PDA

View Full Version : Article: Bounty of Cutler deal now in place



tomjonesrocks
05-02-2010, 01:55 PM
Maybe it's me, but I don't really find this haul "stunning" just yet. A proven franchise QB for a backup QB and bunch of guys that are yet totally unproven...

-------------------------

Bounty of Cutler deal now in place
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
POSTED: 05/02/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

url: http://www.denverpost.com/klis/ci_15000235

It took two drafts and another week of intense concentration to follow the Broncos' bouncing draft picks, but the results are in on the Jay Cutler trade.

Here's what the Broncos got: starting quarterback Kyle Orton, starting outside linebacker Robert Ayers, first-round receiver Demaryius Thomas, third-round receiver Eric Decker, one-half of tight end Richard Quinn (Bears' draft pick plus one more to get him) and one-third of quarterback Tim Tebow (draft pick plus two more).

The haul is stunning.

On paper, the Broncos have a chance to make this the NFL's most significant blockbuster trade since 1989, when Jimmy Johnson used Herschel Walker to resurrect the Dallas Cowboys' franchise.

Now all the Broncos need is for their acquired players to make the ever-difficult transfer from looking good on paper to becoming productive on the field.

If Ayers and Quinn can rebound from disappointing rookie seasons, if Thomas and Decker can recover from their injured feet, if Tebow can become all that, then Orton may go from the early centerpiece of the deal to an afterthought.

Keep in mind the only player who has made the Pro Bowl since the trade was an afterthought. In return for the Broncos' haul, the Bears got Cutler and a fifth-round pick that turned out to be receiver Johnny Knox.

Knox was named to the NFC Pro Bowl team last season as a returner.

"I was aware I was part of the trade, but I didn't know any of the specifics," Knox said at the Pro Bowl in Miami. "All I know, I was hoping to get drafted and was glad I did."

The trade, as it initially was constructed, sent Cutler and a 2009 fifth-round pick (Knox) to the Bears in exchange for Orton, a 2009 first-round pick (Ayers), a 2009 third- round pick (hold on) and a 2010 first-round pick (hold on some more).

Last season, the Broncos packaged their own third- round pick with the third- rounder they got from the Bears to move into the second round to take Quinn.

This year, the Broncos took their No. 11 overall pick from the Bears, traded down to No. 13 while picking up a fourth- round pick (No. 113 overall) from San Francisco. The Broncos then moved down again to No. 24 overall in exchange for two of Philadelphia's third- round picks (Nos. 70 and 87 overall).

The Broncos moved up from No. 24 to No. 22 by sending the No. 113 overall pick they got from San Francisco to New England and took Thomas.

They kept their No. 87 pick and took Decker.

They packaged the No. 70 pick they received from Philly with two of their own picks to take Tebow.

Two quarterbacks, two receivers, a pass rusher and a blocking tight end.

Even the harshest critics of Broncos coach Josh McDaniels and general manager Brian Xanders would say their draft maneuverings were nothing short of brilliant.

It's the wisdom of their selections and decision to trade Cutler in the first place that will come into question until the players produce, and the Broncos win.

Tned
05-02-2010, 02:05 PM
Orton a center piece of the trade? :confused:

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 02:31 PM
It's a little to soon to say that the moves were brilliant. It's going to take a couple of years to figure out if it was brilliant.

Northman
05-02-2010, 02:33 PM
It's a little to soon to say that the moves were brilliant. It's going to take a couple of years to figure out it was brilliant.

Oh yea, definitely. For all we know Jay could have another Pro Bowl year and take the Bears to the SB while we go 5-11 or vice versa. Thats how fast a year can change for any given team.

OrangeHoof
05-02-2010, 02:47 PM
I think Klis is trying to say that the maneuvers were brilliant, even if the results are not (or too soon to know).

FWIW, If you accept the notion that Cutler had to be traded, the Broncos got great value out of the deal. If you approved of dealing Marshall for a pair of seconds and you were a fan of trading down from the 11th overall pick, you have to love the 2s, 3s and a fourth we added with those trades.

Did the Broncos actually make good choices with all those bonus picks? That's where most of us will just have to disagree. I'm underwhelmed by the choices and don't think we got even close to what the Cowboys got in the Walker trade but, really, the Cowboys' haul in the Walker deal was almost perfect. I wasn't expecting that. I was expecting better than players like Ayers and Tebow who, IMO, are more likely to be busts than stars.

Tned
05-02-2010, 02:57 PM
I think Klis is trying to say that the maneuvers were brilliant, even if the results are not (or too soon to know).

FWIW, If you accept the notion that Cutler had to be traded, the Broncos got great value out of the deal. If you approved of dealing Marshall for a pair of seconds and you were a fan of trading down from the 11th overall pick, you have to love the 2s, 3s and a fourth we added with those trades.

Did the Broncos actually make good choices with all those bonus picks? That's where most of us will just have to disagree. I'm underwhelmed by the choices and don't think we got even close to what the Cowboys got in the Walker trade but, really, the Cowboys' haul in the Walker deal was almost perfect. I wasn't expecting that. I was expecting better than players like Ayers and Tebow who, IMO, are more likely to be busts than stars.

Well, I don't think there is any way to make the case that Jay had to be traded. There are players all around the league that demand trades that are never traded. So, the fact that the coach/owner chose to trade him puts the onus on McDaniels to not only get great value in the trade, but more importantly to utilize that value (draft picks) to their fullest potential to replace the traded talent with new talent.

For instance, Klis makes the technically correct (maybe) case that Thomas was drafted with the Cutler pick, but you can make a strong argument that A. Smith was ONLY drafted because of the two first round picks gotten from Cutler in '10, so is it A. Smith or Thomas that is tied to Cutler?

Based on 'letter of the law' so to speak, it's Thomas, based on McDaniels saying that the reason he was willing to burn a future first on Smith was because he still had a full complement of picks in '10 (still had the Cutler first), you can make a strong case that A. Smith is what we got for the second first we got for Cutler.

Regardless, when it all comes back, the players we got in these two drafts, which were all in one way or another impacted by the picks we got from Chicago, need to pan out and make up for the Talent that was recently purged from the team. Until we see if that happened, there is no way to call the moves brilliant.

In fact, most of the talking heads agree that McDaniels paid a steep price for Tebow, rather than the moves being brilliant. The reason is that like a person that trades in their car every year, you lose value with each trade in. That's what happened with his trade backs, trade ups. He lost a little value with each one.

As I have said before, I am actually ok with him 'possibly' overpaying for Tebow, because I believe the upside potential is worth the extra cost of making sure that McDaniels didn't lose 'his' player.

However, we aren't going to know any of these answers for quite a few years. Will Cutler become the Jeff George that many on here believe, or will he lead Chicago to the SB? Will Ayers, Smith, Thomas, Tebow, Quinn and others be complete busts, or lead the Broncos to the SB (or somewhere in between)?

Time will tell.

LordTrychon
05-02-2010, 03:00 PM
Orton a center piece of the trade? :confused:

How often do YOU see the Cutler trade mentioned without Orton being discussed?

Tned
05-02-2010, 03:05 PM
How often do YOU see the Cutler trade mentioned without Orton being discussed?

He refers to the fifth that Chicago got and used on Knox as a throw in, but Orton as a center piece.

Cutler was the center piece, and you could argue the first round picks we got in return were a 'center piece', but to claim that Orton was a center piece is a stretch.

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 03:05 PM
I think Klis is trying to say that the maneuvers were brilliant, even if the results are not (or too soon to know).

FWIW, If you accept the notion that Cutler had to be traded, the Broncos got great value out of the deal. If you approved of dealing Marshall for a pair of seconds and you were a fan of trading down from the 11th overall pick, you have to love the 2s, 3s and a fourth we added with those trades.

Did the Broncos actually make good choices with all those bonus picks? That's where most of us will just have to disagree. I'm underwhelmed by the choices and don't think we got even close to what the Cowboys got in the Walker trade but, really, the Cowboys' haul in the Walker deal was almost perfect. I wasn't expecting that. I was expecting better than players like Ayers and Tebow who, IMO, are more likely to be busts than stars.

Maybe that is what Klis is trying say. I wouldn't say the moves were brilliant at this point. In fact I would reserve that term for if and when they make the Broncos a serious contender.

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 03:15 PM
Well, I don't think there is any way to make the case that Jay had to be traded. There are players all around the league that demand trades that are never traded.

Chad Johnson anyone? For the two years prior to last season Chad said pubilcally that he wanted to be traded and threatened to sit out IIRC. Just a player says he doesn't want to be there doesn't mean that you have to do it.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 03:31 PM
Chad Johnson anyone? For the two years prior to last season Chad said pubilcally that he wanted to be traded and threatened to sit out IIRC. Just a player says he doesn't want to be there doesn't mean that you have to do it.

Who is this Chad Johnson you speak of?

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 03:33 PM
Who is this Chad Johnson you speak of?

Are you serious or are you being sarcastic?

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 04:08 PM
Are you serious or are you being sarcastic?

I'm not aware of a current NFL player who goes by the name of Chad Johnson! :D

Nickademus
05-02-2010, 04:48 PM
for what its worth the trades we made in the draft moving down were brilliant. I hate moving up the trades we made for smith and quinn were dumb. even if smith becomes a good cb (very much in doubt) there was far superior talent on the board @ 14 where we would have been picking this was just a bad rookie mistake. I will reserve judgement on the tebow trade untill he has a season or three under his belt and we know what we have in him hopefully he is not this years matt jones. I feel like we got great value for cutler however it is questionable wether or not we squandered that value at this point.

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 05:18 PM
I think Klis is trying to say that the maneuvers were brilliant, even if the results are not (or too soon to know).

FWIW, If you accept the notion that Cutler had to be traded, the Broncos got great value out of the deal. If you approved of dealing Marshall for a pair of seconds and you were a fan of trading down from the 11th overall pick, you have to love the 2s, 3s and a fourth we added with those trades.

Did the Broncos actually make good choices with all those bonus picks? That's where most of us will just have to disagree. I'm underwhelmed by the choices and don't think we got even close to what the Cowboys got in the Walker trade but, really, the Cowboys' haul in the Walker deal was almost perfect. I wasn't expecting that. I was expecting better than players like Ayers and Tebow who, IMO, are more likely to be busts than stars.

You have to remember that MIN sucked almost as bad as DAL did during that time frame hands down. SO getting a bunch of choices was stunning.

HERE are those drafts after the trade not sure which were DAL or which were MIN and what manuvering they did to get around some of this.


1991 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 1 Russell Maryland DT Miami (Fla.)
1 12 Alvin Harper WR Tennessee
1 20 Kelvin Pritchett DT Mississippi
2 37 Dixon Edwards LB Michigan State
3 62 Godfrey Myles LB Florida
3 64 James Richards -- California
3 70 Erik Williams T Central State (Ohio)
4 97 Curvin Richards RB Pittsburgh
4 106 Bill Musgrave QB Oregon
4 108 Tony Hill DE Tennessee-Chattanooga
4 110 Kevin Harris DE Texas Southern
1990 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 17 Emmitt Smith RB Florida
2 26 Alexander Wright WR Auburn
3 64 Jimmie Jones DT Miami (Fla.)
1989 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 1 Troy Aikman QB UCLA
2 29 Steve Wisniewski G Penn State
2 39 Daryl Johnston RB Syracuse
3 57 Mark Stepnoski C Pittsburgh
3 68 Rhondy Weston DE Florida
4 85 Tony Tolbert DE Texas-El Paso
5 113 Keith Jennings TE Clemson
5 119 Willis Crockett LB Georgia Tech
5 125 Jeff Roth -- Florida

I thought that Josh did some tap dancing to get back and forth like he did to GET those players he wasted with out break the snebulilites of those eth think you can only draft a guy in a creations spot because of perceived "Values"

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 05:32 PM
for what its worth the trades we made in the draft moving down were brilliant. I hate moving up the trades we made for smith and quinn were dumb. even if smith becomes a good cb (very much in doubt) there was far superior talent on the board @ 14 where we would have been picking this was just a bad rookie mistake. I will reserve judgement on the tebow trade untill he has a season or three under his belt and we know what we have in him hopefully he is not this years matt jones. I feel like we got great value for cutler however it is questionable wether or not we squandered that value at this point.


Think you have to give Josh a mulligan for last year. he had just a quarter of if that year to have his Scouted redefine what he was looking for and get the board organized Xman was a rookie GM at the time also.


I did not like the trade ups last year as MAYBE those players could have been had later, and perhaps we did not have REAL scouting info on them either. So to me while potentially wasted picks we could have had drafts like in the past excepting 06 and the jury still seems to be out on those players we did not have many bell ringers before.

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 05:37 PM
I'm not aware of a current NFL player who goes by the name of Chad Johnson! :D

He did say he would eventually change it back to his given name. So I'm just saving a step.

Tned
05-02-2010, 05:48 PM
Think you have to give Josh a mulligan for last year. he had just a quarter of if that year to have his Scouted redefine what he was looking for and get the board organized Xman was a rookie GM at the time also.


I did not like the trade ups last year as MAYBE those players could have been had later, and perhaps we did not have REAL scouting info on them either. So to me while potentially wasted picks we could have had drafts like in the past excepting 06 and the jury still seems to be out on those players we did not have many bell ringers before.

If they didn't have time to prepare their draft board, then that is an even bigger indictment against them for trading the '10 first for A. Smith.

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 05:48 PM
for what its worth the trades we made in the draft moving down were brilliant. I hate moving up the trades we made for smith and quinn were dumb. even if smith becomes a good cb (very much in doubt) there was far superior talent on the board @ 14 where we would have been picking this was just a bad rookie mistake. I will reserve judgement on the tebow trade untill he has a season or three under his belt and we know what we have in him hopefully he is not this years matt jones. I feel like we got great value for cutler however it is questionable wether or not we squandered that value at this point.

At least Tebow isn't trying to transition to a new postion like Matt Jones did. I think the main reason Jones was 1st round draft pick had do with Combine workout.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 06:10 PM
Chad Johnson anyone? For the two years prior to last season Chad said pubilcally that he wanted to be traded and threatened to sit out IIRC. Just a player says he doesn't want to be there doesn't mean that you have to do it.

In all seriousness though, it's a little different with Ocho IMO. He's always been pretty eccentric and I don't think anyone really takes anything he says that seriously. He really doesn't even take himself that seriously. Cutler was just being a douche and Marshall quit on the team/couldn't stay out of trouble. Ocho has never gotten in legal trouble and wasn't really that much of a locker room disturbance.

Let's just assume for arguments sake though that Ocho is a "problem child". How has that worked out for the Bengals, bringing in problem player after problem player? How many playoff wins has that gotten them under Lewis?

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 06:30 PM
In all seriousness though, it's a little different with Ocho IMO. He's always been pretty eccentric and I don't think anyone really takes anything he says that seriously. He really doesn't even take himself that seriously. Cutler was just being a douche and Marshall quit on the team/couldn't stay out of trouble. Ocho has never gotten in legal trouble and wasn't really that much of a locker room disturbance.

Let's just assume for arguments sake though that Ocho is a "problem child". How has that worked out for the Bengals, bringing in problem player after problem player? How many playoff wins has that gotten them under Lewis?

So because he's eccentric that means he can't be serious? I don't buy that. I watched him on set of NFLN and he was dead serious he wanted out of Cincy. Oh really he was never a locker room disturbance? I believe he got into a couple tussles with Lewis. Bottom line when said he wanted out he meant it.

It's factually wrong to say Marshall quit on the team. It was McDaniels choice to sit him for the last game.

Yeah keeping problem player hasn't netted Lewis much terms of playoff wins. So what's your point? McDaniel hasn't proven that moving Cutler and Marshall out and bring in Tebow and Thomas win him games.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 06:36 PM
So because he's eccentric that means he can't be serious? I don't buy that. I watched him on set of NFLN and he was dead serious he wanted out of Cincy. Oh really he was never a locker room disturbance? I believe he got into a couple tussles with Lewis. Bottom line when said he out he meant it.

It's factually wrong to say Marshall quit on the team. It was McDaniels choice to sit him for the last game.

Yeah keeping problem player has netted Lewis much terms of play wins. So what's your point? McDaniel hasn't proven tha tmoving Cutler and Marshall out and bring in Tebow and Thomas win him games.

Lewis has been there 8 years and hasn't won a playoff game. If McDaniels goes a few more years and still doesn't win a playoff game you'll have a point but right now it's pretty unfair to say that his way won't work when he's had exactly one season to make it work.

And my main point is that it's pretty dumb to cite Lewis as an example of being able to work it out with a player asking for a trade since that style of doing things has not translated into any postseason success over 8 years.

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 07:03 PM
Lewis has been there 8 years and hasn't won a playoff game. If McDaniels goes a few more years and still doesn't win a playoff game you'll have a point but right now it's pretty unfair to say that his way won't work when he's had exactly one season to make it work.

And my main point is that it's pretty dumb to cite Lewis as an example of being able to work it out with a player asking for a trade since that style of doing things has not translated into any postseason success over 8 years.

You're the one that made inference that McDaniels move to trade Cutler and Marshall is better than what Bengals did. It does wash to now cry foul that it's unfair to compare Lewis' 8 years to McDaniels one year.

Besides that you missed the point badly. Johnson is contracted to Bengals just because he said 'I want out.' doesn't mean that the Bengals should have obliged him. He's also is not the only player to demand a trade and not get it. He was the one that came to mind first.

TimTebow15MVP
05-02-2010, 07:53 PM
Maybe it's me, but I don't really find this haul "stunning" just yet. A proven franchise QB for a backup QB and bunch of guys that are yet totally unproven...

-------------------------

Bounty of Cutler deal now in place
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
POSTED: 05/02/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

url: http://www.denverpost.com/klis/ci_15000235

It took two drafts and another week of intense concentration to follow the Broncos' bouncing draft picks, but the results are in on the Jay Cutler trade.

Here's what the Broncos got: starting quarterback Kyle Orton, starting outside linebacker Robert Ayers, first-round receiver Demaryius Thomas, third-round receiver Eric Decker, one-half of tight end Richard Quinn (Bears' draft pick plus one more to get him) and one-third of quarterback Tim Tebow (draft pick plus two more).

The haul is stunning.

On paper, the Broncos have a chance to make this the NFL's most significant blockbuster trade since 1989, when Jimmy Johnson used Herschel Walker to resurrect the Dallas Cowboys' franchise.

Now all the Broncos need is for their acquired players to make the ever-difficult transfer from looking good on paper to becoming productive on the field.

If Ayers and Quinn can rebound from disappointing rookie seasons, if Thomas and Decker can recover from their injured feet, if Tebow can become all that, then Orton may go from the early centerpiece of the deal to an afterthought.

Keep in mind the only player who has made the Pro Bowl since the trade was an afterthought. In return for the Broncos' haul, the Bears got Cutler and a fifth-round pick that turned out to be receiver Johnny Knox.

Knox was named to the NFC Pro Bowl team last season as a returner.

"I was aware I was part of the trade, but I didn't know any of the specifics," Knox said at the Pro Bowl in Miami. "All I know, I was hoping to get drafted and was glad I did."

The trade, as it initially was constructed, sent Cutler and a 2009 fifth-round pick (Knox) to the Bears in exchange for Orton, a 2009 first-round pick (Ayers), a 2009 third- round pick (hold on) and a 2010 first-round pick (hold on some more).

Last season, the Broncos packaged their own third- round pick with the third- rounder they got from the Bears to move into the second round to take Quinn.

This year, the Broncos took their No. 11 overall pick from the Bears, traded down to No. 13 while picking up a fourth- round pick (No. 113 overall) from San Francisco. The Broncos then moved down again to No. 24 overall in exchange for two of Philadelphia's third- round picks (Nos. 70 and 87 overall).

The Broncos moved up from No. 24 to No. 22 by sending the No. 113 overall pick they got from San Francisco to New England and took Thomas.

They kept their No. 87 pick and took Decker.

They packaged the No. 70 pick they received from Philly with two of their own picks to take Tebow.

Two quarterbacks, two receivers, a pass rusher and a blocking tight end.

Even the harshest critics of Broncos coach Josh McDaniels and general manager Brian Xanders would say their draft maneuverings were nothing short of brilliant.

It's the wisdom of their selections and decision to trade Cutler in the first place that will come into question until the players produce, and the Broncos win.

What proven franchise qb was dealt?:confused:

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 08:18 PM
John was traded? He was one only FQB on the broncos, other than a couple of 3-4 year rentals.

Jay may or may not have been one had he been mature enough. To stick around then we might have known for sure but he got his panties in a wad and would not talk to the owner so may he is a FQB and maybe just a Coach Killer time will tell, right now he has one QBC, one OC and one HC on his belt.

When you refuse to practice because it is to cold for your lungs, when you dog it in practice, when you refuse to practice when cleared by the team doctors and fail to show up on time for a scheduled rehab appointment, IMHO is quiting on your team, if it was one possibly two of those things, just MAYBE it is excused. But, he racked up the IPoints to the place, that he was a distraction AGAIN to the team.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tempus Fugit
05-02-2010, 09:03 PM
You're the one that made inference that McDaniels move to trade Cutler and Marshall is better than what Bengals did. It does wash to now cry foul that it's unfair to compare Lewis' 8 years to McDaniels one year.

Besides that you missed the point badly. Johnson is contracted to Bengals just because he said 'I want out.' doesn't mean that the Bengals should have obliged him. He's also is not the only player to demand a trade and not get it. He was the one that came to mind first.

Could you please put together a list of QBs who asked to be traded, weren't traded, and then went on to great things with that same team?

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:04 PM
You're the one that made inference that McDaniels move to trade Cutler and Marshall is better than what Bengals did. It does wash to now cry foul that it's unfair to compare Lewis' 8 years to McDaniels one year.

Besides that you missed the point badly. Johnson is contracted to Bengals just because he said 'I want out.' doesn't mean that the Bengals should have obliged him. He's also is not the only player to demand a trade and not get it. He was the one that came to mind first.

And my point is that just because other teams choose to handle it that way doesn't mean that McDaniels has to. Time will tell if they were the right moves, but I feel very confident in the direction he is moving the franchise in.

Tned
05-02-2010, 09:07 PM
Jay may or may not have been one had he been mature enough. To stick around then we might have known for sure but he got his panties in a wad and would not talk to the owner so may he is a FQB and maybe just a Coach Killer time will tell right now he has one QBC, one OC and one HC one his belt.


I'm trying to understand the logic here. For a year plus, you have been talking about how Shanahan was fired because of his refusal to get a real DC and keeping Slowik (I think you call him Slowitt). You have hammered Shanahan for his lack of attention on defense.

Now, all of a sudden you have switched to saying Shanahan wasn't fired because of Slowik and the defensive woes, but in fact it was Jay that got him fired? :confused:

Can you explain the switch and the basis for this new 'coach killer' talk?

Shazam!
05-02-2010, 09:08 PM
A proven franchise QB for a backup QB and bunch of guys that are yet totally unproven...

Who is this 'proven franchise QB' you speak of anyway??

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:12 PM
Who is this 'proven franchise QB' you speak of anyway??

Yeah, I think most PROVEN franchise QB's have at least played in a playoff game.

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:13 PM
Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao

Tned
05-02-2010, 09:15 PM
Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao

Welcome to my world.

LordTrychon
05-02-2010, 09:17 PM
Welcome to my world.

People been callin' you the franchise too?

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:26 PM
Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao

Give me a break. Exactly one poster on this board has explicitly labeled Tebow a franchise QB and that poster isn't posting in this thread. Lots of us think he has loads of potential and will be great but no one is flat out calling him a franchise QB.

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:38 PM
Give me a break. Exactly one poster on this board has explicitly labeled Tebow a franchise QB and that poster isn't posting in this thread. Lots of us think he has loads of potential and will be great but no one is flat out calling him a franchise QB.

:lol:

Oh, its been more than one poster trust me. As for his potential that wont be determined until he actually takes the field and proves it. Cutler has still proved far more on the field than Tebow has at this given time. Its not like Jay has been in the best of circumstances thus far in his career. He may not be a franchise QB but he most certainly worth putting the time and effort into utilizing his talents and potential that he has already shown. Im not the biggest of Cutler fans either but im not moronic enough to not understand he has a lot of ability and is certainly worth the risk that Chicago made to get him.

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 09:39 PM
Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao


Now I read most of this thread while a dinner on the MOBILE site, I must have missed who called Tebow a FQB. Got a post you can reference in this thread?

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 09:40 PM
People been callin' you the franchise too?

He is the BF franchise.:salute:

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:40 PM
Now I read most of this thread while a dinner on the MOBILE site, I must have missed who called Tebow a FQB. Got a post you can reference in this thread?

You didn't misread, Northman is just making things up to try to prove his point.

Tned
05-02-2010, 09:40 PM
He is the BF franchise.:salute:

Does that make me the BFF? ;)

honz
05-02-2010, 09:42 PM
Tebow is a franchise QB. This trade is considered illegal in 28 states.

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:43 PM
Now I read most of this thread while a dinner on the MOBILE site, I must have missed who called Tebow a FQB. Got a post you can reference in this thread?

Dont need one for this thread, look it up its all over this forum. Nice try though.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:46 PM
Dont need one for this thread, look it up its all over this forum. Nice try though.

Unless you can find a post by one of the posters in this thread who you accuse of being hypocrites that explicitly calls Tebow a franchise QB, your claim is just plain wrong.

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:50 PM
Unless you can find a post by one of the posters in this thread who you accuse of being hypocrites that explicitly calls Tebow a franchise QB, your claim is just plain wrong.

Who did i call out exactly? I dont recall mentioning any particular names with my post. Feeling guilty? :lol:

honz
05-02-2010, 09:53 PM
Tebow is a franchise QB. This trade is considered illegal in 28 states.
Here.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:54 PM
Who did i call out exactly? I dont recall mentioning any particular names with my post. Feeling guilty? :lol:

I assume you were calling the posters in this thread hypocrites. And please feel free to search my post history, you will find no instances of me referring to him as such.

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:55 PM
I assume you were calling the posters in this thread hypocrites. And please feel free to search my post history, you will find no instances of me referring to him as such.

There's your problem. You assume too much.

Lonestar
05-02-2010, 09:58 PM
Dont need one for this thread, look it up its all over this forum. Nice try though.

As I said in fact as YOU said in the following quote I have not seen any thing in this thread.



Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao

now if you had said this


Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a Potential franchise QB IN OTHER threads. lmao

You would have been correct

Oh the irony..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Northman
05-02-2010, 09:59 PM
As I said in fact as YOU said in the following quote I have not seen any thing in this thread.




now if you had said this



You would have been correct

Oh the irony..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

And you would be full of shit in this case. But, we knew that already didnt we?

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 09:59 PM
There's your problem. You assume too much.

Well fine, show me a poster who has called Tebow a franchise QB and has also said Cutler isn't one since you claim this has happened. It's easy to just throw out blanket accusations without backing them up.

Northman
05-02-2010, 10:00 PM
Well fine, show me a poster who has called Tebow a franchise QB and has also said Cutler isn't one since you claim this has happened. It's easy to just throw out blanket accusations without backing them up.

Man, you two girls are sure taking my post personally for people who it seems doesnt address too.

BroncoWave
05-02-2010, 10:05 PM
Man, you two girls are sure taking my post personally for people who it seems doesnt address too.

So I take that as you can't back up your claim. I thought so. That's all you had to say.

Northman
05-02-2010, 10:08 PM
So I take that as you can't back up your claim. I thought so. That's all you had to say.

Your responses to my post is all i needed BTB. If it didnt apply too you specifically than you should of never responded to my post. Personally, i dont feel like digging into 2 weeks of Tebowmania to find my examples. Call it laziness but if it didnt apply to you than you should of never responded. Pretty simple when you break it down. :lol:

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
05-02-2010, 10:57 PM
Now I read most of this thread while a dinner on the MOBILE site,

Did you take someone out to eat and then just read forums on your phone? :lol:

How rude jr!!!

:D

Just changing the subject is all...

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 11:00 PM
And my point is that just because other teams choose to handle it that way doesn't mean that McDaniels has to. Time will tell if they were the right moves, but I feel very confident in the direction he is moving the franchise in.

Really that was your point because it sure didn't come out that way?

TXBRONC
05-02-2010, 11:05 PM
I assume you were calling the posters in this thread hypocrites. And please feel free to search my post history, you will find no instances of me referring to him as such.

He's not calling me a hypocrite.

GEM
05-02-2010, 11:25 PM
Maybe it's me, but I don't really find this haul "stunning" just yet. A proven franchise QB for a backup QB and bunch of guys that are yet totally unproven...


I would have to believe that Cutler was a franchise QB to follow that line of thinking. He was good, he had potential, but franchise, nope, I don't see that. That's just my opinion and it differs from a lot of others opinions.

