranked in top half in scoring
#2 ranked Dallas: 4 games against Top 10 offenses
#4 ranked Baltimore: 7 games against top half offenses, including the #2-#5 units
#7 ranked NE: 3 games against top 12 units, including New Orleans
#9 ranked Pitt: 5 games against top half offenses, including #2 and 3
#10 ranked Wash: 4 games against top 10 offenses

These defenses are legit. They have faced the best offenses in the league and aren't simply beating up on creampuffs, ok?

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:27 PM
"So what game last year did out o-line look like it was a weakness?"

Don't know where this question came from. Doesn't make sense.


In order to say our o-line just looked good last year and bad this year simply because of the competition, you should be able to point out how they looked bad agaust good competition last year. If they did good against the good competition last year and can't do good against good competition this year, they fell off. Pretty simple.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:30 PM
Alright jhns, here you go:

Tough defenses Broncos have faced this season and proof they are in fact tough:

#1 ranked Cincy: 6 games against offenses ranked in top half in scoring
#2 ranked Dallas: 4 games against Top 10 offenses
#4 ranked Baltimore: 7 games against top half offenses, including the #2-#5 units
#7 ranked NE: 3 games against top 12 units, including New Orleans
#9 ranked Pitt: 5 games against top half offenses, including #2 and 3
#10 ranked Wash: 4 games against top 10 offenses

These defenses are legit. They have faced the best offenses in the league and aren't simply beating up on creampuffs, ok?

B-but... wait, beantown! Don't you also have to look at those top offenses to see what defenses THEY'VE played? And then look at those Defenses to see what offenses THEY'VE played? And then look at THOSE offenses to see what defenses THEY'VE played?

/jhns'd

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 12:32 PM
In order to say our o-line just looked good last year and bad this year simply because of the competition, you should be able to point out how they looked bad agaust good competition last year. If they did good against the good competition last year and can't do good against good competition this year, they fell off. Pretty simple.

But AGAIN, nobody is saying it's just the level of competition. It's one factor. Other things, like age (Hamilton?) and injury (Harris) are two other variables that you simply cannot ignore. Sometimes guys just get old or lose their edge like Hamilton and just looking at a team on paper won't tell you that.

You have been saying that ONLY Orton, the scheme or the play calling is to blame for the "lack" of offensive production; all the while you keep ignoring all these other key ingredients that play a role.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:34 PM
Alright jhns, here you go:

Tough defenses Broncos have faced this season and proof they are in fact tough:

#1 ranked Cincy: 6 games against offenses ranked in top half in scoring
#2 ranked Dallas: 4 games against Top 10 offenses
#4 ranked Baltimore: 7 games against top half offenses, including the #2-#5 units
#7 ranked NE: 3 games against top 12 units, including New Orleans
#9 ranked Pitt: 5 games against top half offenses, including #2 and 3
#10 ranked Wash: 4 games against top 10 offenses

These defenses are legit. They have faced the best offenses in the league and aren't simply beating up on creampuffs, ok?

How is 5 of 11 teams in the top 16 good competition? How about 3 of 11 being top 12? Looks to me like you have proven my point. Some of those teams have played a lot of bad offenses.

All of this can easily be settled. Show me a single game last season that the offensive line was a weakness. You won't convince me that we didn't play a single good defense. If they looked bad against good defenses last year, you have a point. If they didn't, how can you claim it is good defense holding them back when they handled good defenses last year?

vancejohnson82
12-01-2009, 12:35 PM
In order to say our o-line just looked good last year and bad this year simply because of the competition, you should be able to point out how they looked bad agaust good competition last year. If they did good against the good competition last year and can't do good against good competition this year, they fell off. Pretty simple.

so we are going to ignore the fact that injuries have had an effect on the line this year? or that a new offensive system was implemented??

this is ridiculous...the team is already WELL over the amount of wins all of you Cutlerites had us achieving...yet, you still find things to complain about

it really is mind numbing

vancejohnson82
12-01-2009, 12:36 PM
How is 5 of 11 teams in the top 16 good competition? How about 3 of 11 being top 12? Looks to me like you have proven my point. Some of those teams have played a lot of bad offenses.

All of this can easily be settled. Show me a single game last season that the offensive line was a weakness. You won't convince me that we didn't play a single good defense. If they looked bad against good defenses last year, you have a point. If they didn't, how can you claim it is good defense holding them back when they handled good defenses last year?

so Cincy, Baltimore and Pittsburgh are bad defenses...don't look at the stats just answer honestly...

you're just being obstinate at this point

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:40 PM
But AGAIN, nobody is saying it's just the level of competition. It's one factor. Other things, like age (Hamilton?) and injury (Harris) are two other variables that you simply cannot ignore. Sometimes guys just get old or lose their edge like Hamilton and just looking at a team on paper won't tell you that.

You have been saying that ONLY Orton, the scheme or the play calling is to blame for the "lack" of offensive production; all the while you keep ignoring all these other key ingredients that play a role.

The problem has been there since before Harris went down. It continued after we replaced Hamilton. None of that even tries to explain the reciever dropoff. It is those three things to blame. I have seen the o-line and receivers get it done. You have seen them get it done. The coaching, playcalling, scheme, QB, and RB changed and now they aren't getting it done. That is against good or bad defenses. I'm not sure why you would think the problem is the players when they have shown they can do it.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:43 PM
The problem has been there since before Harris went down. It continued after we replaced Hamilton. None of that even tries to explain the reciever dropoff. It is those three things to blame. I have seen the o-line and receivers get it done. You have seen them get it done. The coaching, playcalling, scheme, QB, and RB changed and now they aren't getting it done. That is against good or bad defenses. I'm not sure why you would think the problem is the players when they have shown they can do it.

Ugh. Arguing with an obtuse moron (whose only goal is to become more obtuse) is never fun. This has just gotten ridiculous.

So a player who got it done last year can get it done now, right? That's your reasoning? Nothing ever changes?

Man, the NFL must be so boring.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:45 PM
so we are going to ignore the fact that injuries have had an effect on the line this year? or that a new offensive system was implemented??

this is ridiculous...the team is already WELL over the amount of wins all of you Cutlerites had us achieving...yet, you still find things to complain about

it really is mind numbing

The problems with the o-line showed well before any injury. Maybe you didn't read but I did blame it on the new offense being installed...

So beating some random fans expectations is good enough for you? It means the offense is perfect and we should keep everything the same from here on? Riiiight.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:47 PM
Ugh. Arguing with an obtuse moron (whose only goal is to become more obtuse) is never fun. This has just gotten ridiculous.

So a player who got it done last year can get it done now, right? That's your reasoning? Nothing ever changes?

Man, the NFL must be so boring.

That would be true if it was one or two players. I am talking about a lot of players. You are right that your arguments are rediculous.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 12:49 PM
How is 5 of 11 teams in the top 16 good competition? How about 3 of 11 being top 12? Looks to me like you have proven my point. Some of those teams have played a lot of bad offenses.

Nope, it proved my point that everyone plays everyone in this league. Nobody plays against only scrubs and nobody plays against just the cream of the crop. Especially this year, when every division seems to have one or two good to really good teams, one ok team and one really bad team.

All of this can easily be settled. Show me a single game last season that the offensive line was a weakness. You won't convince me that we didn't play a single good defense. If they looked bad against good defenses last year, you have a point. If they didn't, how can you claim it is good defense holding them back when they handled good defenses last year?

To be honest, they really didn't play any elite defenses last year. I just looked again to be sure. The best they went against was TB at 9 and NE at 10.

And I'll say the NE game is that "single game" you are looking for. 7 pts scored by the offense, and that didn't come until 4 minutes left in the game in garbage time. 3 sacks allowed, only 169 yds passing, 80 total yards rushing by the RBs, 3 penalties for holding or illegal formation, several tackles in the backfield.....

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:52 PM
Nope, it proved my point that everyone plays everyone in this league. Nobody plays against only scrubs and nobody plays against just the cream of the crop. Especially this year, when every division seems to have one or two good to really good teams, one ok team and one really bad team.



To be honest, they really didn't play any elite defenses last year. I just looked again to be sure. The best they went against was TB at 9 and NE at 10.

And I'll say the NE game is that "single game" you are looking for. 7 pts scored by the offense, and that didn't come until 4 minutes left in the game in garbage time. 3 sacks allowed, only 169 yds passing, 80 total yards rushing by the RBs, 3 penalties for holding or illegal formation, several tackles in the backfield.....

So again you are arguing defenses all see the same thing over a season and level of competition means nothing. Then you again argue the opposite for offenses...

The NE game was one we played without a QB. You are correct that it looked just like what we have now....

lex
12-01-2009, 12:53 PM
If it's not working, you change it up. They haven't.

If Jay was a leader, he would go to his coaches and ask them to change it up. He isn't.

I love how when we see Cutler failing, it's because we're "angry women" with "Cutler-rage." I love seeing him fail; it has nothing to do with rage.

It's joy.

I'm sorry you can't enjoy it with us, lex. He's failing, and instead of enjoying it, you'd rather make excuses for him. And that's your business. But trying to maintain the ridiculous argument that it's his line, or his receivers, or his coaching, or whatEVER, when he's supposed to be the leader on that football team, is completely absurd.

Leaders LEAD. Cutler doesn't.


