Depending on where you are in the country you may have watched a different afternoon game than I did. But if you were in my area you got the Denver Broncos and the New England Patriots. By the end of that game the Broncos were riding high at 5-0 and Josh McDaniels was fist pumping his way off the field.

Did you see it Bears fans? Did it bother you, even if just a little bit? It's okay, you can admit it.

I awake this morning to read about the games from yesterday, knowing that I don't have to review the Bears or the Packers and of course the first thing I see is the Broncos and their big win over the Patriots. I read, just to see how long it will take for the name to be mentioned and then bam, there it is:

"Orton, meanwhile, improved to 18-2 at home as an NFL starter, and the widely derided decision to anoint him the quarterback and trade away Jay Cutler still looks like a good one."

Maybe that gets under your skin, even if just a little bit.

I read on. The Broncos are widely covered this morning on ESPN.com. Probably because they beat the Patriots, the team the network loves to love.

"It was Kyle Orton's Joe Montana moment, yet he doesn't really remember the details." (Bill Williamson)

Come on, that has to make you wince, even if just a little bit. Kyle Orton and Joe Montana in the same sentence.

I have nothing against Kyle Orton, and no Bears fan should. His departure from Chicago brought what should be a franchise quarterback to the Bears and both teams have been successful to this point in the season. But isn't there a little part of you that was hoping the Broncos would hit a wall and that Cutler and the Bears would come out looking like the clear cut winner of the off-season deal?

Unfortunately that is not happening. Instead Kyle Orton is putting up career numbers in Denver.

In 2008 Orton threw for 2,972 yards and 18 touchdowns. He also threw 12 interceptions and finished with a quarterback rating of 79.6, a career best at the time. Is is fair to compare the two seasons? Is it fair to compare the Bears version of Kyle Orton to the Broncos version? After all the Broncos are giving up 20 less points per game in 2009 than 2008.

Orton is doing all the same things he did when he was with Chicago, minus the overthrows. He is managing the game the way the a team that is allowing 8.6 points per game should. He also showed that when needed he can lead his team down the field to a victory.

It really shouldn't matter. The two teams play in two different divisions, in two different league's and don't play each other this season. The success of the Broncos should make little difference in the way we look at the Bears season. It is hard not to compare though. When Dan Bernstein previewed his show for 670 The Score today he wrote the following about the Bears upcoming game with the Falcons,

"Jay Cutler will need to make big plays down the field, and that means risk of sacks and picks, what with the blocking he has.

Contrast that with, say, Kyle Orton, who is being used nicely in Denver.  They build a wall in front of him, clear the passing lanes, and he makes short, sharp throws on digs, crosses and screens.  Conservative works, ironically, for a proud, Tom Harkin-style, Iowa liberal.  Even if he and his teammates looked like chocolate-dipped bananas."

It works for them, but it wasn't what the Bears were looking for in a quarterback. One team is 5-0 and the other 3-1. Maybe this truly was a win-win deal.

But watching a fist pumping McDaniels run around down the field after the game yesterday and reading the Orton-Montana comparisons this morning had to eat at Bears fans. Even if just a little bit.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (7)

...
written by Kolby , October 12, 2009

You shouldn't care, but it is definitely funny to me.

...
written by Coco11 , October 12, 2009

Jay Cutler is way hotter then Kyle Orton...isn't that what really counts?

...
written by rexjaybels , October 12, 2009

If it doesn't matter, it should!

...
written by LeeTee21 , October 12, 2009

I think each QB is in the best situation. Orton needs to have a defense like the Broncos behind him to be as effective as he's been, and Cutler is showing the Bears that he can indeed be the QB they hoped they got. If the trade never happened, I think both teams would be worse off.

...
written by rexjaybels , October 12, 2009

Thanks Lee. I think both qbs are in good situations for their style of play. In the end it's really not a Cutler-Orton argument. One question I would ask to those that think it is though: is your team better because x is the quarterback? How would each team answer, and how would they answer if the trade never happened?

...
written by WIK , October 15, 2009

No need to get panties in a bunch. The Broncos will come back to earth here eventually, as will Orton.

Orton has always been a pretty good QB, and that's it. He can shine in a situation he's in now. Doesn't have to do too much because of a good D. He also has great WR, RB, & TE so he really doesn't have to wow anyone. At times when he does have to press hard, he'll have mixed results.

If Orton was throwing to the receivers the Bears have now, they'd be in trouble. Cutler has been the passing game AND the running game thus far. That's something I don't believe Orton could do.

The moral of the story is, Josh McDaniels is an idiot for not keeping Cutler. If he was still there, with that new D they'd be the Saints of the AFC - Hanging 40pts/gm on opponents and shutting down on defense.

...
written by rexjaybels , October 15, 2009

Well said WIK. Orton is doing the exact same thing he did in Chicago, only with more line help and more talent on offense.

As a Bears fan who would you rather go into Atlanta with this Sunday night, Orton and the Bears O or Cutler and the Bears O?

Write comment

Name

Email

Website

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment