PDA

View Full Version : Sayers says Bears 'haven't done a good job'


Cool Breeze
05-05-2010, 09:28 AM
Sayers says Bears 'haven't done a good job'
By ERIC OLSON, AP

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) One of the greatest Chicago Bears of all time isn't happy with the team's state of affairs.

Gale Sayers took aim Tuesday at coach Lovie Smith, quarterback Jay Cutler and personnel moves that left the Bears without a pick until the third round of the recent NFL draft.

``Cutler hasn't done the job,'' Sayers said. ``Urlacher, I don't know how good he's going to be coming back. He's 33 years old. They need a couple wide receivers, a couple defensive backs. They haven't done a good job.

``If Lovie doesn't do it this year, I think he's gone. He had a good team the Super Bowl year. Nothing came together for him the last couple years.''

The 66-year-old Sayers was back in his hometown as the featured speaker at a booster banquet for Boys Town. He also met with students at the nationally acclaimed home for troubled youth.

Sayers is chairman and CEO of Sayers Inc., a computer business headquartered in Vernon Hills, Ill. He also works in athletic fundraising at Kansas, his alma mater, and is involved in a number of charitable causes in the Chicago area.

Other than a few public appearance he makes on behalf of the Bears, he said, he has little contact with the team these days.

``I go to every game I can,'' he said. ``Yes, I do live and die with them.''

So he knows well that the Bears lost star linebacker Brian Urlacher to a season-ending injury in last year's opener at Green Bay, a big loss for a team that was hoping to contend in the NFC.

The Bears, who traded Kyle Orton and 2009-10 first-round picks to Denver for Cutler, finished 7-9 in Cutler's first season in Chicago and missed the playoffs for the third straight year. The Bears have overhauled their coaching staff - keeping Smith - and signed pass rusher Julius Peppers to a six-year deal.

Sayers was the most explosive offensive player in the NFL in the late 1960s. He retired from football in 1971 after the second of two devastating knee injuries and was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility (1977).

Sayers, who scored six touchdowns and gained 336 all-purpose yards in a game against San Francisco in 1965, is best known for his speed and elusiveness. He was one of the first running backs to return punts and kicks.

``I had some good moves and I used them very well,'' he said. ``The person who reminds me of myself is Barry Sanders. We both used the whole field.''

He shook his head when reminded that some pundits have compared the New Orleans Saints' Reggie Bush with him.

``You can't compare that, because he gets hurt too much,'' Sayers said. ``He's a fine young man. He's a little light. He's not a player who's going to carry 25 times a game. He'll get five carries, catch three passes and run back a couple punts.''

Sayers pointed out that he made $50,000 in his final season and a total of $275,000 over his entire career. He said he would like to be playing today.

``You know why? Because of the money,'' he said. ``I wouldn't change my game. I probably would be just as good because I would be on AstroTurf. The money, that's the key right now. Everybody is making so much. A person snapping the football is making a million dollars.''

http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-nfl/20100504/Sayers-Boys.Town/

And on the eve of his birthday no less...
He's not saying anything we haven't read here since the trade.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 09:33 AM
Colonolebeef and jhns will be here shortly to defend their boyfriend. Their old stand by "jilted lover" attack won't work on Sayers. Probably have to go with the "Cutler will be fine all evidence to the contrary" and then insist he's just that one franchise QB that needs "a good line, good receivers and a strong defense to show his potential" even though that just means he's the same as every other QB in the league.

OABB
05-05-2010, 09:35 AM
Jhiz can't because a pro said it. If a football player says it than it mist be True.

The Joker
05-05-2010, 09:37 AM
http://secondstringsports.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/jay-cutler_48676924.jpg

The Joker
05-05-2010, 09:39 AM
Probably have to go with the "Cutler will be fine all evidence to the contrary" and then insist he's just that one franchise QB that needs "a good line, good receivers and a strong defense to show his potential"

And daylight... don't forget daylight.

Can't very well expect him to play well in primetime, it's dark out for God's sake!!

Man-Goblin
05-05-2010, 09:40 AM
Woo hoo! Cutler hate. Hasn't been enough of it in my life lately. Welcome back, old friend.

jhns
05-05-2010, 09:45 AM
LOL

What a bunch of children.

I agree with Sayers. Cutler didn't play well and the Bears have made many bad personel moves lately. That isn't saying much. When Cutler retires in 10+ years and hasn't gotten any better, then come talk to me. You guys really believe that trade was only about last season? If that is true, how did we win the trade at 8-8? It doesn't seem to have made us better at all.

Cool Breeze
05-05-2010, 09:45 AM
Woo hoo! Cutler hate. Hasn't been enough of it in my life lately. Welcome back, old friend.

Some may give Cutler some man love but

http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2007/10/05oct2-captain-obvious.jpg

Rabb
05-05-2010, 09:47 AM
I don't miss that guy one bit

jhns
05-05-2010, 09:48 AM
Colonolebeef and jhns will be here shortly to defend their boyfriend. Their old stand by "jilted lover" attack won't work on Sayers. Probably have to go with the "Cutler will be fine all evidence to the contrary" and then insist he's just that one franchise QB that needs "a good line, good receivers and a strong defense to show his potential" even though that just means he's the same as every other QB in the league.

Wait, you know a QB that did something without a team around him? Really? Do you care to tell us who that is?

Yes, that one man team thing is a great argument. I don't know why anyone would be dumb enough to dispute it.

LOL

Wow....

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 09:53 AM
Wait, you know a QB that did something without a team around him? Really? Do you care to tell us who that is?


http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/John-Elway-Photograph-C12192603.jpeg

pwnd

The Joker
05-05-2010, 09:53 AM
http://literalminded.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/peyton-manning.jpg

pwned again.

jhns
05-05-2010, 09:54 AM
pwnd

Not even close.

Rabb
05-05-2010, 09:55 AM
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/John-Elway-Photograph-C12192603.jpeg

pwnd

jhns is such a ****ing moron

jhns
05-05-2010, 09:56 AM
http://literalminded.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/peyton-manning.jpg

pwned again.

So now Manning is the only good player on his team?

You guys haven't watched much football. Your posts are good entertainment though.

jhns
05-05-2010, 09:57 AM
jhns is such a ****ing moron

Why thanks. At least this moron knows a little something about the Broncos past.

The Joker
05-05-2010, 09:58 AM
So now Manning is the only good player on his team?

You guys haven't watched much football. Your posts are good entertainment though.

Every team has good players.

But Manning goes down for the year in late August and the Colts don't sniff a .500 record in all honesty.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 09:58 AM
Tom Brady won a SB throwing to guys like Deion Branch.

Drew Brees played with an average line, above average receivers and an average defense and won a SB and MVP title.

Manning has had some of his best years, statistically and in terms of wins, when his team was beaten up. He won MVP with some rookie receivers and a rotating offensive line.

Most of all, Jhiz, Cutler's interceptions were largely a result of him making bad plays and had nothing to do with him being under pressure or being behind. The San Fran game is a great example where even after four interceptions they are still in a position to win it and he throws a fifth int in the wanning moments of the game AND HE WASN'T UNDER PRESSURE. There were about five that could be pinned on the receivers. The rest of the problems had nothing to do with his offensive line. This is a fact and one that you and the rest of you Cutler sluts won't even touch.

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:00 AM
Every team has good players.

But Manning goes down for the year in late August and the Colts don't sniff a .500 record in all honesty.

Kaylor made it very clear. The requirments are no o-line, no receivers, no defense. You just named a QB that has consistently had a top o-line, great receivers, and even a great defense the year they won the SB.

Nice try though.

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 10:02 AM
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/John-Elway-Photograph-C12192603.jpeg

pwnd

ChaChing!:notworthy

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 10:04 AM
jhns is such a ****ing moron

What took you guys so long to this out. Ignoring the Ignorant is an easy fix.

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:05 AM
Tom Brady won a SB throwing to guys like Deion Branch.

Drew Brees played with an average line, above average receivers and an average defense and won a SB and MVP title.

Manning has had some of his best years, statistically and in terms of wins, when his team was beaten up. He won MVP with some rookie receivers and a rotating offensive line.


LOL

Brady won with an excellent line and a top defense. He also had a good run game.

Brees won with a good o-line, very good receivers, very good run game, and an alright defense.

Manning has had a top o-line, great receivers, good run game his entire career. They even had a top defense the year they won the SB.

Good job not knowing anything about the NFL though. This is a team sport. You don't win without a team. You guys saying otherwise is very funny to me. Especially with the **** talk.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 10:05 AM
Khan made it very clear. The requirments are no o-line, no receivers, no defense. You just named a QB that has consistently had a top o-line, great receivers, and even a great defense the year they won the SB.

Nice try though.

Um, no he didn't, and when did this argument become "winning a SB" and about not sucking? I'm talking about just playing well, not winning a title. The latter requires the former, but the former does not require a great line, great receivers and solid defense.

Cutler sucked last year. He wasn't average, he was BAD. The rest of those guys were good when things went bad around them. Manning was killed by retirements and injuries along his offensive line, Harrison's decline and a banged up defense and put up great numbers. This isn't about discussing championships, it's about discussing not sucking, which Cutler has yet to do.

The Joker
05-05-2010, 10:05 AM
Khan made it very clear. The requirments are no o-line, no receivers, no defense. You just named a QB that has consistently had a top o-line, great receivers, and even a great defense the year they won the SB.

Nice try though.

Yeah, that 32nd ranked run D was pretty much the '85 Bears on steroids.

The O-Line is so consistently "great" because Manning is pretty much a God at changing his protections to make sure they're matched up well. They're a solid group that would look a lot less stellar with a lesser QB back there.

Anyway, I've read your posts before and thus have no real interest in pursuing this any further.

You take care, and keep on reaching for that rainbow.

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 10:06 AM
Tom Brady won a SB throwing to guys like Deion Branch.

Drew Brees played with an average line, above average receivers and an average defense and won a SB and MVP title.

Manning has had some of his best years, statistically and in terms of wins, when his team was beaten up. He won MVP with some rookie receivers and a rotating offensive line.

Most of all, Jhiz, Cutler's interceptions were largely a result of him making bad plays and had nothing to do with him being under pressure or being behind. The San Fran game is a great example where even after four interceptions they are still in a position to win it and he throws a fifth int in the wanning moments of the game AND HE WASN'T UNDER PRESSURE. There were about five that could be pinned on the receivers. The rest of the problems had nothing to do with his offensive line. This is a fact and one that you and the rest of you Cutler sluts won't even touch.

:spit:

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 10:08 AM
LOL

Brady won with an excellent line and a top defense. He also had a good run game.
False
Brees won with a good o-line, very good receivers, very good run game, and an alright defense.
False
Manning has had a top o-line, great receivers, good run game his entire career. They even had a top defense the year they won the SB.

False again.
I'm a butt hurt Cutler whore who lies about things to fit my argument.
I agree. :thumbsup:

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:10 AM
Yeah, that 32nd ranked run D was pretty much the '85 Bears on steroids.

The O-Line is so consistently "great" because Manning is pretty much a God at changing his protections to make sure they're matched up well. They're a solid group that would look a lot less stellar with a lesser QB back there.

Anyway, I've read your posts before and thus have no real interest in pursuing this any further.

You take care, and keep on reaching for that rainbow.

You didn't watch the SB year then. They had a top run D even by the time the playoffs rolled around. I agree, he makes his o-line and others better. I don't agree that he had a **** o-line and supporting cast.

Of course you don't want to pursue it further. "This is a one man sport" is kind of hard to defend.

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:12 AM
I agree. :thumbsup:

OK, you win. This is a one man sport. It is why we won 15 SBs with Elway. It is why Manning has 15 SBs himself. They are two of the best and did it all on their own...

LOL

I can't believe how dumb people get after getting their feelings hurt by a player.

Broncos_OTM
05-05-2010, 10:15 AM
Not even close.

YOu cant even own the ownage... their all laughing at you

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:18 AM
YOu cant even own the ownage... their all laughing at you

I'm sorry, was that supposed to make sense?

Rabb
05-05-2010, 10:18 AM
What took you guys so long to this out. Ignoring the Ignorant is an easy fix.

I have had him on ignore for some time now...I only see what he says via quotes

Broncos_OTM
05-05-2010, 10:20 AM
I'm sorry, was that supposed to make sense?

There is no crying in message board posting... Seriously you gave me a good chuckle this morning... Thanks Brah

jhns
05-05-2010, 10:24 AM
There is no crying in message board posting... Seriously you gave me a good chuckle this morning... Thanks Brah

Crying? I am laughing pretty hard at the people here. Your welcome though.

Broncos_OTM
05-05-2010, 10:41 AM
Crying? I am laughing pretty hard at the people here. Your welcome though.
Elway carried his team to his first couple superbowls. To deny is just, i dont know. Stupid?

Just out of curiosuity in the years elway took his team to the Superbowl how many pro bowlers were on the squad...

Ray Finkle
05-05-2010, 10:44 AM
this thread is so much better with jhns on ignore.....priceless.

Popps
05-05-2010, 10:45 AM
Wow. Jhiz is just getting slaughtered in here.

Popps
05-05-2010, 10:46 AM
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/a9lIvnAr01Q&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/a9lIvnAr01Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

55CrushEm
05-05-2010, 10:46 AM
Wow. Jhiz is just getting slaughtered in here.

Yep.....par for the course, isn't it? :~ohyah!:

Paladin
05-05-2010, 10:50 AM
This message is hidden because jhns is on your ignore list (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/profile.php?do=ignorelist).

Thank Tebow for this feature........

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 10:50 AM
The picture of Elway was a pretty good pwn, i must say. Even better that he had zero comeback for it. Unless you think the three amigos were something to behold, Ricky Nattiel did net us a 2nd round pick if i recall...ZOMG!

chex
05-05-2010, 11:02 AM
LOL

If that is true, how did we win the trade at 8-8? It doesn't seem to have made us better at all.

Well, based on record, we know it made the Bears worse.

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 11:05 AM
Elway carried his team to his first couple superbowls. To deny is just, i dont know. Stupid?

Just out of curiosuity in the years elway took his team to the Superbowl how many pro bowlers were on the squad...


You might have to wait until jhns has an opportunity to surf the web for an answer. He wasn't even of legal age until after Elway retired.

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 11:08 AM
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/a9lIvnAr01Q&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/a9lIvnAr01Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


Bawahaha:spit:......and it didn't even show ALL of his interceptions last year.

Play2win
05-05-2010, 11:16 AM
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/John-Elway-Photograph-C12192603.jpeg

pwnd

BADAZZ!!! :militia:

John was/is such a stud.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 11:28 AM
BADAZZ!!! :militia:

John was/is such a stud.
Apparently not. According to jhiz he did nothing for his team and was purely a product of those "awesome" players around him. Sammy Winder and Mark Jackson made Elway, ladies and gentlemen.

jhns
05-05-2010, 11:45 AM
Apparently not. According to jhiz he did nothing for his team and was purely a product of those "awesome" players around him. Sammy Winder and Mark Jackson made Elway, ladies and gentlemen.

LOL

I guess I win then. You take my argument from Elway didn't do it alone to Elway had nothing to do with it. I think that when you start getting that irrational, you know you are being dumb.

Ray Finkle
05-05-2010, 11:52 AM
Bawahaha:spit:......and it didn't even show ALL of his interceptions last year.

they could only put 1:32.....didn't have 5 minutes...

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 11:57 AM
they could only put 1:32.....didn't have 5 minutes...

Apparently a better offensive line makes you less stupid and more accurate.

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:04 PM
Elway carried his team to his first couple superbowls. To deny is just, i dont know. Stupid?

Just out of curiosuity in the years elway took his team to the Superbowl how many pro bowlers were on the squad...

I don't know. What was it, 5-6 average? Top 10 defenses. Top 10 running back. Three amigos.... Sure, they had nothing at all but Elway.

Now that we know Pro Bowls mean so much to you, how about that 25 year old pro bowler we gave away?

That One Guy
05-05-2010, 12:05 PM
Not to interrupt the back and forth and I know it wasn't the point of the article... but... Gale Sayers is a fool if he thinks things would be exactly as they were when he played. If he couldn't stay healthy then, he wouldn't make it out of the college game today. Kind of arrogant of him to speak that way, I thought.

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:06 PM
Apparently a better offensive line makes you less stupid and more accurate.

You know what is really funny? I can point out this exact argument being made for Orton a ton of times on here. Funny that the o-line is used as an excuse so much for him when it doesn't matter to a QBs play.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 12:10 PM
I don't know. What was it, 5-6 average? Top 10 defenses. Top 10 running back. Three amigos.... Sure, they had nothing at all but Elway.

Now that we know Pro Bowls mean so much to you, how about that 25 year old pro bowler we gave away?

The broncos offensive talent in the 80's was nothing short of crap. They had Elway...and crap.

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:13 PM
The broncos offensive talent in the 80's was nothing short of crap. They had Elway...and crap.

Top 10 RB in yards. Top 5 RB in TDs in 86. I'm sure that and Elways passing was also done behind a horrible o-line. Then we can just skip over all the top 10 defenses he worked with. Those don't count!

This is a team sport. This one man sport argument is pretty funny though. I'm pretty sure you are all saying McDaniels team message is a load of crap.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 12:25 PM
You know what is really funny? I can point out this exact argument being made for Orton a ton of times on here. Funny that the o-line is used as an excuse so much for him when it doesn't matter to a QBs play.

What are you talking about? They are nothing alike and this argument proves my point because despite a bad line, ORTON DOESN'T THROW INTERCEPTIONS! ORTON DOESN'T TURN THE BALL OVER IN THE REDZONE!

Did you know that after points, the single most deciding statistic in a win or a loss is turnovers? How else do you think we scored less points in '09 and had a tougher schedule with much tougher defenses and still won 8 games? Certainly the defense is a big factor, but so is the fact we stopped turning the ball over - especially in scoring situations. Cutler threw 27 interceptions, again most of them while not under pressure (a point you still won't acknowledge), and he led the league in redzone turnovers which means Cutler specifically did things to lose games for the Bears. He was personally responsible for several of their loses.

Turnovers = losses. Cutler creates turnovers therefore Cutler = losing.

Your point about Orton just proves that a good or bad offensive line have little to do with you taking care of the ball. It's about not being an idiot. So thank you for making my point for me.

And once again, other players who are better and worse than Cutler have put up better seasons with similar injury and receiver problems around them.

Dukes
05-05-2010, 12:27 PM
Wow jhns is making an ass of himself.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
05-05-2010, 12:29 PM
Wow jhns is making an ass of himself.

Le shock!
http://freshideasnutritainment.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/shocked-kids-at-computer.jpg

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:31 PM
What are you talking about? They are nothing alike and this argument proves my point because despite a bad line, ORTON DOESN'T THROW INTERCEPTIONS! ORTON DOESN'T TURN THE BALL OVER IN THE REDZONE!


Actually, yes he does. He threw 2 pick 6s against one of the worst teams in football. He threw 3 total picks against them. That was one of the few games we opened up the offense. It was one of the few games that %50 of the throws went beyond the LOS.

Anyways, you all have argued Orton will be better with a better o-line. So he won't be more accurate and make better throws with a better line. How exactly will his game improve?

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:33 PM
Wow jhns is making an ass of himself.

It is ok by me. Every coach and GM in this league would agree with me here. So it doesn't really bother me that the less intelligent don't get it.

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 12:48 PM
Wow jhns is making an ass of himself.

This is NEWS?

jhns
05-05-2010, 12:55 PM
This is NEWS?

What is funny about Tail is he gets so pissed that he tries picking fights over the internet. He is a big old tough guy that likes to hide behind his monitor. I used to enjoy this and his PMing me his life story. Now he just hides behind ignore and tries to talk trash constantly because I laughed at his stories. It is kind of cute in a way.

broncswin
05-05-2010, 01:23 PM
Actually, yes he does. He threw 2 pick 6s against one of the worst teams in football. He threw 3 total picks against them. That was one of the few games we opened up the offense. It was one of the few games that %50 of the throws went beyond the LOS.

Anyways, you all have argued Orton will be better with a better o-line. So he won't be more accurate and make better throws with a better line. How exactly will his game improve?

Ya not redzone there big guy

Pseudofool
05-05-2010, 01:23 PM
his PMing me his life story..Is this some kind of personal jab? Aren't you stirring the pot enough?

broncswin
05-05-2010, 01:24 PM
What are you talking about? They are nothing alike and this argument proves my point because despite a bad line, ORTON DOESN'T THROW INTERCEPTIONS! ORTON DOESN'T TURN THE BALL OVER IN THE REDZONE!

Did you know that after points, the single most deciding statistic in a win or a loss is turnovers? How else do you think we scored less points in '09 and had a tougher schedule with much tougher defenses and still won 8 games? Certainly the defense is a big factor, but so is the fact we stopped turning the ball over - especially in scoring situations. Cutler threw 27 interceptions, again most of them while not under pressure (a point you still won't acknowledge), and he led the league in redzone turnovers which means Cutler specifically did things to lose games for the Bears. He was personally responsible for several of their loses.

Turnovers = losses. Cutler creates turnovers therefore Cutler = losing.

Your point about Orton just proves that a good or bad offensive line have little to do with you taking care of the ball. It's about not being an idiot. So thank you for making my point for me.

And once again, other players who are better and worse than Cutler have put up better seasons with similar injury and receiver problems around them.


Lets not forget field position from Cutler to Orton...Cutty turned the ball over way too often on our side of the 50

broncswin
05-05-2010, 01:26 PM
Actually, yes he does. He threw 2 pick 6s against one of the worst teams in football. He threw 3 total picks against them. That was one of the few games we opened up the offense. It was one of the few games that %50 of the throws went beyond the LOS.

Anyways, you all have argued Orton will be better with a better o-line. So he won't be more accurate and make better throws with a better line. How exactly will his game improve?


Your pulling one game out to talk about his turnovers...Cutty has a full season of themHilarious!

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:27 PM
Lets not forget field position from Cutler to Orton...Cutty turned the ball over way too often on our side of the 50

The offense had the 32nd ranked starting field position that year. With a crap special teams, they gave the defense the 16th starting field position. With all of those turnovers, our defense saw the second fewest drives in the league and was still the worst in Broncos history. Yeah, that points to the offense being the problem....

Dedhed
05-05-2010, 01:28 PM
YOu cant even own the ownage... their all laughing at you

He thinks that makes him smart.

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:29 PM
Is this some kind of personal jab? Aren't you stirring the pot enough?

Riiight. I am the one stirring the pot when a guy that has me on ignore is commenting on me all the time.

Yes, it is a personal jab. Tail is a weak individual. He gets upset easily and I laugh about it.

Archer81
05-05-2010, 01:31 PM
Top 10 RB in yards. Top 5 RB in TDs in 86. I'm sure that and Elways passing was also done behind a horrible o-line. Then we can just skip over all the top 10 defenses he worked with. Those don't count!

This is a team sport. This one man sport argument is pretty funny though. I'm pretty sure you are all saying McDaniels team message is a load of crap.


1986:

Leading Rusher: Winder 240 car, 789 yards, 3.3 av, 9 tds (17th in NFL)

Leading Receiver: Willhite (a runningback): 64 rec, 529 yds. (t-19th in NFL)


You should really research the claims you make, ass hat.

:Broncos:

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:31 PM
Ya not redzone there big guy

Good thing I was responding to someone that said "ORTON DOESNT THROW INTERCEPTIONS." then, huh?

Dedhed
05-05-2010, 01:33 PM
Tail is a weak individual. He gets upset easily and I laugh about it.

www.dictionary.com
Clearly you haven't looked up the word hypocrite yet, please do so at the link provided.

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:36 PM
1986:

Leading Rusher: Winder 240 car, 789 yards, 3.3 av, 9 tds (17th in NFL)

Leading Receiver: Willhite (a runningback): 64 rec, 529 yds. (t-19th in NFL)


You should really research the claims you make, ass hat.

:Broncos:

Umm, you should research. You are way off on Sammy. You also seemed to forget the defense.

I'm glad you all think McDaniels team message is a joke though. Funny that he seems to say the same thing as me. It takes a team to win.

As for this "Elway wins by himself" thing. What exactly happened in the years we didn't even reach .500? Those years make all of your arguments a joke.

broncswin
05-05-2010, 01:37 PM
What are you talking about? They are nothing alike and this argument proves my point because despite a bad line, ORTON DOESN'T THROW INTERCEPTIONS! ORTON DOESN'T TURN THE BALL OVER IN THE REDZONE! Did you know that after points, the single most deciding statistic in a win or a loss is turnovers? How else do you think we scored less points in '09 and had a tougher schedule with much tougher defenses and still won 8 games? Certainly the defense is a big factor, but so is the fact we stopped turning the ball over - especially in scoring situations. Cutler threw 27 interceptions, again most of them while not under pressure (a point you still won't acknowledge), and he led the league in redzone turnovers which means Cutler specifically did things to lose games for the Bears. He was personally responsible for several of their loses.

Turnovers = losses. Cutler creates turnovers therefore Cutler = losing.

Your point about Orton just proves that a good or bad offensive line have little to do with you taking care of the ball. It's about not being an idiot. So thank you for making my point for me.

And once again, other players who are better and worse than Cutler have put up better seasons with similar injury and receiver problems around them.

;)

Archer81
05-05-2010, 01:38 PM
Also in 1986, the Three Amigoes had 45, 38 and 31 catches...world beaters.


:Broncos:

Archer81
05-05-2010, 01:48 PM
Umm, you should research. You are way off on Sammy. You also seemed to forget the defense.

I'm glad you all think McDaniels team message is a joke though. Funny that he seems to say the same thing as me. It takes a team to win.

As for this "Elway wins by himself" thing. What exactly happened in the years we didn't even reach .500? Those years make all of your arguments a joke.


You are a twit. NFL.com. Go the Broncos page and look at stats...it does it by year. You specifically said 1986. In 1986, our leading rusher averaged 3.3 ypc, and our leading receiver was a runningback. Neither was top 10, neither was top 5.

In 1987...

Winder was our leading rusher with 741 yards and 6tds. (good for 11th in the NFL)

Leading Receiver was Vance Johnson. 42 rec, 684 yards and 7tds. (38th in the NFL)

In 1989...

Humphrey was our leading rusher with 1151 yards and 7 tds (8th in yards in nfl)

Johnson was our leading receiver with 76 rec for 1095 yards, 7tds(t-9th). Our offense was so prolithic that season the next leading wr for denver had a whopping 28 catches...

We made superbowls in 86, 87 and 89 because of John Elway. The only time we had any comparable talent to the 97-98 champ. seasons was in 1989...and we lost that superbowl 55-10.

So how long have you been watching the Broncos?

:Broncos:

Archer81
05-05-2010, 01:51 PM
Umm, you should research. You are way off on Sammy. You also seemed to forget the defense.