As soon as I say something thats not true, youll have traction. As it is now, youre just one of the angry women that hate Jay Cutler.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 12:54 PM
I have seen the o-line and receivers get it done. You have seen them get it done. The coaching, playcalling, scheme, QB, and RB changed and now they aren't getting it done. That is against good or bad defenses. I'm not sure why you would think the problem is the players when they have shown they can do it.

But here's the real question? Who have you seen them "do it" against?

Take away the Oakland and New Orleans games last year (the 24th and 26th ranked defenses last year in pts) and you have an offensive unit that looks A LOT like the unit we see today. In fact, take away those two games and the offenses are literally within one point scored of each other.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:54 PM
So again you are arguing defenses all see the same thing over a season and level of competition means nothing. Then you again argue the opposite for offenses...

The NE game was one we played without a QB. You are correct that it looked just like what we have now....

We played NE without a QB?? Cutler missed one series. One.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 12:55 PM
As soon as I say something thats not true, youll have traction. As it is now, youre just one of the angry women that hate Jay Cutler.

I already have traction, and you've made every pathetic excuse in the book. You're a laughingstock here.

I guess the 'angry women' must outnumber your stupid ass by quite a bit.

jhns
12-01-2009, 12:57 PM
But here's the real question? Who have you seen them "do it" against?

Take away the Oakland and New Orleans games last year (the 24th and 26th ranked defenses last year in pts) and you have an offensive unit that looks A LOT like the unit we see today. In fact, take away those two games and the offenses are literally within one point scored of each other.

Yup, and then you even it up by taking away the best two games this year and it looks the same again....

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 12:59 PM
So again you are arguing defenses all see the same thing over a season and level of competition means nothing. Then you again argue the opposite for offenses.

I'm saying they all see a good range of opponents. So you can take a team's ranking at the end of the year on either offense or defense and compare it to another team's ranking and feel with a good degree of certainty that it is an apples to apples comparison.

I can't believe you are this uneducated that this very simple concept eludes you.

The NE game was one we played without a QB. You are correct that it looked just like what we have now....

Seriously? Ignore the QB in the equation. Go with OLine play only. It was a TERRIBLE game for the OLine against a decent defense, just what you asked for. It's not like I had a lot of games to choose from (there were literally only 2 games against better-than-league-average defenses all last year). I guess I could've gone with the TB game, which was also a less-than-impressive outing by the OLine considering they could only manage 16 pts.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:00 PM
We played NE without a QB?? Cutler missed one series. One.

I'm not sure how this changes what I said.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:00 PM
Yup, and then you even it up by taking away the best two games this year and it looks the same again....

Nope. Those two games haven't happened yet.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:07 PM
I'm saying they all see a good range of opponents. So you can take a team's ranking at the end of the year on either offense or defense and compare it to another team's ranking and feel with a good degree of certainty that it is an apples to apples comparison.

I can't believe you are this uneducated that this very simple concept eludes you.



Seriously? Ignore the QB in the equation. Go with OLine play only. It was a TERRIBLE game for the OLine against a decent defense, just what you asked for. It's not like I had a lot of games to choose from (there were literally only 2 games against better-than-league-average defenses all last year). I guess I could've gone with the TB game, which was also a less-than-impressive outing by the OLine considering they could only manage 16 pts.

I get what you are saying with the first part. If that is true, why isn't it true for the offense? Why is strength of schedule something that changes an offenses performance but the defenses all average out? How does that work exactly? Keep calling me the dumb one as you come with this lame stuff.

You didn't follow this team very well last year. The o-line had a great game against a Tampa team that was playing great. The low score was what we aimed for. Shanahan even said so before the game. He made a game plan built around ball control against one of the best defenses to that point last season. I wouldn't be complaining about the offense if they matched that production against good defenses this year. Anyways, you say the o-line played bad because of the score or some stats? Seriously? You think you can tell from that and you question my intelligence?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 01:07 PM
I'm not sure how this changes what I said.

You said we played NE without a QB. We had a QB. His name is Jay Cutler, he missed ONE SERIES, not ONE GAME. So we did, in fact, play with a QB.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:09 PM
You said we played NE without a QB. We had a QB. His name is Jay Cutler, he missed ONE SERIES, not ONE GAME. So we did, in fact, play with a QB.

Cutler didn't play that game. Go back and watch last season and tell me that we had a QB that game. He may have been in there but he wasn't throwing even half as good as he was. A limited QB will make the rest of the offense look worse. Guess what I have been saying through this entire thread...

chex
12-01-2009, 01:11 PM
A limited QB will make the rest of the offense look worse.