TimTebow15MVP
05-03-2010, 01:27 AM
Such irony in this thread when people are calling out Jay but then labeling Tebow a franchise QB. lmao

okay fine we dont know if tebow is a franchise qb YET but we do know cutler is NOT

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 08:44 AM
It's a little to soon to say that the moves were brilliant. It's going to take a couple of years to figure out if it was brilliant.

No. The moves to aquire the specific draft slots were brilliant. Very Belicheat/NE-like. The trades down were absolutely perfect, and then the moves back up to get who they wanted were perfect also.
Its the PLAYERS that might not become brilliant picks. Time will tell.
But the ability to manipulate the draft, draft picks and other teams was nothing short of brilliant.

claymore
05-03-2010, 08:48 AM
If Tebow is worth 2 #1 Draft picks and a starting QB in 2013 he is a then a Franchise QB.

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 08:55 AM
If Tebow is worth 2 #1 Draft picks and a starting QB in 2013 he is a then a Franchise QB.

Agreed.
And you just know, with out a shadow of a doubt that DEN will be playing CHI next year.
The league will find a way, and that game will also measure who is succesful and who isnt.
And i gotta tell ya, i am not worried about DEN destroying CHI next year with Tebow at the helm.
Oh the drama....

BroncoWave
05-03-2010, 08:58 AM
Agreed.
And you just know, with out a shadow of a doubt that DEN will be playing CHI next year.
The league will find a way, and that game will also measure who is succesful and who isnt.
Oh the drama....

What do you mean the league will find a way? They have a formula for deciding the schedule years in advance you know?

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 09:05 AM
What do you mean the league will find a way? They have a formula for deciding the schedule years in advance you know?

Oh that formula will somehow be manipulated to include a game between DEN and CHI. Just you wait;)

Or Tebow will just play and beat CHI by himself.


After he re-writes the formula, with Tebow as the solution.

Tned
05-03-2010, 09:07 AM
Agreed.
And you just know, with out a shadow of a doubt that DEN will be playing CHI next year.
The league will find a way, and that game will also measure who is succesful and who isnt.
And i gotta tell ya, i am not worried about DEN destroying CHI next year with Tebow at the helm.
Oh the drama....


What do you mean the league will find a way? They have a formula for deciding the schedule years in advance you know?

Well, you are both right. The NFL has been using a preset rotation for the last five or six years (one full rotation through the league) and I don't think they have announced if they will use the same formula beyond 2010 (that's when the one full rotation is complete). If they do, just continue on, then the AFCW is in line to play the NFCN next season and Chicago and Denver would be matched up.

However, as far as I know, they have not confirmed whether they will continue the current method of scheduling teams.

claymore
05-03-2010, 09:08 AM
Agreed.
And you just know, with out a shadow of a doubt that DEN will be playing CHI next year.
The league will find a way, and that game will also measure who is succesful and who isnt.
And i gotta tell ya, i am not worried about DEN destroying CHI next year with Tebow at the helm.
Oh the drama....

Kinda like how the steelers dont have a prime time game until Big Ben returns from suspension? :laugh:

Nomad
05-03-2010, 09:10 AM
The label 'franchise' QB is earned and proven not a given which analysts and fans make the mistake of assuming and throwing the word around too liberally! None of the names mentioned in this thread have earned the label 'franchise' QB....yet!! The potential may be there but it's yet to happen!!

__________________________________________________ _____

What Is a Franchise Quarterback Exactly?
by Sam Snyder Correspondent Written on July 30, 2009

Franchise quarterback. You hear it all the time, you can't look up a team without finding articles about getting a "franchise quarterback."

It's everywhere. "This team found it's franchise QB. This team needs a franchise QB." You can't escape it.

But what is a franchise quarterback?

It's odd that you see a word tossed around so much, but no one knows the exact meaning. Everyone talks about who is a franchise QB, but not what is a franchise QB is. You can't label a franchise QB unless you know what it is.

After research about people who are labeled as "franchise quarterbacks" and those who aren't considered as such.

The player must match certain criteria to be considered a franchise quarterback: consistency, talent, leadership/maturity, and football intelligence.



Consistency

In order to be a franchise quarterback or to find one, the player needs to be able to perform a certain level all the time. That doesn't mean he has to be spectacular, but he can perform at a good performance day in and day out.

Someone who throws five touchdown passes and no interceptions in one game, then throws five interceptions and no touchdowns the next would not make a good franchise quarterback.

If someone throws two touchdown passes and one interception in one game, and then repeats that performance every game, that is one step to becoming a "franchise QB."



Talent

You can run the ball as many times as you like, your defense can score as many points as you like. But the fact remains, if you're quarterback is a bum, your team will suffer.

Some teams feature a run first offense, where the quarterback is more of a game manager, but when he is needed, a true franchise QB can step up and make big plays for his team.

Quarterbacks like Joe Flacco, Jake Delhomme, or Ben Roethlisberger aren't asked to throw a lot, nor is anyone expecting great numbers to come out of them. But when the time comes, they all can step up their game, Roethlisberger in particular.



Leadership/Maturity

Players look to their quarterback. They look to them for help, they look for them for guidance, and if a QB is willing to accept that role, then they're not set to be a franchise player.

The entire offense runs around the quarterback, and it's his job to rally his team around him, or they all crumble.

This also includes being a team player. If a quarterback is more concerned about his passer rating over his teams win-loss record, he is doomed for failure.

He must be able to accept responsibility for his mistakes, and not point fingers and cast blame on other offensive players for his shortcomings. He must be able to remain cool under pressure and keep his composure when things get sour.

If he's cracking under pressure, and being a self-centered crybaby, then he isn't qualified.



Football Intelligence

I'm not talking about the player's IQ or Wonderlic score, I'm talking about his on field head game. The quarterback has to know what is going on the field at all times, no exceptions.

He needs to know where the safeties, where his receivers are going. He needs to be able to pick up a blitz and correctly change the play. If there are seven DB's on the field, he should know not to pass it unless he absolutely has to.

This also includes decision making. If he decides to continuously throw the ball into triple coverage, or decides to rush the ball himself into a blitz, he isn't a franchise quarterback.

So using the following criteria, you can know make a list of the franchise quarterbacks of the NFL, who is becoming a franchise quarterback, and who has the potential to be a franchise QB.

Tned
05-03-2010, 09:14 AM
Kinda like how the steelers dont have a prime time game until Big Ben returns from suspension? :laugh:

The primetime games, times, who plays in London, etc., are decided in the offseason, but who plays who this year was determined about 7 years ago. 14 of the 16 games this year consist of our normal AFC west matchups, and then we play the NFC west and AFC South (I think it's the south, Indy's division).

The final two games are the teams from the AFC East and AFC North that finished in the same division standing as us (#1 from AFC West, plays #1 from AFC East and #1 from AFC North -- #2 from AFC West, plays #2 from AFC East and #2 from AFC North, etc).

If they simply restart the rotation, which they started sometime around 2005, then we would be in line to play the NFC North and Chicago in 2011. If they decide to use a different scheduling method, who knows who we will play.

BroncoWave
05-03-2010, 09:21 AM
Oh that formula will somehow be manipulated to include a game between DEN and CHI. Just you wait;)

No it won't, that's not how it works at all based on the current system. We do happen to play the NFC North next year but had that not been the case, the league wouldn't have just randomly made us play the Bears. If that were the case they would have done it this past season when the Cutler trade was more fresh on the public's mind.

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 09:25 AM
No it won't, that's not how it works at all based on the current system. We do happen to play the NFC North next year but had that not been the case, the league wouldn't have just randomly made us play the Bears. If that were the case they would have done it this past season when the Cutler trade was more fresh on the public's mind.

See i told you, they already manipulated the schedule! Its a conspiracy!
CONSPIRACY!!!:D

jessica
05-03-2010, 09:28 AM
well i need help in getting in touch with the broncos coach please help me thank you

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 09:29 AM
well i need help in getting in touch with the broncos coach please help me thank you

Thats me. What can i help you with?

Tned
05-03-2010, 09:32 AM
No it won't, that's not how it works at all based on the current system. We do happen to play the NFC North next year but had that not been the case, the league wouldn't have just randomly made us play the Bears. If that were the case they would have done it this past season when the Cutler trade was more fresh on the public's mind.

Do you know if they (I assume competition committee) decided to keep the current rotation for another 7 years? The last round ends in 2010 and last I heard, it hadn't been decided.

Nomad
05-03-2010, 09:32 AM
well i need help in getting in touch with the broncos coach please help me thank you

Denver Broncos Headquarters At Dove Valley
13655 Broncos Pkwy
Englewood, CO 80112
(303) 649-9000

I doubt you'll get his personal cell number but you can start here !!

LordTrychon
05-03-2010, 09:54 AM
Do you know if they (I assume competition committee) decided to keep the current rotation for another 7 years? The last round ends in 2010 and last I heard, it hadn't been decided.

I didn't know it was up for renewal. I love the current system, and it's been one of my largest arguments against expansion.

I hope they keep it.

T.K.O.
05-03-2010, 10:07 AM
i think they are moving to a 2 year system in light of the whole "mayan calendar" thing

Tned
05-03-2010, 10:24 AM
I didn't know it was up for renewal. I love the current system, and it's been one of my largest arguments against expansion.

I hope they keep it.

I think it's a good system. It eliminated the old tough first place schedule, easy last place schedule, since now they only have two games to adjust strength, and like last year, the second place team can wind up with a tougher schedule than the first place in the division. Still, like you, I like it.

Basically, they adopted it on a trial basis, which was one circuit around the league, which I think took 7 years. I heard towards the end of last season that they were discussing whether or not to keep the current system or use a different one, but never heard if a decision was made either way.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 10:47 AM
No. The moves to aquire the specific draft slots were brilliant. Very Belicheat/NE-like. The trades down were absolutely perfect, and then the moves back up to get who they wanted were perfect also.
Its the PLAYERS that might not become brilliant picks. Time will tell.
But the ability to manipulate the draft, draft picks and other teams was nothing short of brilliant.

I understand what you're saying but I don't think the moves can be separated from the player that was chosen. The reason I say that is because the moves were made for the sole purpose of getting those specific players. So if the players don't pan out then moves will be seen as unwise from many in media as well some of the fan base.

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 10:51 AM
I understand what you're saying but I don't think the moves can be separated from the player that was chosen. The reason I say that is because the moves were made for the sole purpose of getting those specific players. So if the players don't pan out then moves will be seen as unwise from many in media as well some of the fan base.

Yeah, you can attatch the moves to the players, and i will eventually, but until then, the fact that he manipultaed the draft to his liking and got what he wanted should be commended.
Now those picks just need to pan out. And i am not saying this because of Pickler as much as for the betterment of the franchise.
Pickler made his bed, and now he can lie in it. CHI isnt winning that division for a long time.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 11:21 AM
Yeah, you can attatch the moves to the players, and i will eventually, but until then, the fact that he manipultaed the draft to his liking and got what he wanted should be commended.
Now those picks just need to pan out. And i am not saying this because of Pickler as much as for the betterment of the franchise.
Pickler made his bed, and now he can lie in it. CHI isnt winning that division for a long time.

McDaniel did what he thought was right and that's fine because it's nothing in my control. I agree it's for the betterment of the team. It they succeed they could very well be cornerstones for next 10-15 years barring anything that we can not foresee.

As far as Chicago is concerned there fate is as much of unknown as ours is.

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 11:27 AM
McDaniel did what he thought was right and that's fine because it's nothing in my control. I agree it's for the betterment of the team. It they succeed they could very well be cornerstones for next 10-15 years barring anything that we can not foresee.

As far as Chicago is concerned there fate is as much of unknown as ours is.

I think CHI is in a much more difficult situation in their division. MIN is a juggernaut and getting either another vet QB, or a really solid rookie in there is only going to continue their dominance even after Favre leaves (if he ever does!)
GB is also a very, very strong team and is only getting better.
DEt has made strides and it wouldnt suprise me to see them move ahead of CHI for 3rd place in that division this year!
CHI' defense is in trouble, and missing pieces all over and even Urlacher's return wont fix it within the division. offensively they have a run game,. but no real recievers (Knox! maaaaybe) and then theres the putrid offensive line issues. I dont see them contending for a long time.

I think DEN on the other hand has turned a difficult corner, and will be in contention for a WC spot this year.

Northman
05-03-2010, 11:33 AM
I think CHI is in a much more difficult situation in their division. MIN is a juggernaut and getting either another vet QB, or a really solid rookie in there is only going to continue their dominance even after Favre leaves (if he ever does!)
GB is also a very, very strong team and is only getting better.
DEt has made strides and it wouldnt suprise me to see them move ahead of CHI for 3rd place in that division this year!
CHI' defense is in trouble, and missing pieces all over and even Urlacher's return wont fix it within the division. offensively they have a run game,. but no real recievers (Knox! maaaaybe) and then theres the putrid offensive line issues. I dont see them contending for a long time.

I think DEN on the other hand has turned a difficult corner, and will be in contention for a WC spot this year.

Based on what?

Tned
05-03-2010, 11:56 AM
Yeah, you can attatch the moves to the players, and i will eventually, but until then, the fact that he manipultaed the draft to his liking and got what he wanted should be commended.
Now those picks just need to pan out. And i am not saying this because of Pickler as much as for the betterment of the franchise.
Pickler made his bed, and now he can lie in it. CHI isnt winning that division for a long time.

I agree. I think some of the moves might have been questionable, for instance only time will tell if picking character (Thomas) over talent (Bryant), will pan out. I know McD says that they had Thomas as the higher rated WR, but you have to wonder if it was tainted by wanting to pick a squeaky clean WR to replace Marshall.

Regardless, I'm with you. While it will take some time to see if his picks work out (Tebow and Thomas having the big spotlights on them), what we do know is that he executed his strategy perfectly.

Ed Werder of ESPN claims that before the first round started, McDaniels told him he was going to move back and draft Thomas and Tebow in the first round. That's exactly what McDaniels did, drafted the two guys HE watned in the first round, without giving up the rest of his draft to do it.

So, putting aside whether or not McD was right in wanting those players, you have to admire how he got them both in the first round, giving up the equivalent of a first and 2nd rounder for both players.

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 12:21 PM
I agree. I think some of the moves might have been questionable, for instance only time will tell if picking character (Thomas) over talent (Bryant), will pan out. I know McD says that they had Thomas as the higher rated WR, but you have to wonder if it was tainted by wanting to pick a squeaky clean WR to replace Marshall.

Regardless, I'm with you. While it will take some time to see if his picks work out (Tebow and Thomas having the big spotlights on them), what we do know is that he executed his strategy perfectly.

Ed Werder of ESPN claims that before the first round started, McDaniels told him he was going to move back and draft Thomas and Tebow in the first round. That's exactly what McDaniels did, drafted the two guys HE watned in the first round, without giving up the rest of his draft to do it.

So, putting aside whether or not McD was right in wanting those players, you have to admire how he got them both in the first round, giving up the equivalent of a first and 2nd rounder for both players.

Could not have said it better!

SOCALORADO.
05-03-2010, 12:24 PM
Based on what?

Look, i am just repeating what Tebow said, em kay?
And with a winning % like his, its gotta be true.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 01:01 PM
A proven franchise QB I hope to God you're not talking about Cutler.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 01:03 PM
I agree. I think some of the moves might have been questionable, for instance only time will tell if picking character (Thomas) over talent (Bryant), will pan out. I know McD says that they had Thomas as the higher rated WR, but you have to wonder if it was tainted by wanting to pick a squeaky clean WR to replace Marshall.

No, it's really very simple. The X receiver needs deep speed to stretch the defense. Bryant, like Marshall, was too slow for that role. Thomas has the speed and height you want there, hence why he was chosen over Bryant.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 01:08 PM
No, it's really very simple. The X receiver needs deep speed to stretch the defense. Bryant, like Marshall, was too slow for that role. Thomas has the speed and height you want there, hence why he was chosen over Bryant.

No that's not the simple reason.

1. He chose Thomas because he had hole to fill.

2. Thomas has no character issues.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 01:14 PM
No that's not the simple reason.

1. He chose Thomas because he had hole to fill. That's what I said. :D


2. Thomas has no character issues. Yeah, but Bryant's "character" issues were blown out of proportion and I'm pretty confident that if he fit the role we needed to fill, McD would have taken him.

claymore
05-03-2010, 01:17 PM
Bryant had heart issues too. That shit would scare me especially in Denver with the altitude. But I am a worry wart with Broncos injuries/heart issues.

T.K.O.
05-03-2010, 01:17 PM
What proven franchise qb was dealt?:confused:

i was just waiting to see if anyone had pointed out the artcle has no basis in fact when statements such as this exist in it !
thanx for taking care of that:laugh:

T.K.O.
05-03-2010, 01:24 PM
bryant got hurt at rookie mini's yesterday....not bad but apparantly hobbled

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 01:31 PM
That's what I said. :D

Yeah, but Bryant's "character" issues were blown out of proportion and I'm pretty confident that if he fit the role we needed to fill, McD would have taken him.

That's not what you said. You said that McDaniel chose him because he faster than Bryant and you also that X has have elite speed. That a false notion because you don't have elite speed to get deep.

If and when you become of McDaniels staff then you might know why he chose Thomas over Bryant but until then you're just guessing. Until then I'll by the evidence of the picks and what we about them.

You have been watching Marshall the past three year you don't speed to get deep. And not yac, I'm talking about where he initially catches the ball.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 01:43 PM
That's not what you said. You said that McDaniel chose him because he faster than Bryant and you also that X has have elite speed. That a false notion because you don't have elite speed to get deep. Yeah you do, and McDaniels said as much around draft time. The X receiver needs that deep speed to stretch the offense. It's what Moss did in New England and why we used Royal there despite him being far too short for the role.


If and when you become of McDaniels staff then you might know why he chose Thomas over Bryant but until then you're just guessing. I don't need to be part of the staff to see the logic in these moves. Not only has McD been very forthcoming about what he is looking for at certain positions but there are previous bodies of work (both his and other coaches) in this offense that we can reference.

X receiver: Needs to be tall and fast. Both Thomas and Bryant have the height, only one has elite speed, and that is the one we selected. Was a hole for all of 2009.

Hence it's easy to draw the conclusion the Thomas was drafted because he fit the X receiver role.


Until I'll by the evidence of the picks and what we about them. Can I get that in English please? :tsk:

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 01:51 PM
Yeah you do, and McDaniels said as much around draft time. The X receiver needs that deep speed to stretch the offense. It's what Moss did in New England and why we used Royal there despite him being far too short for the role.

I don't need to be part of the staff to see the logic in these moves. Not only has McD been very forthcoming about what he is looking for at certain positions but there are previous bodies of work (both his and other coaches) in this offense that we can reference.

X receiver: Needs to be tall and fast. Both Thomas and Bryant have the height, only one has elite speed, and that is the one we selected. Was a hole for all of 2009.

Hence it's easy to draw the conclusion the Thomas was drafted because he fit the X receiver role.

Can I get that in English please? :tsk:

Where did he say that Marshall didn't have the speed to get deep? As I said you haven't been watching Marshall if you don't think he can deep. It benefit you greatly to actually watch the game.

Yes you would have to be apart of his staff to know exactly why he chose Thomas over Bryant otherwise it's you grasping at straws. Thanks for playing.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 02:07 PM
Where did he say that Marshall didn't have the speed to get deep? Does the fact that he gave Marshall almost zero time at the X spot count?


As I said you haven't been watching Marshall if you don't think he can deep. It benefit you greatly to actually watch the game. Anyone can go deep, even slower tight ends, given enough time. Someone with elite speed can do it much faster, which is a very big benefit to stretching the defense.


Yes you would have to be apart of his staff to know exactly why he chose Thomas over Bryant otherwise it's you grasping at straws. Thanks for playing. Wrong again. It's very simple. X receiver needs deep speed, Bryant doesn't have it, hence he wasn't picked. I'm sorry that you can't understand it but that is exactly what happened.

For the record I was saying this here before the draft ever happened.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 02:21 PM
Does the fact that he gave Marshall almost zero time at the X spot count?

Anyone can go deep, even slower tight ends, given enough time. Someone with elite speed can do it much faster, which is a very big benefit to stretching the defense.

Wrong again. It's very simple. X receiver needs deep speed, Bryant doesn't have it, hence he wasn't picked. I'm sorry that you can't understand it but that is exactly what happened.

For the record I was saying this here before the draft ever happened.

Ah no it wouldn't count because you don't know what he assigned Marshall as. You're guess that's all you're doing. When you come up with actual proof rather than pulling stuff out of your rear end let me know.

I don't give a damn if you said it before the draft let me hear it from McDaniels then I'll believe you know what hell you're talking about.

Lonestar
05-03-2010, 02:34 PM
I guess I don't understand folks for critizing Josh for picking Thomas over bryant.

They brought both guys in and based on their judgement Thomas fit their plans better.

Nothing more or less. Just as BM would not conform to club rules. They decided that bryant would not fit as well as Thomas would.

Who is more talented BM and he did not make the cut.

Just because someone is supposedly more talented does not make them the end all.

I have worked with folks that I would have never hire andf while they did a good to great job they caused issues with the rest of the group.

When I became the guy making people decisions I made sure they would fit in and those that did not got shipped out to other locations or gone altogether.

IIRC thomas had more speed than BM did and Decker is a true posseion guy who runs great routes and flat does not drop passes.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bosco
05-03-2010, 03:32 PM
Ah no it wouldn't count because you don't know what he assigned Marshall as. You're joking right? Do you not think we can't watch what's happening on the field and be able to figure out who is playing what receiver position?

Shazam!
05-03-2010, 05:10 PM
I guess I don't understand folks for critizing Josh for picking Thomas over bryant...

Denver couldve drafter John Elway, Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Tom Nalen out of a time machine and McDaniels would still get criticized for it.

C'mon Jr. You know better! :)

arapaho2
05-03-2010, 05:22 PM
Denver couldve drafter John Elway, Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Tom Nalen out of a time machine and McDaniels would still get criticized for it.

C'mon Jr. You know better! :)

or mcd could draft the beer guy from the stadium for wr...the wino on the corner for a pass rusher..and his fat neighbor jimbo for center and all you guys would be all over his nuts bragging on what a brilliant draft

come on man you know this

Tned
05-03-2010, 05:25 PM
Denver couldve drafter John Elway, Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Tom Nalen out of a time machine and McDaniels would still get criticized for it.

C'mon Jr. You know better! :)

I love the way the guys playing the "McDaniels hater" card completely ignore the fact that some of the biggest critics of his draft picks have been the pro-McDaniels crowd.

P.S. FWIW, only two of those four players were drafted by the Denver Broncos.

Shazam!
05-03-2010, 05:32 PM
or mcd could draft the beer guy from the stadium for wr...the wino on the corner for a pass rusher..and his fat neighbor jimbo for center and all you guys would be all over his nuts bragging on what a brilliant draft

come on man you know this

No, I don't know this.

I know when I think he deserves criticism when it's fair I'll give it. There was a Thread here about if he'd trade up to the top 6 in the Draft, and if that was the case, Id have been absolutely FURIOUS and would never forgive that. Watch how fast Id have turned into the 'haters camp' if that happened.

Im not quick to condemn him until he's done what he wants and it clearly didnt work. Cutler or Marshall didnt want to be here, so Im all for them being elsewhere. Now that he is stocked with his guys, we'll see what happens and if TT actually develops in a possible franchise QB. If there arent results, I'll be the first to call for his firing. Since I realize this team was getting shit on every other week and a change was needed, I didnt espect this to happen overnight.

...perhaps you disagree with the players selected (notably Tebow) but McD had a brilliant draft and fielded many needs.

Shazam!
05-03-2010, 05:36 PM
I love the way the guys playing the "McDaniels hater" card completely ignore the fact that some of the biggest critics of his draft picks have been the pro-McDaniels crowd.

Actually, some of the ones in your cabal who've shit all over McD for months have finally calmed some and are actually on board with TT.


P.S. FWIW, only two of those four players were drafted by the Denver Broncos.

Thank you for a history lesson on the Broncos that I didnt need because I am well aware of their origins. Their draft positions werent the point TNed and you know it. It was their names as heroes in Broncos lore.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 05:41 PM
Denver couldve drafter John Elway, Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Tom Nalen out of a time machine and McDaniels would still get criticized for it.

C'mon Jr. You know better! :)

There are few people who have made some critical comments but for the most part I think most people are cautiously optimistic.

Tned
05-03-2010, 05:47 PM
Actually, some of the ones in your cabal who've shit all over McD for months have finally calmed some and are actually on board with TT.

Thank you for a history lesson on the Broncos that I didnt need because I am well aware of their origins. Their draft positions werent the point TNed and you know it. It was their names as heroes in Broncos lore.

And you 'know' that I am not in any McDaniels hater 'cabal'. Search my posts, I have criticized him for a handful of decisions/moves, but praised him for far more and have said I hope he is the coach for the next 14+ years.

Some people make very broad strokes with their 'hater' brush.

As to Tebow, as I have said, some of the biggest critics of his draft picks have not been from who you label 'haters', but instead people that have been very pro-McDaniels. Therefore, it doesn't really make sense to disqualify all criticism of the draft as just guys that hate McDaniels going on with their hating.

This is coming from someone that neither hates McDaniels nor hated the draft.

GEM
05-03-2010, 05:53 PM
It seems to be getting a bit personal in here, so I'm asking a few to stick to the thread topic and not be insulting to each other in the process.

arapaho2
05-03-2010, 06:15 PM
No, I don't know this.

I know when I think he deserves criticism when it's fair I'll give it. There was a Thread here about if he'd trade up to the top 6 in the Draft, and if that was the case, Id have been absolutely FURIOUS and would never forgive that. Watch how fast Id have turned into the 'haters camp' if that happened.

Im not quick to condemn him until he's done what he wants and it clearly didnt work. Cutler or Marshall didnt want to be here, so Im all for them being elsewhere. Now that he is stocked with his guys, we'll see what happens and if TT actually develops in a possible franchise QB. If there arent results, I'll be the first to call for his firing. Since I realize this team was getting shit on every other week and a change was needed, I didnt espect this to happen overnight.

...perhaps you disagree with the players selected (notably Tebow) but McD had a brilliant draft and fielded many needs.


so saying people who think the draft wasnt a brilliant stroke of genious ...wouldnt be happy or would find fault with mcd drafting players like elway is perfectly fine...but reversing it...somehow gets your panties in a knot

sounds hypocritical to me

Bosco
05-03-2010, 06:16 PM
No I don't think you're that swift. Prove it that you know exactly who is designated what. You talk a big game but you can't back it up with actual proof can you?

For what? You've clearly demonstrated that you lack even the most rudimentary knowledge of anything to do with football, and I'm not going to waste my time digging around to find proof for every statement of mine that you doubt.

Start bringing some real debate and then we'll talk.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 06:25 PM
You're joking right? Do you not think we can't watch what's happening on the field and be able to figure out who is playing what receiver position?

No I'm not joking. You would have be apart of McDaniels staff to know which players are designated to what roles in the offense. If you're going to insist that you know give me some real proof.

Lets get back to the exercise actually started. You are also insisting Thomas was drafted for his speed, again prove it. You've drawn some conclusions based on what you see, that's still not proof, it's a guess. As you admited you don't need elite speed to get deep.

Both Thomas and Tebow both are seen as high charcacter, hard working, and intelligent. We know that McDaniels puts a high premium on those things because he said it many times over.

TXBRONC
05-03-2010, 06:26 PM
For what? You've clearly demonstrated that you lack even the most rudimentary knowledge of anything to do with football, and I'm not going to waste my time digging around to find proof for every statement of mine that you doubt.

Start bringing some real debate and then we'll talk.

Translation: I can't prove it.

Bosco
05-03-2010, 06:28 PM
Translation: I can't prove it.

Whatever makes you feel better son.

Tned
05-03-2010, 06:31 PM
It seems to be getting a bit personal in here, so I'm asking a few to stick to the thread topic and not be insulting to each other in the process.

Just in case you guys missed Gem's post.

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
05-03-2010, 06:42 PM
Again, I think people are suffering from what is known as acute season-is-over-plantifactidimensial stress syndrome, where one develops a tendency to stress over little things while aggression mounts and is not released through good hearted cheering for football teams. In other words we miss watching football games and are mad.

GEM
05-03-2010, 10:24 PM
Again, I think people are suffering from what is known as acute season-is-over-plantifactidimensial stress syndrome, where one develops a tendency to stress over little things while aggression mounts and is not released through good hearted cheering for football teams. In other words we miss watching football games and are mad.


I think we're suffering some people's overinflated ego and lack of manners to be civil with one another. :laugh:

T.K.O.
05-04-2010, 12:05 PM
Again, I think people are suffering from what is known as acute season-is-over-plantifactidimensial stress syndrome, where one develops a tendency to stress over little things while aggression mounts and is not released through good hearted cheering for football teams. In other words we miss watching football games and are mad.

nice.......:D