Season Team Rushing Receiving Fumbles
G GS Att Yds Avg Lng TD Rec Yds Avg Lng TD FUM Lost
1990 Denver Broncos 15 -- 42 120 2.9 19 2 17 145 8.5 17 0 -- --
1989 Denver Broncos 16 -- 110 351 3.2 16 2 14 91 6.5 19 0 -- --
1988 Denver Broncos 16 -- 149 543 3.6 35 4 17 103 6.1 14 1 -- --
1987 Denver Broncos 12 -- 196 741 3.8 19 6 14 74 5.3 13 1 -- --
1986 Denver Broncos 16 -- 240 789 3.3 31 9 26 171 6.6 20T 5 -- --
1985 Denver Broncos 14 -- 199 714 3.6 42 8 31 197 6.4 24 0 -- --
1984 Denver Broncos 16 -- 296 1,153 3.9 24 4 44 288 6.5 21 2 -- --
1983 Denver Broncos 14 -- 196 757 3.9 52 3 23 150 6.5 17 0 -- --
1982 Denver Broncos 8 -- 67 259 3.9 18 1 11 83 7.5 22 0 -- --

Sammy Winder career stats.

:Broncos:

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:51 PM
Also in 1986, the Three Amigoes had 45, 38 and 31 catches...world beaters.


:Broncos:

OK, fine. Elway did it all alone. So again, why did we have .500 and worse seasons with Elway? Why did we only win 2 SBs when his career was much longer than two years? Why did we only win the SBs when we had the most talented all around team? None of this makes sense with the "Elway does it alone" theory.

Archer81
05-05-2010, 01:53 PM
OK, fine. Elway did it all alone. So again, why did we have .500 and worse seasons with Elway? Why did we only win 2 SBs when his career was much longer than two years? Why did we only win the SBs when we had the most talented all around team? None of this makes sense with the "Elway does it alone" theory.


Keep squirming, bitch. It excites me.


:Broncos:

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:53 PM
Season Team Rushing Receiving Fumbles
G GS Att Yds Avg Lng TD Rec Yds Avg Lng TD FUM Lost

1986 Denver Broncos 16 -- 240 789 3.3 31 9 26 171 6.6 20T 5 -- --

:Broncos:

Boy, sure looks to me like he scored 14 TDs. Maybe you think it doesn't count if a RB scores off a reception? 4th in the league in TDs. Look it up.

kamakazi_kal
05-05-2010, 01:55 PM
arrrg who cares already. Can't everyone just go rub one out to a tebow poster already.

jhns
05-05-2010, 01:56 PM
Keep squirming, b****. It excites me.


:Broncos:

I figured you wouldn't be able to respond to that. It does make your arguments look bad.

Master___Pain
05-05-2010, 02:04 PM
jhns reminds me of the character Wimp Lo in Kung Pow, especially the quote of

"We trained Wimp Lo wrong, as a joke. He thinks losing is winning"

and then after an ass whipping Wimp Lo says "Hmmmmm, I bleeding, making me the victor!"

Funny stuff.

Archer81
05-05-2010, 02:08 PM
I figured you wouldn't be able to respond to that. It does make your arguments look bad.


You change the argument when you are proven wrong.

You claimed Denver had a top 10 running back. We didnt. You claimed the "three amigoes" were likewise top offensive talent...yet in 86 they did not lead the team in receiving.

Did you watch Elway in the 1980s? We had a fantastic offensive player hamstrung by a dinosaur HC who had the unique ability to let Elway do what he needed to do in the 4th quarter to pull wins out of thin air. We made superbowls in the 1980s because we had John Elway. No Elway, and its doubtful we make the playoffs the years we did. Our offensive line has historically been small, even before Shanahan. Our 1980s defenses had good players...but were too small to match up with the NFC teams and got steam rolled.

We did not win a superbowl until Denver had talent capable of helping Elway on offense. Which basically means we needed a complete team to win championships...that has not changed.

:Broncos:

jhns
05-05-2010, 02:13 PM
You change the argument when you are proven wrong.

You claimed Denver had a top 10 running back. We didnt. You claimed the "three amigoes" were likewise top offensive talent...yet in 86 they did not lead the team in receiving.


Umm, what do you call 7th in rushing TDs and 4th in total TDs? A bottom half RB? OK....

When did I say they were top talent? I said we had receivers. Kaylors claim, and this entire argument, is that a player wins with no receivers, no RB, no line, and no defense. If you think all of those guys sucked then that is on you. I think they were pretty good for us.

Anyways, please show where I changed the argument. I have been saying the same thing this entire time. This is a team sport. No one player wins on their own. McDaniels agrees and has preached this. I would bet every coach and GM in this league agrees with me.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 02:25 PM
I'm so enjoying Jhns getting owned all over the place. Hey, just say "you know what, youre right, im gonna be a man and admit i ****ed this one up"

jhns
05-05-2010, 02:29 PM
I'm so enjoying Jhns getting owned all over the place. Hey, just say "you know what, youre right, im gonna be a man and admit i ****ed this one up"

LOL

Yes, I am getting owned. That is why the majority of the people responding have nothing of value to add. It shows my argument is flawed when you can't come up with anything to prove it wrong.

I fully agree. This is a one man sport. It is all about the individual talent. McDaniels is the worst coach in history as he keeps giving away our very talented individuals.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 02:34 PM
People have consistently proved you wrong and then you, in your warped mind, change the argument and take hyperbole literally.

jhns
05-05-2010, 02:36 PM
People have consistently proved you wrong and then you, in your warped mind, change the argument and take hyperbole literally.

No one has proven me wrong. Please though, show me where I changed the argument so I can get back on track. You guys keep claiming this and no one can show it. Hmmm... I wonder why that is.

Master___Pain
05-05-2010, 02:41 PM
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/dasimbaking21/Gifs/ChipperJones.gif

Inkana7
05-05-2010, 02:42 PM
No one has proven me wrong. Please though, show me where I changed the argument so I can get back on track. You guys keep claiming this and no one can show it. Hmmm... I wonder why that is.

You show me where you changed the argument. Maybe when you're ready to post like a big boy we'll talk.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 02:43 PM
No one has proven me wrong. Please though, show me where I changed the argument so I can get back on track. You guys keep claiming this and no one can show it. Hmmm... I wonder why that is.

Holy ****, sircheknejkenny whatever provided you actual stats proving his point about Sammy Winder and you told him he was WRONG (when he wasnt). Kaylore took your argument apart piece by piece and all you could say was "orton throws picks too" as if he suggested that orton has never thrown a pick in his life (taking hyperbole literally). The point was Elway won games with inferior talent around him, and then you start this dumb "football isnt a one man sport" argument. You keep changing your point and sound stupider and stupider by the minute.

Jason in LA
05-05-2010, 02:48 PM
First thing that I thought when I read the title to this thread was that the Bears didn't do a good job when they had Sayers either. They sucked. So I wouldn't be asking that guy about what a winning team should be.

I'm just saying. ;D

TailgateNut
05-05-2010, 02:53 PM
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/dasimbaking21/Gifs/ChipperJones.gif


That's all anyone can do when dealing with this assclown. He's all butthurt because I've put him on ignore with the rest of his kind (The Lex and BF7s of the OM). When he steps in a pile of ****, he scrapes the crap with his fingernail, tastes it and proclaims it's chocolate ice cream, and then pats himself on the back for being right once again.

He has no honor, and isn't man enough to admit when he's wrong.

jhns
05-05-2010, 02:54 PM
Holy ****, sircheknejkenny whatever provided you actual stats proving his point about Sammy Winder and you told him he was WRONG (when he wasnt). Kaylore took your argument apart piece by piece and all you could say was "orton throws picks too" as if he suggested that orton has never thrown a pick in his life (taking hyperbole literally). The point was Elway won games with inferior talent around him, and then you start this dumb "football isnt a one man sport" argument. You keep changing your point and sound stupider and stupider by the minute.

No, they literally said that Elway won with no line, no receivers, no RB, and no defense. It wasn't that he won with less talent around him than others. It was that he won by himself. I have not changed this argument one bit. I will show you my early posts claiming exactly that. Elway did not win with no o-line, no receivers, and no defense. This was a very specific list.

As for Winder, why don't you show me where I was wrong again. I think you failed to read and then started commenting on stuff you don't know. That makes you look dumb. I would recommend not doing it.

As for the Orton thing, I pointed out an exremtly horrible game against one of the worst teams in football.

Kaylor did not take my argument apart. He says the Patriots won a SB with only Brady. The Patriots were a defensive team when they won SBs. That alone makes his argument a joke. Manning had no line and no receivers? Since when?

Again though, can you provide a specific example of me changing the argument? I still don't see it. This is why you shouldn't go with group think. Just running with something someone else says will make you look dumb.

jhns
05-05-2010, 02:56 PM
That's all anyone can do when dealing with this assclown. He's all butthurt because I've put him on ignore with the rest of his kind (The Lex and BF7s of the OM). .

Why would I be butthurt that you put me on ignore? You still read my posts and it is much more fun to make fun of you this way.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2010, 03:04 PM
No, they literally said that Elway won with no line, no receivers, no RB, and no defense. It wasn't that he won with less talent around him than others. It was that he won by himself. I have not changed this argument one bit. I will show you my early posts claiming exactly that. Elway did not win with no o-line, no receivers, and no defense. This was a very specific list.

As for Winder, why don't you show me where I was wrong again. I think you failed to read and then started commenting on stuff you don't know. That makes you look dumb. I would recommend not doing it.

As for the Orton thing, I pointed out an exremtly horrible game against one of the worst teams in football.

Kaylor did not take my argument apart. He says the Patriots won a SB with only Brady. The Patriots were a defensive team when they won SBs. That alone makes his argument a joke. Manning had no line and no receivers? Since when?

Again though, can you provide a specific example of me changing the argument? I still don't see it. This is why you shouldn't go with group think. Just running with something someone else says will make you look dumb.

1) again you are taking hyperbole as literal. Youre not 5.

2) Winder was hardly anything special, as evidenced by the stats provided (not to mention, any casual bronco fan will tell you he was forgettable)

3) One bad game in a sample size of 40 or how many ever Orton started. He's not known for throwing picks, get over it.

4) Youre a joke. Give it up.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
05-05-2010, 03:09 PM
I'm really happy people keep quoting jhns. Really. Really glad. Seriously. I love seeing him repeat himself over and over and over again, making the same non-specific point over and over and over again, missing the point of others over and over and over again. It's making the OM super mega-terrific awesome-o!

Just put him on ignore. You're not going to convince him of anything. The little **** is too self-righteous and pig-headed to admit when he's wrong (which he has been since the start, especially in this thread). He doesn't know how to read a full sentence or post, so you're wasting your time.

Just put him on ignore. It's awesome when threads don't get derailed constantly.

As for the Bears, Jason is right. Sayers played on ****ty squads too.

Also: TD was better than him. True story.

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:10 PM
1) again you are taking hyperbole as literal. Youre not 5.

2) Winder was hardly anything special, as evidenced by the stats provided (not to mention, any casual bronco fan will tell you he was forgettable)

3) One bad game in a sample size of 40 or how many ever Orton started. He's not known for throwing picks, get over it.

4) Youre a joke. Give it up.

1) I get to act 5 when people cry about my posting before I ever post. Not only that but put some ridiculous crap like that. Also, a lot of this has been very specific. They even tried defending those Brady and Manning claims. I'm not sure how you get hyperbole.

2) 4th in the league in TDs in 86. 7th in rushing TDs. Yeah, he was nothing. He didn't help the team one bit.

3) Do you want me to go through all of his bad games? Why does that matter. The point was that he was saying a better o-line doesn't help with a QBs accuracy and decision making. You are right that the int thing wasn't important. Try arguing that real point though. I figured it was enough of a joke that I would point out how bad Orton could be.

4) Not likely.

5) I think it's pretty funny that now you guys are just avoiding the changing arguments thing.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:11 PM
Johns, we see what you are trying to do. You're trying to go uber literal so that no one can defeat your argument, cause otherwise you have to admit you lose. The problem is Kaylore said this:

jhns will be here shortly to defend their boyfriend. Their old stand by "jilted lover" attack won't work on Sayers. Probably have to go with the "Cutler will be fine all evidence to the contrary" and then insist he's just that one franchise QB that needs "a good line, good receivers and a strong defense to show his potential" even though that just means he's the same as every other QB in the league.

Where in you replied with this:

Wait, you know a QB that did something without a team around him? Really? Do you care to tell us who that is?

Yes, that one man team thing is a great argument. I don't know why anyone would be dumb enough to dispute it.

LOL

Wow....

The problem with your argument is Kaylore didn't LITERALLY say that one QB could do everything without the other 10 O players around him. He literally said that you would go argue that Cutler needs GOOD talent around him to be good too. He implied that other great QBs could prove they were great QBs with less than good talent. He proved it with Elway.

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 03:16 PM
You change the argument when you are proven wrong.

You claimed Denver had a top 10 running back. We didnt. You claimed the "three amigoes" were likewise top offensive talent...yet in 86 they did not lead the team in receiving.

Did you watch Elway in the 1980s? We had a fantastic offensive player hamstrung by a dinosaur HC who had the unique ability to let Elway do what he needed to do in the 4th quarter to pull wins out of thin air. We made superbowls in the 1980s because we had John Elway. No Elway, and its doubtful we make the playoffs the years we did. Our offensive line has historically been small, even before Shanahan. Our 1980s defenses had good players...but were too small to match up with the NFC teams and got steam rolled.

We did not win a superbowl until Denver had talent capable of helping Elway on offense. Which basically means we needed a complete team to win championships...that has not changed.

:Broncos:
Nailed it. He did the same thing with me when having a good year = winning a Super Bowl. He makes all these statements that we don't know football but his history is so wrong that it just proves the opposite is true. And as soon as proven wrong he just ignores it and changes the subject.

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:18 PM
You're trying to go uber literal so that no one can defeat your argument

Wow, that says it all right there. If I take the argument literally I am off base? Maybe you guys should stop defending dumb ass claims and we wouldn't have this problem.

I think he failed trying to show it with Elway. He had a top scoring threat and a top defense every year he did good.

Anyways, let's relate that argument to Cutler. You are saying good players make those around them better? I fully agree with that. So now let's talk about how the o-line got way worse the second Cutler was given away. Let's talk about Royal and how he was one of the best rookie receivers ever only to not even look like an NFL receiver the instant Cutler was given away. Is that the point Kaylor was making?

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:22 PM
I think he failed trying to show it with Elway. He had a top scoring threat and a top defense every year he did good.


This is news to me.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
05-05-2010, 03:23 PM
This is news to me.

To take him literally means that he had the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense. Because that's "top."

So when did Elway have the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense?

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:24 PM
This is news to me.

So name me a year we did good and didn't have both of those.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:26 PM
so name me a year we did good and didn't have both of those.

1983-1999

TheElusiveKyleOrton
05-05-2010, 03:27 PM
Also: Superman does good. People do well.

Like nails on a ****ing chalkboard.

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:27 PM
To take him literally means that he had the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense. Because that's "top."

So when did Elway have the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense?

Every year he played. Anyways, I didn't say THE top. You aren't very good at this literal thing.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:28 PM
To take him literally means that he had the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense. Because that's "top."

So when did Elway have the #1 scoring threat AND the #1 defense?

Oh I am. Fallacious Arguments abound! Typically I can't stand them, but jhns has been going with it for far too long. When you can't beat them, join them. And you can never beat a fallacious argument.

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:29 PM
1983-1999

Ummm, we didn't do good even close to all of those years. Well, unless .500 and worse is good now.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:29 PM
So name me a year we did good and didn't have both of those.

Also you've changed it from he - "show me a year when he (Elway) did good" - to we (implying team).

When you don't tack your point down, no one can counter. It is hard to punch the wind.

broncofan2438
05-05-2010, 03:29 PM
Cutler sucks

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:30 PM
Ummm, we didn't do good even close to all of those years. Well, unless .500 and worse is good now.

Superbowls are tasty, like steak or cheese.

We made it to 4 superbowls in a 7 year period, that is above .500, which is good.

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:32 PM
Also you've changed it from he - "show me a year when he (Elway) did good" - to we (implying team).

When you don't tack your point down, no one can counter. It is hard to punch the wind.

I thought QBs were judged on wins? Isn't saying we and he the same thing?

jhns
05-05-2010, 03:35 PM
Superbowls are tasty, like steak or cheese.

We made it to 4 superbowls in a 7 year period, that is above .500, which is good.

You do realize the people I argued with tried to defend everything they said, right? Not one time was it mentioned that I was taking them too literally. What you are doing now shows that even you think they were being dumb. You can't even fathom them saying that. The fact that they did and then tried defending it is pretty funny. I'm glad you agree.

Also, I find this argument with you to be funny for another reason. These same people argued for 10 pages of another thread with me about McDaniels calling the Cutler trade dumb. They argued with me because I didn't produce a quote with the actual word dumb in it. That is even though I never used that in quotes. I even gave the real quote before the argument started. It is good entertainment that now I am getting this taking stuff literally crap.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:48 PM
I thought QBs were judged on wins? Isn't saying we and he the same thing?

No, they're judged on how good they are. Which is why Elway is often thought of as one of the best and Cutler is compared to Matt Leinart.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:50 PM
You do realize the people I argued with tried to defend everything they said, right? Not one time was it mentioned that I was taking them too literally. What you are doing now shows that even you think they were being dumb. You can't even fathom them saying that. The fact that they did and then tried defending it is pretty funny. I'm glad you agree.

I see that we disagree on all points made. Why is this conversation titillating my mind muscle so much? Its so serious... yet everyone has been so full of humor. I can't understand whats going on. I love lamp.

Irish Stout
05-05-2010, 03:52 PM
Ok, I'm done. jhns, it was a stupid argument from all sides. I saw what you were doing and tried to at least get logical, but then went with fallacy instead as that is the only way to reach an end. Through MAD or its mind crippling variation.

I only feel bad to have taken this so far off track from what the OP probably intended. As well as letting myself be suckered into such stupidity.

Cutler Sucks! Elway Rules!

broncosteven
05-05-2010, 03:52 PM
Sayers says Bears 'haven't done a good job'
By ERIC OLSON, AP

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) One of the greatest Chicago Bears of all time isn't happy with the team's state of affairs.

Gale Sayers took aim Tuesday at coach Lovie Smith, quarterback Jay Cutler and personnel moves that left the Bears without a pick until the third round of the recent NFL draft.

``Cutler hasn't done the job,'' Sayers said. ``Urlacher, I don't know how good he's going to be coming back. He's 33 years old. They need a couple wide receivers, a couple defensive backs. They haven't done a good job.

``If Lovie doesn't do it this year, I think he's gone. He had a good team the Super Bowl year. Nothing came together for him the last couple years.''

The 66-year-old Sayers was back in his hometown as the featured speaker at a booster banquet for Boys Town. He also met with students at the nationally acclaimed home for troubled youth.

Sayers is chairman and CEO of Sayers Inc., a computer business headquartered in Vernon Hills, Ill. He also works in athletic fundraising at Kansas, his alma mater, and is involved in a number of charitable causes in the Chicago area.

Other than a few public appearance he makes on behalf of the Bears, he said, he has little contact with the team these days.

``I go to every game I can,'' he said. ``Yes, I do live and die with them.''

So he knows well that the Bears lost star linebacker Brian Urlacher to a season-ending injury in last year's opener at Green Bay, a big loss for a team that was hoping to contend in the NFC.

The Bears, who traded Kyle Orton and 2009-10 first-round picks to Denver for Cutler, finished 7-9 in Cutler's first season in Chicago and missed the playoffs for the third straight year. The Bears have overhauled their coaching staff - keeping Smith - and signed pass rusher Julius Peppers to a six-year deal.

Sayers was the most explosive offensive player in the NFL in the late 1960s. He retired from football in 1971 after the second of two devastating knee injuries and was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility (1977).

Sayers, who scored six touchdowns and gained 336 all-purpose yards in a game against San Francisco in 1965, is best known for his speed and elusiveness. He was one of the first running backs to return punts and kicks.

``I had some good moves and I used them very well,'' he said. ``The person who reminds me of myself is Barry Sanders. We both used the whole field.''

He shook his head when reminded that some pundits have compared the New Orleans Saints' Reggie Bush with him.

``You can't compare that, because he gets hurt too much,'' Sayers said. ``He's a fine young man. He's a little light. He's not a player who's going to carry 25 times a game. He'll get five carries, catch three passes and run back a couple punts.''

Sayers pointed out that he made $50,000 in his final season and a total of $275,000 over his entire career. He said he would like to be playing today.

``You know why? Because of the money,'' he said. ``I wouldn't change my game. I probably would be just as good because I would be on AstroTurf. The money, that's the key right now. Everybody is making so much. A person snapping the football is making a million dollars.''

http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-nfl/20100504/Sayers-Boys.Town/

And on the eve of his birthday no less...
He's not saying anything we haven't read here since the trade.

I don't want to get into any arguments or come off as supporting Cutler or duh bears in this thread but Sayers isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

My wife is in IT also and her company was buying with Sayers group for awhile. They would do a RFI and it would come down to 2-3 vendors. Then Sayers would come out and have lunch with the IT guys and since they were all bear fans they would take the action. This happened once or twice then they started having trouble and they couldn't get support. After that they went with a different vendor, then six months to a year later Sayers group was cut from either MS or IBM for poor support. They reorganized but lost a lot of business, I think they may have gone bankrupt in order to reorg.

Sayers also used to be on the Score radio in Chicago, he is a bad public speaker and didn't bring a lot to the analysis. It is sad when Doug Buffone is better. I haven't heard him much recently, I thought they cut ties with him a couple years ago around the time of his business issues but could be wrong because I don't listen as often as I used to.

Just a point of considering the source.

Paladin
05-05-2010, 03:58 PM
No, they're judged on how good they are. Which is why Elway is often thought of as one of the best and Cutler is compared to Jeff George.


Fixed it for you. No charge....

Paladin
05-05-2010, 04:01 PM
This message is hidden because jhns is on your ignore list.


Tebow willed it......

jhns
05-05-2010, 04:19 PM
This message is hidden because jhns is on your ignore list.


Tebow willed it......

That isn't the real ignore message. You are a fake.

Cito Pelon
05-05-2010, 04:22 PM
Sayers says Bears 'haven't done a good job'
By ERIC OLSON, AP

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) One of the greatest Chicago Bears of all time isn't happy with the team's state of affairs.

Gale Sayers took aim Tuesday at coach Lovie Smith, quarterback Jay Cutler and personnel moves that left the Bears without a pick until the third round of the recent NFL draft.

``Cutler hasn't done the job,'' Sayers said. ``Urlacher, I don't know how good he's going to be coming back. He's 33 years old. They need a couple wide receivers, a couple defensive backs. They haven't done a good job.

``If Lovie doesn't do it this year, I think he's gone. He had a good team the Super Bowl year. Nothing came together for him the last couple years.''

The 66-year-old Sayers was back in his hometown as the featured speaker at a booster banquet for Boys Town. He also met with students at the nationally acclaimed home for troubled youth.

Sayers is chairman and CEO of Sayers Inc., a computer business headquartered in Vernon Hills, Ill. He also works in athletic fundraising at Kansas, his alma mater, and is involved in a number of charitable causes in the Chicago area.

Other than a few public appearance he makes on behalf of the Bears, he said, he has little contact with the team these days.

``I go to every game I can,'' he said. ``Yes, I do live and die with them.''

So he knows well that the Bears lost star linebacker Brian Urlacher to a season-ending injury in last year's opener at Green Bay, a big loss for a team that was hoping to contend in the NFC.

The Bears, who traded Kyle Orton and 2009-10 first-round picks to Denver for Cutler, finished 7-9 in Cutler's first season in Chicago and missed the playoffs for the third straight year. The Bears have overhauled their coaching staff - keeping Smith - and signed pass rusher Julius Peppers to a six-year deal.

Sayers was the most explosive offensive player in the NFL in the late 1960s. He retired from football in 1971 after the second of two devastating knee injuries and was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility (1977).

Sayers, who scored six touchdowns and gained 336 all-purpose yards in a game against San Francisco in 1965, is best known for his speed and elusiveness. He was one of the first running backs to return punts and kicks.

``I had some good moves and I used them very well,'' he said. ``The person who reminds me of myself is Barry Sanders. We both used the whole field.''

He shook his head when reminded that some pundits have compared the New Orleans Saints' Reggie Bush with him.

``You can't compare that, because he gets hurt too much,'' Sayers said. ``He's a fine young man. He's a little light. He's not a player who's going to carry 25 times a game. He'll get five carries, catch three passes and run back a couple punts.''

Sayers pointed out that he made $50,000 in his final season and a total of $275,000 over his entire career. He said he would like to be playing today.

``You know why? Because of the money,'' he said. ``I wouldn't change my game. I probably would be just as good because I would be on AstroTurf. The money, that's the key right now. Everybody is making so much. A person snapping the football is making a million dollars.''

http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-nfl/20100504/Sayers-Boys.Town/

And on the eve of his birthday no less...
He's not saying anything we haven't read here since the trade.

Guy is as insufferably arrogant as Jim Brown or Magic Johnson.

OABB
05-05-2010, 04:29 PM
This is lex and Kobe worthy.

HEAV
05-05-2010, 04:30 PM
http://secondstringsports.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/jay-cutler_48676924.jpg

Nice beer gut Cutty...

Kaylore
05-05-2010, 06:32 PM
Oh I am. Fallacious Arguments abound! Typically I can't stand them, but jhns has been going with it for far too long. When you can't beat them, join them. And you can never beat a fallacious argument.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm

Pseudofool
05-05-2010, 06:44 PM
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
Why do I feel a moral imperative to correct such people?

colonelbeef
05-05-2010, 07:18 PM
Colonolebeef and jhns will be here shortly to defend their boyfriend. Their old stand by "jilted lover" attack won't work on Sayers. Probably have to go with the "Cutler will be fine all evidence to the contrary" and then insist he's just that one franchise QB that needs "a good line, good receivers and a strong defense to show his potential" even though that just means he's the same as every other QB in the league.

Why in the world would I disagree with what Sayers said? Cutler didn't get it done last year. Nobody on that team did.

oubronco
05-05-2010, 07:21 PM
Cutler sucks

so does Orton

hambone13
05-05-2010, 07:37 PM
arrrg who cares already. Can't everyone just go rub one out to a tebow poster already.

ewwww, it's way to gay to think our QB prospect might actually enjoy the intense, jacked, ball-juice he's generating....

Circle Orange
05-05-2010, 07:54 PM
I hope Cutler continues to suck next year. And every one after that. The truth is bitter, but we must accept it. ;)

Some of these guys played with a lotta pro bowlers on their squads, just sayin.' One in particular...not so much. Like, no pro bowl centers, wideouts or running backs for ten years. Not put in a system to distribute ball to a million folk to disperse the scoring. Just sayin.' Put in a system to hold back then win it late? Have no clue who that could be!

And Sayers hasn't liked anything the bears have done for nearly ten years. Whiny old dude. http://scosoft.com/s/e/56f552dc.gif