You mean like playing with a busted finger on your throwing hand?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 01:11 PM
Cutler didn't play that game. Go back and watch last season and tell me that we had a QB that game. He may have been in there but he wasn't throwing even half as good as he was. A limited QB will make the rest of the offense look worse. Guess what I have been saying through this entire thread...

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/facepalm.jpg

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:12 PM
I get what you are saying with the first part. If that is true, why isn't it true for the offense? Why is strength of schedule something that changes an offenses performance but the defenses all average out? How does that work exactly? Keep calling me the dumb one as you come with this lame stuff.

I have gone through great pains to stress in every sentence, "offense OR defense" but for some reason you keep saying that I'm limiting my application of rankings to just one side or the other. I have no idea where you keep coming up with this.

vancejohnson82
12-01-2009, 01:13 PM
I dont understand what the argument is here against the '09 Broncos...

Jay Cutler wasnt THE problem, but he sure as hell was PART of the problem with his mistakes and forced throws...

you put Orton behind our team last year and we make the playoffs adn the defense doesnt look as bad because they arent playing on short fields every game....

I will stand by that statement

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:13 PM
Cutler didn't play that game. Go back and watch last season and tell me that we had a QB that game. He may have been in there but he wasn't throwing even half as good as he was. A limited QB will make the rest of the offense look worse. Guess what I have been saying through this entire thread...

Yup, I always found it a convenient excuse at the time, yet he looked fine on the TD pass he threw at the end of the game. That's the way it is with that guy. Bad throws? Always an excuse. Good throws? All skill baby.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:20 PM
I have gone through great pains to stress in every sentence, "offense OR defense" but for some reason you keep saying that I'm limiting my application of rankings to just one side or the other. I have no idea where you keep coming up with this.

Yeah, I'm not sure I get what you are even saying now. How is it that they all even out but there is such a huge difference between the defenses we faced last year compared to this year? You claim that difference is something that helps make all of our offensive guys look a lot worse. So are all defenses better this year and everyone is playing better ones? How can you say it evens out if we played such crap last year and such greatness this year? If it is even, all teams must have played crap last year and greatness this year then.

Again, I do not follow what you are saying and I would be willing to bet that you don't even know.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:24 PM
Yup, I always found it a convenient excuse at the time, yet he looked fine on the TD pass he threw at the end of the game. That's the way it is with that guy. Bad throws? Always an excuse. Good throws? All skill baby.

LOL

OK, you win. Cutler didn't look limited at all that game. I am just making excuses. He looked the same as he did all season.....

It would be nice if people actually watched the games before trying to talk about them.

bombay
12-01-2009, 01:25 PM
Lot of bull**** about one sub-mediocre qb.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:26 PM
You didn't follow this team very well last year.

You are extrapolating this off of what?

The o-line had a great game against a Tampa team that was playing great.

Great? I should do what you do here and make you prove this with a play by play example of why you think it was great.

The low score was what we aimed for. Shanahan even said so before the game. He made a game plan built around ball control against one of the best defenses to that point last season. I wouldn't be complaining about the offense if they matched that production against good defenses this year. Anyways, you say the o-line played bad because of the score or some stats? Seriously? You think you can tell from that and you question my intelligence?

In that case, it was an epic fail.

Tampa won the time of possession battle and here's a summary of the Broncos offense:

3 three and outs
1 four and out
1 six and out drive with two holding calls and a negative yardage run

The only TD drive was a 5 play drive that started at midfield. I will give them two good field goal drives though.

Yup, that's some good, quality ball control alright.

And what are you talking about with the "TB had one of the best defenses in the league at that point". Going into that game, TB had given up over 20 pts in 3 out of their 4 games. Once again, you are proven wrong (shocker, I know).

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:27 PM
LOL

OK, you win. Cutler didn't look limited at all that game. I am just making excuses. He looked the same as he did all season.....

It would be nice if people actually watched the games before trying to talk about them.

I was in attendance for that massacre.

Beantown Bronco
12-01-2009, 01:30 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure I get what you are even saying now. How is it that they all even out but there is such a huge difference between the defenses we faced last year compared to this year? You claim that difference is something that helps make all of our offensive guys look a lot worse. So are all defenses better this year and everyone is playing better ones? How can you say it evens out if we played such crap last year and such greatness this year? If it is even, all teams must have played crap last year and greatness this year then.

Again, I do not follow what you are saying and I would be willing to bet that you don't even know.

OMFG.

Here's what I'm saying. At the end of the day, the Baltimores and the Pittsburghs of the world play ROUGHLY the same amount of good and bad teams at the end of the year as the Detroits and KCs of the world (in terms of ranking of opposing offenses and defenses). What makes the Pittsburghs and Baltimores of the world better than the Detroits and KCs of the world is this:

The Pittsburghs and Baltimores of the world don't allow their opponents to score as much as the Detroits and KCs do.

Imagine that.

And where the difference between this year and last year comes into play is that, to this point in 09, we have played an unusual amount of "top teams" early and will face 3 creampuffs in the next 5 games. So some leveling will take place. We'll still have a stronger slate this year overall, but it won't be AS extreme as it has been to this point.....so what I'm saying is, production over the next 5 games should be greater than over the previous 6 or 7 games, just because of the way our schedule fell.

jhns
12-01-2009, 01:31 PM
I dont understand what the argument is here against the '09 Broncos...

Jay Cutler wasnt THE problem, but he sure as hell was PART of the problem with his mistakes and forced throws...

you put Orton behind our team last year and we make the playoffs adn the defense doesnt look as bad because they arent playing on short fields every game....

I will stand by that statement

That is junk. Our defense gave up scores on a large percentage of drives. Orton would not make them look better with 3 and outs. Last year our defense saw the fewest drives in the league. Last year, our offense had the 32nd ranked starting field position and made up 16 places to give the defense the 16th ranked starting field position. This team wins even less with Orton last year because the defense sees the field a lot more.

We had problems on offense last year. This is true. I don't get why that excuses this years team from critisism when the offense is playing even worse than the one that had problems last year.

Mr.Meanie
12-01-2009, 01:40 PM
You mean like playing with a busted finger on your throwing hand?

oh snap

lex
12-01-2009, 01:44 PM
I already have traction, and you've made every pathetic excuse in the book. You're a laughingstock here.

I guess the 'angry women' must outnumber your stupid ass by quite a bit.

Youre inconsequential and you have no traction. The jokes on you. Youre clueless and should have been left in a field when you were young. You make inane points that dont really address what youre allegedly "disagreeing with" on top of your premise being wrong at the outset. Its apparent that youve been reduced to being shown for what you are and that is an angry woman on a blood lust. Why do you even make posts when Popps does your thinking for you...you and the other angry women?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 02:21 PM
Youre inconsequential and you have no traction. The jokes on you. Youre clueless and should have been left in a field when you were young. You make inane points that dont really address what youre allegedly "disagreeing with" on top of your premise being wrong at the outset. Its apparent that youve been reduced to being shown for what you are and that is an angry woman on a blood lust. Why do you even make posts when Popps does your thinking for you...you and the other angry women?

Why are you even still posting in this thread after I completely embarrassed you yesterday? Run along now. Go play with yourself in your field.

You were wrong, I called you on it, and your only response was "Durrrrrrrr, I already told you." Good one, doofus.

Here's a hot tip: Take Cutler's cock out of your mouth. Swallow. Wipe your ****ing dirty whorish mouth and get on with your life, you pathetic no-point-having waste of bandwidth.

Your mother should have slapped you. Now I have to go slap her. Whores beget whores.

prunch
12-01-2009, 03:21 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IOC-hDULX1c&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IOC-hDULX1c&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Peoples Champ
12-01-2009, 03:23 PM
this is getting crazy on here

vancejohnson82
12-01-2009, 04:00 PM
Youre inconsequential and you have no traction. The jokes on you. Youre clueless and should have been left in a field when you were young. You make inane points that dont really address what youre allegedly "disagreeing with" on top of your premise being wrong at the outset. Its apparent that youve been reduced to being shown for what you are and that is an angry woman on a blood lust. Why do you even make posts when Popps does your thinking for you...you and the other angry women?

since March you have been getting spanked in thread after thread on this board....you said the team was in monumentally bad shape since we let go of Cutler and you have been proven wrong time and time again....you're waiting for this team to go south so you can step in with a big smile on your internet mug but the truth is that we've already exceeded expectations and are headed in the right direction and set up for success for a while now. You really are pretty pathetic

We are going to match the teams win output from last year and that means your doom and gloom prediction for the season and your lust for Cutler looks plain foolish....you're a bum

Killericon
12-01-2009, 04:08 PM
http://drunkenachura.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/internet-serious-business.jpg

Popcorn Sutton
12-01-2009, 05:13 PM
I amazed you stuck with it this long Beantown.

CEH
12-01-2009, 05:33 PM
Lot of bull**** about one sub-mediocre qb.

I know if you just make a pact that we won't talk about said QB until he has a winning record then this MB will be said QB free until 2012 maybe.

Also said QB is having issues with said OC or vice versa

"Complicating matters is the relationship between Turner and said QB a relationship one source described as filled with "animosity," at least from one side. "

Inkana7
12-01-2009, 05:51 PM
As soon as I say something thats not true, youll have traction. As it is now, youre just one of the angry women that hate Jay Cutler.

Jay said I was a 6. Why would I not hate him?

Northman
12-01-2009, 06:26 PM
Why would he do that? Embarrassed by his post content?
/

Nah, decided to change the name a long time ago on all the forums im on. Where were you? lol

Northman
12-01-2009, 06:34 PM
Funny. You disappeared when we were 6-0, then reappeared when we'd lost two straight. To say "I told you so."

You'd rather be right than happy. Sick.

Ha!

You mean you guys have some of those fair weathered bastards on here too?

broncogary
12-01-2009, 06:37 PM
Nah, decided to change the name a long time ago on all the forums im on. Where were you? lol

He had to change it after the hissy fit he threw when the Broncos wouldn't let him punt. :clown:

Northman
12-01-2009, 06:40 PM
It's a blind love for the Broncos. Our only way to really judge our team is with our WINNING record. Forget all the fantasy numbers, the QB ratings, the number of INTS. The Broncos are winning despite the fact that the majority of his board said we couldn't even win 6 games the entire year.

As far as any hate towards Cutler goes I believe that is justified as well. The more he struggles the better our pick. Rooting against Cutler is rooting for the Broncos.

End Thread.

Northman
12-01-2009, 06:40 PM
He had to change it after the hissy fit he threw when the Broncos wouldn't let him punt. :clown:

Shhhhhh. LOL

lex
12-01-2009, 08:42 PM
Jay said I was a 6. Why would I not hate him?

Why do you even care what Jay does?

lex
12-01-2009, 08:45 PM
Why are you even still posting in this thread after I completely embarrassed you yesterday? Run along now. Go play with yourself in your field.

You were wrong, I called you on it, and your only response was "Durrrrrrrr, I already told you." Good one, doofus.

Here's a hot tip: Take Cutler's cock out of your mouth. Swallow. Wipe your ****ing dirty whorish mouth and get on with your life, you pathetic no-point-having waste of bandwidth.

Your mother should have slapped you. Now I have to go slap her. Whores beget whores.
First of all, you are an embarassment and whats more amusing is you dont even know your own stupidity. The only thing you did was hampster wheel a point you thought you were making and one you thought was a response to what I said. It wasnt. Not only that, but it was subsequently exposed. Im not sure why you think you have a victory out of that. Youre were wrong in saying you disagreed and you were wrong in your premise.

Like I said, Ill take their draft pick. Youre far more enraptured by emotion than I am.

lex
12-01-2009, 08:47 PM
since March you have been getting spanked in thread after thread on this board....you said the team was in monumentally bad shape since we let go of Cutler and you have been proven wrong time and time again....you're waiting for this team to go south so you can step in with a big smile on your internet mug but the truth is that we've already exceeded expectations and are headed in the right direction and set up for success for a while now. You really are pretty pathetic

We are going to match the teams win output from last year and that means your doom and gloom prediction for the season and your lust for Cutler looks plain foolish....you're a bum

Whats with all these likeminded people from the North American Man/Boy Love Association? Maybe you guys shouldnt speak of spanking in open view of those not in youre circle jerk society.

Jekyll15Hyde
12-01-2009, 09:02 PM
First of all, you are an embarassment and whats more amusing is you dont even know your own stupidity. The only thing you did was hampster wheel a point you thought you were making and one you thought was a response to what I said. It wasnt. Not only that, but it was subsequently exposed. Im not sure why you think you have a victory out of that. Youre were wrong in saying you disagreed and you were wrong in your premise.

Like I said, Ill take their draft pick. Youre far more enraptured by emotion than I am.

lame

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-01-2009, 09:13 PM
First of all, you are an embarassment and whats more amusing is you dont even know your own stupidity. The only thing you did was hampster wheel a point you thought you were making and one you thought was a response to what I said. It wasnt. Not only that, but it was subsequently exposed. Im not sure why you think you have a victory out of that. Youre were wrong in saying you disagreed and you were wrong in your premise.

Like I said, Ill take their draft pick. Youre far more enraptured by emotion than I am.

The only thing I did was hamster wheel? Is that why you disappeared, then came back with some lame "What I meant, was that ANGELO changed the offense" bull**** that was incredibly transparent. You were owned.

As for claiming 'victory,' I'll leave that to simpletons like you. I have enough victories in life that I don't need to take pride in owning your stupid ass.

You were wrong. You are wrong. You will always be wrong.

And the only one who doesn't see it is you. And THAT is funny as hell.

Circle Orange
12-01-2009, 09:39 PM
i didnt see one "lol!" in his post so it must be for real. Keep 'em coming BW :thumbs:

I kinda hinted at that in an earlier thread, but I'm not sure where Cuttles head is at half the time (if it's anywhere at all). That isn't the kind of thing that will win you tickets in the locker room.

And Urlacher can't stand Cutler...his boy got run out of town awhile ago. Why's he running his mouth so much now?

Archer81
12-01-2009, 09:44 PM
One is gay and the other isnt?


:Broncos:

Circle Orange
12-01-2009, 09:55 PM
Really? Thats interesting. I live in Chicago and am not going to say Orton had more time or less time to throw. But its amazing how people come out of the woodwork and suddenly present themselves as people who know all about the 2008 Bears.

First of all, addressing your point as though it has legitimacy, who is to say that the play design is the same with Orton vs Cutler? Its possible that Chicago calls more plays that take longer to develop due to Jay having a bigger arm. Secondly, who is to say that a lot of it isnt from Jay buying time with his mobility?

I wanted to see the Bears do well this year but Ill also take the higher draft pick (not too high for Bowlen though). Whatever. Some of you angry women are like a dog and a sock with your Cutler-rage.


I must be one of those angry women!

Seeing bumble**** fall down, throw picks, fumble, pout, and sniff his armpits is a delight. Watch the interceptions hit TILT! We just can't get enough! See him stand tall on the field, waving his arms like a madman! Watch him scream at officials! Shriek in horror at his brain dead picks!
Laugh at his nosepicking and shuffling during press conferences! Yes, we angry women love doughboys who are softer than paste with the manners of a goat. That's class!

Oh, and Jay's mobility buys time. He's looking for defensive backs to throw to while scrambling!

On the other hand, he has an arm, of which praises are sung. Jarmarcus and Kyle Boller should be so jealous. :clown:

~Crash~
12-01-2009, 10:10 PM
I must be one of those angry women!

Seeing bumble**** fall down, throw picks, fumble, pout, and sniff his armpits is a delight. Watch the interceptions hit TILT! We just can't get enough! See him stand tall on the field, waving his arms like a madman! Watch him scream at officials! Shriek in horror at his brain dead picks!
Laugh at his nosepicking and shuffling during press conferences! Yes, we angry women love doughboys who are softer than paste with the manners of a goat. That's class!

Oh, and Jay's mobility buys time. He's looking for defensive backs to throw to while scrambling!

On the other hand, he has an arm, of which praises are sung. Jarmarcus and Kyle Boller should be so jealous. :clown:

your just pissed because you cannot put wigs on him any moreHa!

TailgateNut
12-02-2009, 07:33 AM
since March you have been getting spanked in thread after thread on this board....you said the team was in monumentally bad shape since we let go of Cutler and you have been proven wrong time and time again....you're waiting for this team to go south so you can step in with a big smile on your internet mug but the truth is that we've already exceeded expectations and are headed in the right direction and set up for success for a while now. You really are pretty pathetic

We are going to match the teams win output from last year and that means your doom and gloom prediction for the season and your lust for Cutler looks plain foolish....you're a bum

LexROFL!ROFL!ROFL!

The best use of the iggy function.

TonyR
12-02-2009, 05:48 PM
Cutler on Urlacher: "Brian's right"
Posted by Michael David Smith on December 2, 2009 3:29 PM ET

Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher made some critical comments over the weekend about the way the team's offense has changed since switching quarterbacks from Kyle Orton to Jay Cutler.

Today, Cutler said he thinks Urlacher is right -- although Cutler seems to think that the real culprit is the Bears' running game, not his own problems as a passer.

"We've struggled running the ball. Brian's right," Cutler said. "You don't have to run the ball every play, you don't have to be a running team. But when you run the ball, you have to be effective."

But Urlacher's criticism went beyond just saying the Bears struggle running the ball. Urlacher criticized both the Bears' running attack -- telling Yahoo's Michael Silver, "We don't make anyone [expletive] miss" -- and the shift at quarterback.

Cutler said he took no offense to Urlacher saying he hates the way the Bears' identity has changed now that Orton is gone.

"He didn't have to apologize to me," Cutler said. "I talked to him, I understand what he's talking about. It's frustrating for everybody in that locker room. . . . I know Brian's frustrated, I'm frustrated, but there's not much we can do."

Actually, there is something the Bears can do: They can start winning some games. Until the Bears are winning with Cutler under center, Cutler had better get used to the criticism.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/02/cutler-on-urlacher-brians-right/

Los Broncos
12-02-2009, 06:09 PM
"He didn't have to apologize to me," Cutler said. "I talked to him, I understand what he's talking about. It's frustrating for everybody in that locker room. . . . I know Brian's frustrated, I'm frustrated, but there's not much we can do."

Like not throw picks in the red zone?, yeah not much you can do about it.

Archer81
12-02-2009, 06:16 PM
"He didn't have to apologize to me," Cutler said. "I talked to him, I understand what he's talking about. It's frustrating for everybody in that locker room. . . . I know Brian's frustrated, I'm frustrated, but there's not much we can do."

Like not throw picks in the red zone?, yeah not much you can do about it.


"We" could throw the ball away when under pressure...or "we" can take the checkdown rather than force it into double coverage...or "we" can mature as a QB and offensive leader.


:Broncos:

Circle Orange
12-02-2009, 06:43 PM
your just pissed because you cannot put wigs on him any moreHa!

Oh, I CRY at the lack of avatars! I've got 600 wigs and no way to put 'em on the dope...8')

Sassy
12-03-2009, 11:11 PM
I highly doubt that part of the "game plan" is to throw into double and triple coverage, nor to set new NFL interception records.ROFL!

Cutler is quite entertaining this year ;D

Popps
12-03-2009, 11:19 PM
Cutler on Urlacher: "Brian's right"
Posted by Michael David Smith on December 2, 2009 3:29 PM ET

C
Today, Cutler said he thinks Urlacher is right -- although Cutler seems to think that the real culprit is the Bears' running game, not his own problems as a passer.

"We've struggled running the ball. Brian's right," Cutler said. "You don't have to run the ball every play, you don't have to be a running team. But when you run the ball, you have to be effective.".

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/02/cutler-on-urlacher-brians-right/


Wow, now there's a shocker. Jay is blaming someone else for his interceptions.

Who'da thunk it!?

SJ Bronco
12-03-2009, 11:45 PM
I'm no cutler lover, I'm no cutler hater....I couldn't care less what he does unless the bears play the Broncos. I do find it odd he's struggling so much. I think he's pressing a bit. Being from Illinois originally, I know some bears fans, they have had just about enough of him, let me tell you.

Play2win
12-04-2009, 12:08 AM
Wow, now there's a shocker. Jay is blaming someone else for his interceptions.

Who'da thunk it!?

So first it was the Wide Receiver's fault, then it was the running back's fault, so lets see, whats next? next its gonna be the tight end's fault... or the fullback... or... whats left? Oh, now it must be the wide receiver's fault again...

and cycle goes on and on and on Hilarious!

Punisher
12-04-2009, 07:37 AM
Cutler is the best QB ever and hes gonna win the Bears like 3 Super Bowls and there gonna make a new Super Bowl Shuffle Video and Cutler's gonna be in it i also like to point out that Orton doesn't like Black Chicks he likes white hot blonde chicks and Cutler loves the black Pussy.

oubronco
12-04-2009, 07:48 AM
"We" could throw the ball away when under pressure...or "we" can take the checkdown rather than force it into double coverage...or "we" can mature as a QB and offensive leader.


:Broncos:

have you watched that team they don't have a checkdown they all suck :rofl:

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-04-2009, 07:49 AM
Wow, now there's a shocker. Jay is blaming someone else for his interceptions.

Who'da thunk it!?

I SMELL A LEADER!

/rasta'd

oubronco
12-04-2009, 07:49 AM
Cutler is the best QB ever and hes gonna win the Bears like 3 Super Bowls and there gonna make a new Super Bowl Shuffle Video and Cutler's gonna be in it i also like to point out that Orton doesn't like Black Chicks he likes white hot blonde chicks and Cutler loves the black p***Y.

is there something wrong with the black p***y? ;D

TailgateNut
12-04-2009, 07:54 AM
Cutler is quite entertaining this year ;D

....just glad he isn't entertaining us with his wonderful "bullet passes" to the opposing team.:wiggle:

Beantown Bronco
12-04-2009, 08:35 AM
i also like to point out that Orton doesn't like Black Chicks he likes white hot blonde chicks and Cutler loves the black p***Y.

Looks like Orton and Tiger have something in common.

vancejohnson82
12-04-2009, 08:42 AM
Looks like Orton and Tiger have something in common.

Tiger should grow a neckbeard....i think it would really turn around the public's perception of him

speaking of....can we get a Smilie with a neckbeard?!?!?!?

Peoples Champ
12-04-2009, 09:03 AM
Tiger should grow a neckbeard....i think it would really turn around the public's perception of him

speaking of....can we get a Smilie with a neckbeard?!?!?!?

no then he wont have confidence like this commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUErc2ICEcs

They should change this commercial to Tiger going into the hotel room.

baja
12-04-2009, 11:03 AM
Cutler is the best QB ever and hes gonna win the Bears like 3 Super Bowls and there gonna make a new Super Bowl Shuffle Video and Cutler's gonna be in it i also like to point out that Orton doesn't like Black Chicks he likes white hot blonde chicks and<b> Cutler loves the black p***Y.

well at least Cutler has one redeeming quality.

Punisher
12-04-2009, 07:23 PM
well at least Cutler has one redeeming quality.
lol 3 cheers for Black Pussy :kiss: