PDA

View Full Version : The Denver Broncos Before the "Offensive" Experiment with the Offense



Tned
05-07-2008, 01:10 PM
How were the Denver Broncos doing before the "offensive" experiment with the offense?

Many fans looked at the AFCCG loss as time to hit the panic button, and unfortunately, in hindsight, the Broncos coaching staff did the same. We have been talking in the Ryan Torain thread about how (I believe, some don't agree) the Broncos made significant changes in their play calling, formations, etc. (offensive scheme) starting week 1 of 2006.

I thought it would be good to 'remind' all of us exactly what Denver had accomplished prior to the AFCCG loss and for them to realize that the over-reaction and misguided changes (Heimerdinger/Bates - offensive and defensive scheme changes in '06 (offense) and '07 (defense) ruined a pretty good run.

To start out, I thought I would recap how the Broncos ranked during the three years '03, '04 and '05 in some stats, prior to Heimerdinger changing the offensive scheme and play calling in week 1 of '06.

Most wins between '03 - '05

3rd 11 wins per season (NE & Ind tied for 1st w/ 12.7)

Most playoff appearances '03 - '05

Tied 1st 3 (tied for 1st w/ Indy, Sea & NE)

Total playoff games, playoff wins, winning %, Super Bowl Appearances and SB Wins '03 - '05

Playoff games: Tied 7th 4 (NE - 8, Car 7, Pit/Ind - 6)
Playoff Wins: Tied 7th 1 (NE - 7, Car/Pit 5)
Playoff Winning%: 14th 25% (NE 88%, Pit 83%, Car 71%)
Super Bowl Appearances: N/A (NE 2, 4 teams tied with 1 appearance)
Super Bowl Wins: N/A 2 (NE 3, Pitt -1)

General observations about the three year period '03 - '05

There are 32 teams in the NFL.

Of those:

Denver is ONE of only FOUR teams to make the playoffs each of the three years
Denver is one of only 13 teams to win at least one playoff game during those 3 years. Six teams of the 32 had more than one playoff win over the three year period.
Denver is ONE of only THREE teams in the NFL to have 33 or more regular season wins in the three years from '03 - '05.

LordTrychon
05-07-2008, 01:28 PM
Great thread, Tned.


I get so sick of hearing about the number of playoff wins...


No appreciation for the organization's ability to constantly compete at a high level. That's a rare thing and something to admire. Shanny can rebuild a team and go no worse than 7-9. Damn impressive. :salute:

Ziggy
05-07-2008, 01:35 PM
Great thread, Tned.


I get so sick of hearing about the number of playoff wins...


No appreciation for the organization's ability to constantly compete at a high level. That's a rare thing and something to admire. Shanny can rebuild a team and go no worse than 7-9. Damn impressive. :salute:

Actually he went 6-10 in 1999. You make a great point Tned. The problem is, that Denver was using smoke and mirrors to get to the playoffs and were exposed when they got there. They never had a chance at winning a Super Bowl with those teams. Most may disagree with me on that, but oh well.

I would still rather lose in the playoffs than not get there at all, but sooner or later you still have to fix what doesn't work. In Denver, if you aren't winning the Super Bowl, it isnt working. We can thank Pat Bowlen and Mike Shanahan for that kind of mindset. I for one, am a fan of it.

LordTrychon
05-07-2008, 01:40 PM
Actually he went 6-10 in 1999. You make a great point Tned. The problem is, that Denver was using smoke and mirrors to get to the playoffs and were exposed when they got there. They never had a chance at winning a Super Bowl with those teams. Most may disagree with me on that, but oh well.

I would still rather lose in the playoffs than not get there at all, but sooner or later you still have to fix what doesn't work. In Denver, if you aren't winning the Super Bowl, it isnt working. We can thank Pat Bowlen and Mike Shanahan for that kind of mindset. I for one, am a fan of it.

:laugh:

Touche...

I was merely referring to the current state of the team and my belief that we'll be better next year... fair point though. ;)

lex
05-07-2008, 01:43 PM
This is a good thread. I think there are various instances where we overreacted to something that happened in the playoffs.

tubby
05-07-2008, 02:09 PM
Jake Plummer rules

Tned
05-07-2008, 04:13 PM
Actually he went 6-10 in 1999. You make a great point Tned. The problem is, that Denver was using smoke and mirrors to get to the playoffs and were exposed when they got there. They never had a chance at winning a Super Bowl with those teams. Most may disagree with me on that, but oh well.

I would still rather lose in the playoffs than not get there at all, but sooner or later you still have to fix what doesn't work. In Denver, if you aren't winning the Super Bowl, it isnt working. We can thank Pat Bowlen and Mike Shanahan for that kind of mindset. I for one, am a fan of it.

I think most agree with you. Incorrectly, IMO, but most agree. Following the AFCCG win, everyone was talking about how all the other teams now had a bluebrint to beat the Broncos, because Pitt dominated us. Then, the offensive game plan changed from the first snap of week 1, 2006 and that became "proof" for this blueprint that every team in the league had to now beat the Broncos, even though the previous three years they were topped only by NE and Indy in wins.

I think another way to look at it, besides blueprints and smoke/mirrors is matchups. We always matched up well against NE, but horribly against Indy. No surprise, due to their different offenses. Prior to the Bates debacle, we were solid against the run, but didn't matchup well against the Indy's wide open, spread offense. NE, who ran a very good, but less spread, more run/short pass offense, we fared well against.

Pitt, had a dominating defense, especially in '05, and the fact we could not establish the run or passing game against them meant we had not offense, and it was made worse by the fact we couldn't stop Big Ben on 3rd down in that game.

However, the part people fail to realize with the 'blueprint' theory, is there were very few defenses in the league we matched up as badly against as Pitt's dominating 3-4.

lex
05-07-2008, 04:26 PM
I think most agree with you. Incorrectly, IMO, but most agree. Following the AFCCG win, everyone was talking about how all the other teams now had a bluebrint to beat the Broncos, because Pitt dominated us. Then, the offensive game plan changed from the first snap of week 1, 2006 and that became "proof" for this blueprint that every team in the league had to now beat the Broncos, even though the previous three years they were topped only by NE and Indy in wins.

I think another way to look at it, besides blueprints and smoke/mirrors is matchups. We always matched up well against NE, but horribly against Indy. No surprise, due to their different offenses. Prior to the Bates debacle, we were solid against the run, but didn't matchup well against the Indy's wide open, spread offense. NE, who ran a very good, but less spread, more run/short pass offense, we fared well against.

Pitt, had a dominating defense, especially in '05, and the fact we could not establish the run or passing game against them meant we had not offense, and it was made worse by the fact we couldn't stop Big Ben on 3rd down in that game.

However, the part people fail to realize with the 'blueprint' theory, is there were very few defenses in the league we matched up as badly against as Pitt's dominating 3-4.

What I took from that Pitt game is that its yet another example of overreacting. We blitzed like crazy that year and it worked until Pittsburgh came up with a plan for it. Not only did we not adjust during the game but the following season we reacted by almost never blitzing. And then on plays where we would blitz Manning, we would send everyone or no one and in doing so, removed any challenge for Manning...he was never pressed to wonder where the blitz was coming from which is the whole problem that exists for him with the 3-4.

Another example of how we overreacted to a loss was when we decided we can get by with any RB and traded for Champ only to eventually realize that its great to have an elite CB but if your next other CBs are scrubs, its hard. So we used a first (Foster), a second (Bell) and a 2nd, and two 3rds in 2005 to find that second corner.

I dont know if anyone has noticed this also but we went from Griese to his polar opposite in Plummer.

Lonestar
05-07-2008, 05:48 PM
Great thread, Tned.


I get so sick of hearing about the number of playoff wins...


No appreciation for the organization's ability to constantly compete at a high level. That's a rare thing and something to admire. Shanny can rebuild a team and go no worse than 7-9. Damn impressive. :salute:


We do not know IF that is the worse he will do in the rebuild mode..
I suspect that next year will not be that good.

Goodness a year ago if you would have used that term you'd be shouted down, put in locks in the town square and probably stoned for whispering heretic comments..

Nature Boy
05-07-2008, 06:05 PM
You can blame the defense for the lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. We would have beat Seattle had we got past Pittsburgh. The following season, 2006, the Oline was decimated by injuries and Plummer was prematurely benched for a rook and we missed the playoffs because of it.

We had a good run from 03-05, but the team feel apart; have been rebuilding ever since. This season will be the 1st trial run of a broken team(thank Jim Bates) that I think is well on it's way. The O-line looks like it's been addressed and same for the D-line. Henry will be healthy and Cutler will be that much more better. I'm predicting an 11-5 season; can't be any worst than 7-9.

lex
05-07-2008, 07:23 PM
You can blame the defense for the lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. We would have beat Seattle had we got past Pittsburgh. The following season, 2006, the Oline was decimated by injuries and Plummer was prematurely benched for a rook and we missed the playoffs because of it.

We had a good run from 03-05, but the team feel apart; have been rebuilding ever since. This season will be the 1st trial run of a broken team(thank Jim Bates) that I think is well on it's way. The O-line looks like it's been addressed and same for the D-line. Henry will be healthy and Cutler will be that much more better. I'm predicting an 11-5 season; can't be any worst than 7-9.

What in his past gives that statement any credibility? And besides that, its not like he's even THAT great anyway. But in any case, you should really look at his injury history.

Nature Boy
05-07-2008, 07:34 PM
Lex, please refer to my signature. Thank You.

Nature Boy
05-07-2008, 07:35 PM
I hear Alexander is coming to Denver for a visit. You rather have him?

omac
05-07-2008, 08:49 PM
Excellent points, Tned and Ziggy. :salute:

People keep saying how we can't score rushing TDs within the red zone with our OL ... it was only 2005 when we had 25 rushing TDs. We were ranked #2 overall in rushing yardage, and our defense against the run was excellent. Even usually in our worst years, our rushing offense and defense have remained solid.

It's true, though, that we needed to make a change. We weren't going to the Superbowl with those teams. I, like most, over-reacted to Coyer and did not appreciate what he brought to our defense; I only looked at the weaknesses. Getting Bates turned out to be a HUGE step backwards that we're now trying to recover from.

I think instead of the coaching changes, the player changes which we've done, will eventually make this team win the Superbowl. The QB we have now can pass well in the pocket, yet is also excellent on the move ... that should allow for a wide variety of playcalling. We may have gotten the DEs to attack the QB ... well, we surely got one good one. We've upgraded the OL and the DL. We definitely upgraded our players. The only thing 05 has over our team now is dependable RBs; ours seem to always get injured. Maybe their kick return team was also better.

I've liked the makeup of this team since last season; too bad Javon didn't work out, that would've been a deadly. And I still think Henry can be the back we need. :cheers:

elsid13
05-07-2008, 08:58 PM
I disagree with the statement that the offense has change, it hasn't. Shanahan still runs his ball control offense around zone block scheme and passing game peppered with crossing patterns and Play Action. Dinger didn't change that, and won't change as long as Shanahan here.

What we have seen is evolution of the offense to go to more 3 WRs and 2 TE sets. That was done to balance out the 3/4 and zone blitz that are through out the league.

Scarface
05-07-2008, 10:13 PM
We were never going to win a Super Bowl with Jake Plummer. It just wasn't happening. The fact that we did so well with him is a testament to the coaching of Shanahan and Kubiak. If anything the experiment was the Jake Plummer era and I'm glad its over.

Tned
05-07-2008, 10:55 PM
We were never going to win a Super Bowl with Jake Plummer. It just wasn't happening. The fact that we did so well with him is a testament to the coaching of Shanahan and Kubiak. If anything the experiment was the Jake Plummer era and I'm glad its over.

So, Plummer was the experiment and the result was the team having the third most wins in the league over three years, but Heimerdinger changing the offense and bringing it crashing down both with Jake and Jay at the helm wasn't a failed experiment :confused:

I agree with your comment about Shanny and Kubiak, but where I think it falls down is that if Heimerdinger wasn't a failed experiment, than the offense should have gotten better and the team won more with the new additions on O and D.

Scarface
05-07-2008, 10:59 PM
It was never Heimerdinger's offense. Never. It's always been Shanny's offense.

Tned
05-07-2008, 11:03 PM
It was never Heimerdinger's offense. Never. It's always been Shanny's offense.

So Shannahan completely changed it between the AFCCG and Week 1 the next year and then two years later got rid of his assistant head coach - offense, who was hired to open up the passing game???

omac
05-08-2008, 03:48 AM
So Shannahan completely changed it between the AFCCG and Week 1 the next year and then two years later got rid of his assistant head coach - offense, who was hired to open up the passing game???

I guess the bottom line is, Shanny didn't believe we could win a superbowl with an offense that didn't have good pocket passing in it's arsenal. Who designed the passing game, or the whole offense, or who was the playcaller is difficult to tell. I, for one, didn't see any passing play that I could definitely say "this was from Heimerdinger, not Shanny". In the pocket passing, there were a lot of WCO stuff that Shanny already knew. Seemed like the bread and butter play of the pocket passing were the slants or screens or outs, stuff that didn't require a lot of time to develop, since our OL couldn't hold up that long. Most of the time, Jay would need to be on the move in order to buy himself time for the deeper passes.

I think Shanny believed it's important to become a good pocket passing team to go along with all the other plays. I do too. The Broncos are an offense-first team, not like the Ravens. We can't afford not to have a full arsenal of offensive plays.

Tned
05-08-2008, 07:00 AM
Seemed like the bread and butter play of the pocket passing were the slants or screens or outs, stuff that didn't require a lot of time to develop, since our OL couldn't hold up that long. Most of the time, Jay would need to be on the move in order to buy himself time for the deeper passes.

This is the key, of the problem, whether it was Shanny or Heimerdinger that was responsible in the change.

Week 1 2006 we had 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 26 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

Between the AFCCG and that game, Shanny brought in Heimerdinger as the Assistant head coach - Offense with the stated purpose of opening up the pass game. In week 1, 2006, there was a complete departure from the type play calling that had led to both passing and running success the previous three years.

This complete change conincided with Kubiak leaving, Heimerdinger coming in as head of the offense and Dennison being promoted to OC. So, whether it was Shanny's plays, Heimerdingers or Dennison's, it doesn't change the basic fact. The plays called and offensive scheme used, just did not suit the talent on the field.

Same problem we had with Bates last year. Not coincidentally, both Bates and Heimerdinger, our two assistant head coaches are no longer here.


I think Shanny believed it's important to become a good pocket passing team to go along with all the other plays. I do too. The Broncos are an offense-first team, not like the Ravens. We can't afford not to have a full arsenal of offensive plays.

Agreed, which is why the player moves (Cutler, Walker, Marshall, Scheffler, Graham, Clady, etc) were good to move in that direction. HOWEVER, believing it is important doesn't mean you should start calling the plays and running a scheme that your talent on the field is incapable of running.

Few will disagree that Jake's forte was not passing from the pocket and our offensive line (especially as it existed game 1 of 2006) was not capable of protecting the QB in a traditional pocket passing offense. YET, game 1 of 2006, 26 of the 29 pass plays called were 'traditional' pocket passing play calls, which put the offense in a position to fail. That same play calling was used all season long with the same o-line and with both Jay and Jake, and the offense failed miserably.

So, as I have said before, I don't disagree with the need to transform the offense, my points are two:


The people that say the offensive play calling DID NOT change in '06 and '07, either didn't watch the games or didn't WATCH the games.

Transormation takes time. Dinger and Bates both failed because they attempted to implement scheme changes BEFORE they had talent on the field that could run the schemes successfully. That resulted in two horrid seasons and the two of them moving on.

Scarface
05-08-2008, 09:01 AM
So Shannahan completely changed it between the AFCCG and Week 1 the next year and then two years later got rid of his assistant head coach - offense, who was hired to open up the passing game???

Limiting the amount of bootlegs isn't exactly completely changing the offense.

Kaylore
05-08-2008, 10:06 AM
So I guess this forum is a bunch of Plummer homers. I always wondered where you guys went.

The fact is that Plummer was the reason we lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. He was personally responsible for four of the turnovers. We had some breaks not go our way, but we were only down by ten in the third quarter and Plummer kept giving the Steelers the ball.

The following season the team was winning in spite of Plummer. His play was absolutely terrible in virtually every aspect. When the defense finally broke down we couldn't hide his stink any more and Shanahan made the choice in moving on. Yeah, the locker room took it as giving up on the season, but the play wasn't much different from Plummer to Cutler and at least Cutler had upside.

Mike
05-08-2008, 10:10 AM
So I guess this forum is a bunch of Plummer homers. I always wondered where you guys went.

The fact is that Plummer was the reason we lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. He was personally responsible for four of the turnovers. We had some breaks not go our way, but we were only down by ten in the third quarter and Plummer kept giving the Steelers the ball.

The following season the team was winning in spite of Plummer. His play was absolutely terrible in virtually every aspect. When the defense finally broke down we couldn't hide his stink any more and Shanahan made the choice in moving on. Yeah, the locker room took it as giving up on the season, but the play wasn't much different from Plummer to Cutler and at least Cutler had upside.

Definitely not a bunch of Plummer homers. His name rarely comes up around here...thank goodness.

When evaluating the changes from Shanahan/Kubiak to Shanahan/Dinger you have to look at the players though.

Kaylore
05-08-2008, 10:10 AM
Limiting the amount of bootlegs isn't exactly completely changing the offense.

:rolleyes:Yeah. Do you guys know why we limited the bootleg? We had no running game and it became obvious early on with no rushing attack that Plummer was a one-trick pony. The loses on the line and no legitimate running back made Plummer have to stay in the pocket. Plummer couldn't scare the safeties into staying back and the result is one of the worst offenses in Mike Shanahan history.

Now that we have a QB that can throw with accuracy over the middle of the field and who enjoys putting the time in Mon-Saturday, we can have a real offense that isn't gimmicky.

lex
05-08-2008, 11:00 AM
So I guess this forum is a bunch of Plummer homers. I always wondered where you guys went.

The fact is that Plummer was the reason we lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. He was personally responsible for four of the turnovers. We had some breaks not go our way, but we were only down by ten in the third quarter and Plummer kept giving the Steelers the ball.

The following season the team was winning in spite of Plummer. His play was absolutely terrible in virtually every aspect. When the defense finally broke down we couldn't hide his stink any more and Shanahan made the choice in moving on. Yeah, the locker room took it as giving up on the season, but the play wasn't much different from Plummer to Cutler and at least Cutler had upside.

Actually in the weeks leading up to the switch from Plummer to Cutler, our running game was in neutral and it was being talked about. The Plummer apologists were saying the running game was the reason for Plummers struggles but it was the other way around. Immediately after we inserted Cutler in the lineup, the running game opened up and the discussion of our non-existent running game ceased. Its not like it was great after that but it was far better than it had been in the weeks leading up to Plummers demotion. Eventually we werent able to work around Plummer and it was affecting the running game. If our OLine hadnt been in a slow state of erosion, our running game may have been able to compensate for Jakes shortcomings. But either way, there was an obvious difference in the offense after Jay became the starter.

underrated29
05-08-2008, 11:05 AM
also dont forget we had Tbell toting the rock. In our system we need someone like him to tote it 10-15 times, not full time.

Mike bell as you all know eventually stole the show and brought some power and tackle breaking to our game, and even though i like him, he was just a fill in until we could get some good runners back here.

So the running game, even though it might have improved some after wards as lex said. Still wasnt near what OUR running game is usually like, and therefore imo still sucked.

Kaylore
05-08-2008, 11:09 AM
Actually in the weeks leading up to the switch from Plummer to Cutler, our running game was in neutral and it was being talked about. The Plummer apologists were saying the running game was the reason for Plummers struggles but it was the other way around. Immediately after we inserted Cutler in the lineup, the running game opened up and the discussion of our non-existent running game ceased. Its not like it was great after that but it was far better than it had been in the weeks leading up to Plummers demotion. Eventually we werent able to work around Plummer and it was affecting the running game. If our OLine hadnt been in a slow state of erosion, our running game may have been able to compensate for Jakes shortcomings. But either way, there was an obvious difference in the offense after Jay became the starter.

I think that was the point I was trying to make. The safeties would load the box and Plummer could never beat them because his accuracy from the pocket is atrocious and all he does is throw picks when he throws over the middle of the field.

lex
05-08-2008, 11:22 AM
I think that was the point I was trying to make. The safeties would load the box and Plummer could never beat them because his accuracy from the pocket is atrocious and all he does is throw picks when he throws over the middle of the field.

Yup. Not only the safeties but the defense would flow in the direction of the bootleg. Denver countered this with that deep pass across the field because it would often be open. But you cant build an offense around that one deep ball across the field. In addition to that deep ball its also worth pointing out that Denver scored on a reverse play with Javon Walker vs New England. Its not like Denver didnt know what was going on and not trying to counter the defenses inclination to focus on Jakes limitations.

Dreadnought
05-08-2008, 11:22 AM
You can blame the defense for the lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. We would have beat Seattle had we got past Pittsburgh. The following season, 2006, the Oline was decimated by injuries and Plummer was prematurely benched for a rook and we missed the playoffs because of it...

We weren't making the Playoffs in '06 with or without Plummer. That defense came apart like a cheap suit from the Colts game on; our overall defensive stats for the season look OK in retrospect because it played so well weeks 1 - 6 or so, but they were a complete mess by the end of the Year, and a stiff like Plummer was never going to be able to compensate for that. Smoke and Mirrors sums it up pretty well for that era.

The fact that Bates was a disaster doesn't change the fact that the Broncos defense had already begun to implode before he got here. He just took a bad situation and made it worse.

Kaylore
05-08-2008, 12:29 PM
Yup. Not only the safeties but the defense would flow in the direction of the bootleg. Denver countered this with that deep pass across the field because it would often be open. But you cant build an offense around that one deep ball across the field. In addition to that deep ball its also worth pointing out that Denver scored on a reverse play with Javon Walker vs New England. Its not like Denver didnt know what was going on and not trying to counter the defenses inclination to focus on Jakes limitations.

It's not so much flow as the DE's would play contain on every play. You go back and watch and they don't even rush. They just contain and Jake had nowhere to go.

lex
05-08-2008, 12:55 PM
It's not so much flow as the DE's would play contain on every play. You go back and watch and they don't even rush. They just contain and Jake had nowhere to go.

Look at the LBs and the DBs. They were daring him to throw it across the field. They were ok with giving him the deep pass to the left when he was rolling out to his right.

TXBRONC
05-08-2008, 05:19 PM
This is the key, of the problem, whether it was Shanny or Heimerdinger that was responsible in the change.

Week 1 2006 we had 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 26 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

Between the AFCCG and that game, Shanny brought in Heimerdinger as the Assistant head coach - Offense with the stated purpose of opening up the pass game. In week 1, 2006, there was a complete departure from the type play calling that had led to both passing and running success the previous three years.

This complete change conincided with Kubiak leaving, Heimerdinger coming in as head of the offense and Dennison being promoted to OC. So, whether it was Shanny's plays, Heimerdingers or Dennison's, it doesn't change the basic fact. The plays called and offensive scheme used, just did not suit the talent on the field.

Same problem we had with Bates last year. Not coincidentally, both Bates and Heimerdinger, our two assistant head coaches are no longer here.



Agreed, which is why the player moves (Cutler, Walker, Marshall, Scheffler, Graham, Clady, etc) were good to move in that direction. HOWEVER, believing it is important doesn't mean you should start calling the plays and running a scheme that your talent on the field is incapable of running.

Few will disagree that Jake's forte was not passing from the pocket and our offensive line (especially as it existed game 1 of 2006) was not capable of protecting the QB in a traditional pocket passing offense. YET, game 1 of 2006, 26 of the 29 pass plays called were 'traditional' pocket passing play calls, which put the offense in a position to fail. That same play calling was used all season long with the same o-line and with both Jay and Jake, and the offense failed miserably.

So, as I have said before, I don't disagree with the need to transform the offense, my points are two:


The people that say the offensive play calling DID NOT change in '06 and '07, either didn't watch the games or didn't WATCH the games.

Transormation takes time. Dinger and Bates both failed because they attempted to implement scheme changes BEFORE they had talent on the field that could run the schemes successfully. That resulted in two horrid seasons and the two of them moving on.


Yes the play calling changed however I started think a little about this I really don't that is reason offense sputtered.

I went looked back at Jay's statst to date and they are very good.

Passing Stats
YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
2006 DEN 5 81 137 59.1 1001 7.3 9 71 5 88.5

2007 DEN 16 297 467 63.6 3497 7.5 20 68 14 88.1

Career 21 378 604 62.6 4498 7.4 29 71 19 88.2

Looking at his stats there are other factors that I think should factor into the equation. The running game wasn't as strong as it had been in previous years, injuries, and inexperience all played very large roles in the ineffectiveness of the offense.

elsid13
05-08-2008, 05:23 PM
Yes the play calling changed however I started think a little about this I really don't that is reason offense sputtered.

I went looked back at Jay's statst to date and they are very good.

Passing Stats
YEAR TEAM G CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT
2006 DEN 5 81 137 59.1 1001 7.3 9 71 5 88.5

2007 DEN 16 297 467 63.6 3497 7.5 20 68 14 88.1

Career 21 378 604 62.6 4498 7.4 29 71 19 88.2

Looking at his stats there are other factors that I think should factor into the equation. The running game wasn't as strong as it had been in previous years, injuries, and inexperience all played very large roles in the ineffectiveness of the offense.


They are really good when consider he dropped 40 pounds, lost strength and his blood suger was out of whack.

Dreadnought
05-08-2008, 06:21 PM
They are really good when consider he dropped 40 pounds, lost strength and his blood suger was out of whack.

His 06 Stats are far better than Jake's were, but by the time of the switch our defense had collapsed and our running game was running out of steam as well. Jay turned over the ball a bit too much in 06, but for a Rookie he was damned good most of the time. We weren't going to the playoffs regardless, and were just seeing the first signs of the mess we had on our hands last year.

I'm really hoping that the diagnosis and treatment of his Diabetes will pay off in 08. Jay played pretty well in 07 even without accounting for his health issues.

TXBRONC
05-08-2008, 07:19 PM
His 06 Stats are far better than Jake's were, but by the time of the switch our defense had collapsed and our running game was running out of steam as well. Jay turned over the ball a bit too much in 06, but for a Rookie he was damned good most of the time. We weren't going to the playoffs regardless, and were just seeing the first signs of the mess we had on our hands last year.

I'm really hoping that the diagnosis and treatment of his Diabetes will pay off in 08. Jay played pretty well in 07 even without accounting for his health issues.

Jay should return to full strength shortly. The only thing they have figure out is how to handle the certain dip in his blood sugar when he starts exerting himself during games.

Tned
05-08-2008, 07:35 PM
So I guess this forum is a bunch of Plummer homers. I always wondered where you guys went.

The fact is that Plummer was the reason we lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. He was personally responsible for four of the turnovers. We had some breaks not go our way, but we were only down by ten in the third quarter and Plummer kept giving the Steelers the ball.

The following season the team was winning in spite of Plummer. His play was absolutely terrible in virtually every aspect. When the defense finally broke down we couldn't hide his stink any more and Shanahan made the choice in moving on. Yeah, the locker room took it as giving up on the season, but the play wasn't much different from Plummer to Cutler and at least Cutler had upside.

No, Broncos homers. Might be a minor distinction to some, but a difference none the less. As I have stated, my issue isn't with a move to Jay, I think drafting him was great. However, putting Jay, Jake or the Oline in a scheme or calling plays that they don't have the talent to execute is something I have a major problem with.

Tned
05-08-2008, 07:38 PM
:rolleyes:Yeah. Do you guys know why we limited the bootleg? We had no running game and it became obvious early on with no rushing attack that Plummer was a one-trick pony. The loses on the line and no legitimate running back made Plummer have to stay in the pocket. Plummer couldn't scare the safeties into staying back and the result is one of the worst offenses in Mike Shanahan history.

Now that we have a QB that can throw with accuracy over the middle of the field and who enjoys putting the time in Mon-Saturday, we can have a real offense that isn't gimmicky.

That sounds good in theory, and I know you are a student of the game, based on your camp reports, but where your analysis fails is that the limited bootlegs and turn to pocket passing and traditional play action occurred immediately in week 1 of 2006. It could not have been a reaction to no running game in 2006, when the team came out from the first play with a pocket passing game plan.

Kaylore
05-08-2008, 11:20 PM
That sounds good in theory, and I know you are a student of the game, based on your camp reports, but where your analysis fails is that the limited bootlegs and turn to pocket passing and traditional play action occurred immediately in week 1 of 2006. It could not have been a reaction to no running game in 2006, when the team came out from the first play with a pocket passing game plan.

Sorry but you're off on this. You don't remember the Rams game? How many times was Cutler sacked when he rolled out in that game? They even started blitzing cornerbacks to him. That was pretty much what set the tone for the rest of the season.

Tned
05-08-2008, 11:34 PM
Sorry but you're off on this. You don't remember the Rams game? How many times was Cutler sacked when he rolled out in that game? They even started blitzing cornerbacks to him. That was pretty much what set the tone for the rest of the season.

Actually I do remember the Rams game, I just disagree as to when the tone was set. It was set before the first snap.

The Broncos only attempted one rollout in the entire first half. Jake was sacked by an uncovered DB on his only rollout attempt in the first half, when a DB came up to the line, and no adjustment was made to cover him (no TE or back even attempted to pick the DB up). Jake was sacked as he just started to turn away from the play fake.

Other than that, the entire first half was pocket passing calls. In the second half, they called two rollouts (and he threw two picks). One pick was the infamous Devoe floater and the other was one where Rod was actually interfered with, but no call was made. So, something like 29 passing plays called in the game, 3 rollouts. ONLY once did jake get contained when attempting to boot, and that was with the uncovered DB.

No question the results of those three boot attempts were not good, especially the two picks, but there is no way you can say that the defense dictated the play calling in that game, as it was clear from the first series that the play calling was going to be predominantly pocket passing and tradition, straight drop play actions.

The game was made worse by the two or three fumbles in the first half.

I broke down every pass play in the game (short drop, deep drop, boot, etc.) and will post it in a sec. So, I definitely remember that game, because I remember how pissed I was after it that they were calling plays that put Jake in a position where he didn't play good (in the pocket) and put the line in a position they didn't play well (straight pass blocking).

Don't get me wrong, I love the fact the team has been transforming over the last several years (Cutler, Walker, Marshal, Scheffler, Dumervil, Clady, etc.), my only issue is when the play calling changed BEFORE the new talent was on the field and capable of executing the new schemes. Same thing happened last year with the defense. Bates attempted to implement his defense in a cookie cutter approach, regardless of whether the talent on the field supported it.

I am a proponent of calling plays and utilizing schemes that get the most out of the talent on the field, which means focusing on what they do well, not just what the coach thinks in "theory" is the best offensive scheme to run.

Tned
05-08-2008, 11:39 PM
Sorry but you're off on this. You don't remember the Rams game? How many times was Cutler sacked when he rolled out in that game? They even started blitzing cornerbacks to him. That was pretty much what set the tone for the rest of the season.

Here, I posted this a couple days ago. It is important to understand, I am not a Jake home or trying to glorify him, instead I am trying to point out the difference in play calling from Kubiak's last season to the next game, which was when assistant head coach -- offense, Heimerdinger, was supposed to bring a new dimension to our pass game.

IMO, there was a drastic difference in play calling from the first series of the first game of '06, so therefore those that say the defenses 'dictated' the changes are off base, unless the opposing defenses happened to be drawing up the offensive game plans with Heimerdinger prior to the season starting.

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

Ok, I was curious, so I went and checked my mania posts following week 1, 2006. I did a play by play breakdown of the game:


1. drop back, pass to Alexander left.
2. drop back, pass to Walker left sideline
3. drop back, pass intended for Scheffler, over back shoulder/behind him- incomplete
x sack given up by foster.
4. drop back, in defenders grasp, left handed underhand toss to M. bell completed
5. play action drop, over middle to Smith
x drop back, sack (beat mike Bell) - fumble
6. drop back, under pressure and back peddling, intended for Smith, intercepted, Smith had no play on ball
x. Playaction, boot leg left, sacked by unblocked DB.
7. Screen pass to M. Bell to right side.
8. Play action, straight drop, hit Smith at right numbers
9. screen to left, M. Bell
10. play action, straight drop, screen to Scheffler to left
11. straight drop, under pressure, spins out of sack, hits Alexander near left sideline

End of half Summary

Plummer 9-11 94 0/1 (td/ind) 64.4 (rating)
3 sacks
9 completions, all but one was well placed for receiver (the left handed flip was both ill advised and high)
2 incompletions, both bad throws (one was behind Scheffler, the other was intercepted and Smith had no play on the ball)
1 fumble (sack, Plummer never looked in direction of rusher and never saw the hit coming)


12. short drop, pass intended for Walker at left numbers on slant, throw low and off walkers hands
13. straight drop, short lob intended for walker on sideline who jumped over defender, pass bounced out of hands and off face mask, a little long.
14. short drop, pass intended for walker near left numbers on slant, pass hit Walker in hands and dropped.
x. straight drop, sacked by three defenders before reaching his 5 step drop point.
15. short drop. Short pass intended for Smith near left numbers, badly overthrown, no chance of being caught. (appeared to be mixup on what route was being run).
16. STraight drop, pass intended for Smith at right sideline, thrown behind smith
17. straight drop, screen pass to M. Bell to left side.
18. Short drop, short lob to left sideline, catch made over back of defender (PI declined), pass was high.
19. Play action straight drop, converted to rollout because of pressure, throw intended for Scheffler who was interfered with and knocked off his feet, but flag was picked up with claim that defender was also going for ball. Pass appeared to be offline, but no good camera angle to tell if it was catchable if Scheffler hadn't had his feet cut out from underneath him.
20. Bootleg right, Devoe seperates from defender and is wide open on left side of field coming across middle, Jake throws high, floating 40 yard pass over Devoe and intercepted at 5 yard line.
21. Straight drop, lob pass intended for Smith at right sideline, pass a little long/high, and off Smiths fingers as it was batted away by defender running in stride with Smith.
22. Straight drop, pass to Smith at near left numbers on short curl route, slightly high (reach up, no jump)
23. Straight drop, throwin while back peddling because of pressure, pass intended for Walker, low and in front of Walker, who dove but the ball bounced.
x24x. Straight drop, pass intended for Walker on left sideline, lob pass, knocked away by defender, PI called.
24. Straight drop, screen attempt to T. Bell on right side, pass high and off Tatum's one outstretched hand.
25. short drop, pass to Walker between right numbers and hash mark on right side, pass hit Walker in stride.
26. Bootleg left, pass intended for Smith near left numbers, who was covered by defender. Defender tips ball which is intercepted by another defender.

Second half summary:

11 incompletions, of those:
1 dead on target, but dropped
2 slightly off target, but very catchable
5 poorly thrown, catchable with good to great effort by receiver (one INT)
2 impossible for receiver to catch (one INT)
1 not known (catch where Scheff was interfered with, but flag picked up, it is impossible to tell if ball was catchable from camer angles available).

4 completions, of those:
2 on target
2 slightly off target

First half 13 of the 14 pass attempts were straight drop backs or drop back play actions. They attempted ONE bootleg in the first half and their was a blown coverage assignment where an unblocked DB came free right at Jake and sacked him as Jake was just turning from the play action (after reading the play by play, I remembered that).

Second half 13 of 15 pass attempts were straight drop backs or play action, straight drop backs, two boots in the half.

For the game. 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 25 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

The defense didn't dictate the game, the Broncos CHANGED their offensive play calling from what was successful the three previous years.

Kaylore
05-09-2008, 12:17 PM
They didn't ask Plummer to do anything in that game that he hadn't done the seasons before. The reason we threw at them is their corners are total junk. There were definitely some just bad news bears moments like Walker dropping what would have been a TD and our line being out of rhythm all game. However the defense kept us alive.

Plummer was the reason we lost that game. He kept turning the ball over. You will say "we should have rolled out more." After watching the Steelers game tape, every team in the league had their ends play contain and this was no different. At some point you can't say the coaches are at fault because your QB sucks so bad he can't play football like a QB is supposed to. You need a QB to throw from the pocket with at least average ability. It's ok to be good outside the pocket, but if that's all you can do you will fail as a QB. That is what Plummer was: a one trick pony.

What pisses me off is he had good games in the pocket. 2005 at home against the Chargers he was in the pocket the whole game and carved them up. That same year he stayed in the pocket and killed Jacksonville on the road when they were the number one pass defense in the league. It's not that he wasn't capable, it's that Plummer didn't care enough to try Mon-Sat.

Nickademus
05-09-2008, 01:32 PM
You can blame the defense for the lost to the Steelers in the AFCCG. We would have beat Seattle had we got past Pittsburgh. The following season, 2006, the Oline was decimated by injuries and Plummer was prematurely benched for a rook and we missed the playoffs because of it.
We had a good run from 03-05, but the team feel apart; have been rebuilding ever since. This season will be the 1st trial run of a broken team(thank Jim Bates) that I think is well on it's way. The O-line looks like it's been addressed and same for the D-line. Henry will be healthy and Cutler will be that much more better. I'm predicting an 11-5 season; can't be any worst than 7-9.

Seriously take off the rose colored glasses when you look back at that season. Plumber got benched because he was playing like crap. It was almost like he lost his confidence in the AFCCG then Shanny decided to go get the QB of the future in the offseason, and Jake instead of maning up and compeating mailed in the season untill we were forced to pull him and start Jay.

Kaylore
05-09-2008, 01:48 PM
Seriously take off the rose colored glasses when you look back at that season. Plumber got benched because he was playing like crap. It was almost like he lost his confidence in the AFCCG then Shanny decided to go get the QB of the future in the offseason, and Jake instead of maning up and compeating mailed in the season untill we were forced to pull him and start Jay.

Exactly. Shanahan did everything he could to keep Plummer afloat. Shanahan even got Walker and Scheffler to help in the pass game that year. Drew Brees had a career year when new competition came in. Plummer folded like a tent. I see people blame it on scheme, on Shanahan hating on him, even on the media. Plummer played his way out of the starting spot and that's the bottom line.

Tned
05-09-2008, 01:48 PM
They didn't ask Plummer to do anything in that game that he hadn't done the seasons before. The reason we threw at them is their corners are total junk. There were definitely some just bad news bears moments like Walker dropping what would have been a TD and our line being out of rhythm all game. However the defense kept us alive.

Plummer was the reason we lost that game. He kept turning the ball over. You will say "we should have rolled out more." After watching the Steelers game tape, every team in the league had their ends play contain and this was no different. At some point you can't say the coaches are at fault because your QB sucks so bad he can't play football like a QB is supposed to. You need a QB to throw from the pocket with at least average ability. It's ok to be good outside the pocket, but if that's all you can do you will fail as a QB. That is what Plummer was: a one trick pony.

What pisses me off is he had good games in the pocket. 2005 at home against the Chargers he was in the pocket the whole game and carved them up. That same year he stayed in the pocket and killed Jacksonville on the road when they were the number one pass defense in the league. It's not that he wasn't capable, it's that Plummer didn't care enough to try Mon-Sat.

I guess I will agree to disagree, because we see the same thing from different perspectives. I agree Plummer was a one trick pony, but for you that seems to absolve Heimerdinger from the fact that for three years Kubiak got as much as possible out of the one trick pony, but Heimerdinger came in and immediately tried to implement a drop back passing (with shotgun intermixed) scheme, that the 'one trick pony' couldn't handle, but you see nothing wrong with that.

Even if you get past the fact the O-line's forte wasn't straight up pass blocking and were badly overmatched when put in that situation, I don't see how you get past the fact that Heimerdinger installed a pocket passing game when teams DIDN'T force them (St. Louis didn't force it, it was the game plan) to stay in the pocket, when our one trick pony couldn't pass from the pocket.

Why? Because Heimerdinger, like Bates, was a one trick pony that didn't adjust his ideas to the talent on the field.

OMorange&blue
05-09-2008, 02:06 PM
I guess I will agree to disagree, because we see the same thing from different perspectives. I agree Plummer was a one trick pony, but for you that seems to absolve Heimerdinger from the fact that for three years Kubiak got as much as possible out of the one trick pony, but Heimerdinger came in and immediately tried to implement a drop back passing (with shotgun intermixed) scheme, that the 'one trick pony' couldn't handle, but you see nothing wrong with that.

Even if you get past the fact the O-line's forte wasn't straight up pass blocking and were badly overmatched when put in that situation, I don't see how you get past the fact that Heimerdinger installed a pocket passing game when teams DIDN'T force them (St. Louis didn't force it, it was the game plan) to stay in the pocket, when our one trick pony couldn't pass from the pocket.

Why? Because Heimerdinger, like Bates, was a one trick pony that didn't adjust his ideas to the talent on the field.

Thats not what I got from it.


What pisses me off is he had good games in the pocket. 2005 at home against the Chargers he was in the pocket the whole game and carved them up. That same year he stayed in the pocket and killed Jacksonville on the road when they were the number one pass defense in the league. It's not that he wasn't capable, it's that Plummer didn't care enough to try Mon-Sat.


Plummer quit trying.

Lonestar
05-09-2008, 02:12 PM
Exactly. Shanahan did everything he could to keep Plummer afloat. Shanahan even got Walker and Scheffler to help in the pass game that year. Drew Brees had a career year when new competition came in. Plummer folded like a tent. I see people blame it on scheme, on Shanahan hating on him, even on the media. Plummer played his way out of the starting spot and that's the bottom line.


If I remember correctly Scheffler was a rookie that saw at best limited TC time because of a ankle issue when he did play it was with Jay so their timing was down pretty good playing very plain vanilla Playbook.. Scheffler admitted in later in the year he did not play well early, because he did not understand the playbook yet.. Finally started to come around about the time Jake was pulled.. Yes Jake had Walker but that was all he had and the Run game sucked also..

I liked Jake for what he did in DEN, WIN but 2006 was predestined to be Jays debut one way or the other and frankly the only reason he did not start day one, was mikey had at least learned from the greasy debacle a few years before..

Jake while being a ONE trick PONY did not do anything to hold Jay back did not sabotage him like so many other veteran QB's have in years past..

When Mikey stabbed him in the back by drafting Jay I do not blame him for not embracing the new system as as dumb as many of you think Jake was he saw the hand writing on the wall.. He knew he would be gone the next year..

I was not happy when Jay was drafted as I thought we had higher priorities as needs . But have embraced him since.. Also happy for Jake and the peace he got out of leaving DEN..

omac
05-09-2008, 07:38 PM
This is the key, of the problem, whether it was Shanny or Heimerdinger that was responsible in the change.

Week 1 2006 we had 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 26 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

Between the AFCCG and that game, Shanny brought in Heimerdinger as the Assistant head coach - Offense with the stated purpose of opening up the pass game. In week 1, 2006, there was a complete departure from the type play calling that had led to both passing and running success the previous three years.

This complete change conincided with Kubiak leaving, Heimerdinger coming in as head of the offense and Dennison being promoted to OC. So, whether it was Shanny's plays, Heimerdingers or Dennison's, it doesn't change the basic fact. The plays called and offensive scheme used, just did not suit the talent on the field.

Same problem we had with Bates last year. Not coincidentally, both Bates and Heimerdinger, our two assistant head coaches are no longer here.



Agreed, which is why the player moves (Cutler, Walker, Marshall, Scheffler, Graham, Clady, etc) were good to move in that direction. HOWEVER, believing it is important doesn't mean you should start calling the plays and running a scheme that your talent on the field is incapable of running.

Few will disagree that Jake's forte was not passing from the pocket and our offensive line (especially as it existed game 1 of 2006) was not capable of protecting the QB in a traditional pocket passing offense. YET, game 1 of 2006, 26 of the 29 pass plays called were 'traditional' pocket passing play calls, which put the offense in a position to fail. That same play calling was used all season long with the same o-line and with both Jay and Jake, and the offense failed miserably.

So, as I have said before, I don't disagree with the need to transform the offense, my points are two:


The people that say the offensive play calling DID NOT change in '06 and '07, either didn't watch the games or didn't WATCH the games.

Transormation takes time. Dinger and Bates both failed because they attempted to implement scheme changes BEFORE they had talent on the field that could run the schemes successfully. That resulted in two horrid seasons and the two of them moving on.


Great post! :salute: I'm a little late with this comment, as this post grew a few more pages pretty fast. :D

omac
05-09-2008, 07:52 PM
When Mikey stabbed him in the back by drafting Jay I do not blame him for not embracing the new system as as dumb as many of you think Jake was he saw the hand writing on the wall.. He knew he would be gone the next year..

I was not happy when Jay was drafted as I thought we had higher priorities as needs . But have embraced him since.. Also happy for Jake and the peace he got out of leaving DEN..

Drafting Jay is stabbing Jake in the back? No, Shanny saw what happened in the AFCCG and decided the offense under Jake was not enough to win a superbowl, and drafted the QB he believed could give Denver a better chane to win one (or more) superbowls. Shanny wouldn't be a responsible employee if he believed a change was needed, yet did nothing.

And it wasn't Shanny who wanted Jake out of Denver; Shanny wanted Jake to be the backup, yet it was Jake who believed he could still start for another team. It was Jake who wanted out of Denver. He even shook hands with the Bronco players after 49ers game to say goodbye. So we can speculate that, at least initially, Jake wanted to start elsewhere; whether or not his decision to retire had anything to do with getting traded to Tampa, who knows?

He definitely could've stayed a Bronco if he wanted to, but he didn't want to be a backup. Nothing wrong with that at all, and from all accounts, he seems to be enjoying handball and his retirement. Everything worked out. :cheers:

Lonestar
05-09-2008, 08:00 PM
Drafting Jay is stabbing Jake in the back? No, Shanny saw what happened in the AFCCG and decided the offense under Jake was not enough to win a superbowl, and drafted the QB he believed could give Denver a better chane to win one (or more) superbowls. Shanny wouldn't be a responsible employee if he believed a change was needed, yet did nothing.

And it wasn't Shanny who wanted Jake out of Denver; Shanny wanted Jake to be the backup, yet it was Jake who believed he could still start for another team. It was Jake who wanted out of Denver. He even shook hands with the Bronco players after 49ers game to say goodbye. So we can speculate that, at least initially, Jake wanted to start elsewhere; whether or not his decision to retire had anything to do with getting traded to Tampa, who knows?

He definitely could've stayed a Bronco if he wanted to, but he didn't want to be a backup. Nothing wrong with that at all, and from all accounts, he seems to be enjoying handball and his retirement. Everything worked out. :cheers:


mikey did what he thought was best for the team I have not problem with that, but perhaps he could have let Jake know, so he does not have to hear it from a friend. That is what is called stabbing in the back IMO..

Jake did not want to play any longer that was plain for all to see.. I do not think TPA trade had anything to do with it..

Tned
05-09-2008, 08:06 PM
mikey did what he thought was best for the team I have not problem with that, but perhaps he could have let Jake know, so he does not have to hear it from a friend. That is what is called stabbing in the back IMO..

Jake did not want to play any longer that was plain for all to see.. I do not think TPA trade had anything to do with it..

Was foxworth just stabbed in the back?
Was Harris/Pears just stabbed in the back?
Was Henry/Young just stabbed in the back?

Drafting young players is a fact of life. Heimerdinger screwed the pooch with his horrible offensive leadership and inability to adapt an offense to the talent on the field, but regardless if Jake had played well in '06 he would have made a decision as to when to start Jay a tough one.

I have never understood this stabbed in the back thing when young players are drafted at a position.

omac
05-09-2008, 08:32 PM
mikey did what he thought was best for the team I have not problem with that, but perhaps he could have let Jake know, so he does not have to hear it from a friend. That is what is called stabbing in the back IMO..

Jake did not want to play any longer that was plain for all to see.. I do not think TPA trade had anything to do with it..

Just out of curiosity, were Shanny and Jake friends? Shanny comes across to me as someone who acts very professional, such that a lof of his decisions when cutting or trading players is very cold and businesslike. Heck, even Lynch now has to compete for his starting spot. I'm not sure if the players or Shanny think of each other in friendship terms.

omac
05-09-2008, 08:35 PM
Was foxworth just stabbed in the back?
Was Harris/Pears just stabbed in the back?
Was Henry/Young just stabbed in the back?

Drafting young players is a fact of life. Heimerdinger screwed the pooch with his horrible offensive leadership and inability to adapt an offense to the talent on the field, but regardless if Jake had played well in '06 he would have made a decision as to when to start Jay a tough one.

I have never understood this stabbed in the back thing when young players are drafted at a position.

I agree with you; acquiring other players is just part of the NFL process. Young was waiting in the wings while Montana was starting.

On a side note, I think Foxy will be gone from the Broncos soon.

Tned
05-09-2008, 09:50 PM
I agree with you; acquiring other players is just part of the NFL process. Young was waiting in the wings while Montana was starting.

On a side note, I think Foxy will be gone from the Broncos soon.


Agreed on both. Many think that the DB in the third (drawing a blank on name) was brought in because of the liklyhood of losing Foxworth in '09.

Lonestar
05-09-2008, 10:27 PM
Just out of curiosity, were Shanny and Jake friends? Shanny comes across to me as someone who acts very professional, such that a lof of his decisions when cutting or trading players is very cold and businesslike. Heck, even Lynch now has to compete for his starting spot. I'm not sure if the players or Shanny think of each other in friendship terms.

I heard they were lovers.. ;)

Kubiack might have been a friend of both. But mikey was his coach for many years a courtesy call would have been appropriate.. Not like someone from the vast organization could have spent a few seconds leaving a voice mail if nothing else..

We all know we traded up to get Jay there would have been a minute or two to make the call..

If nothing else call it respect for a player, even the turk brings you to the head coach they just do not send a telegram.. Or in this case let him hear about it from TV or a friend..

I guess I expected mikey to have a bit more class than that.

Tned
05-09-2008, 10:33 PM
I heard they were lovers.. ;)

Kubiack might have been a friend of both. But mikey was his coach for many years a courtesy call would have been appropriate.. Not like someone from the vast organization could have spent a few seconds leaving a voice mail if nothing else..

We all know we traded up to get Jay there would have been a minute or two to make the call..

If nothing else call it respect for a player, even the turk brings you to the head coach they just do not send a telegram.. Or in this case let him hear about it from TV or a friend..

I guess I expected mikey to have a bit more class than that.

Just out of curiousity, did this courtesy only extend to Jake? If not, where do you draw the line? How long a player has been with the team? Only the QB?

Who do you feal Shanny should call when drafting a player, and who doesn't need to be called? Is it by position?

Lonestar
05-09-2008, 10:33 PM
Was foxworth just stabbed in the back?
Was Harris/Pears just stabbed in the back?
Was Henry/Young just stabbed in the back?

Drafting young players is a fact of life. Heimerdinger screwed the pooch with his horrible offensive leadership and inability to adapt an offense to the talent on the field, but regardless if Jake had played well in '06 he would have made a decision as to when to start Jay a tough one.

I have never understood this stabbed in the back thing when young players are drafted at a position.

Did anyone of them lead the team to the AFCCG?

Was foxy a starter and was the draft choice a number 11?

Same goes for the others. Non starters are different than starters. A simple phone call giving the offensive leader and starting QB a heads up would have been a common courtesy. IMO

Lonestar
05-09-2008, 10:40 PM
Just out of curiousity, did this courtesy only extend to Jake? If not, where do you draw the line? How long a player has been with the team? Only the QB?

Who do you feal Shanny should call when drafting a player, and who doesn't need to be called? Is it by position?

I think the starting QB that has the best won lost record while on the team would get that call.

Simple call saying something like hey we are going to take Jay, to work him into the system, when it is time for you to go. Then we have the spot covered.. Unlike the way most rookies are thrown to the wolves.. This way our winning tradition does not go down the toilet.. He will have a lot to learn from a pro like yourself..

About 15 seconds to get through that simple commentary..

WARHORSE
05-09-2008, 11:35 PM
I think the starting QB that has the best won lost record while on the team would get that call.

Simple call saying something like hey we are going to take Jay, to work him into the system, when it is time for you to go. Then we have the spot covered.. Unlike the way most rookies are thrown to the wolves.. This way our winning tradition does not go down the toilet.. He will have a lot to learn from a pro like yourself..

About 15 seconds to get through that simple commentary..


Man Wizzer, I cant believe youre in here trying to make that argument stick. Since when does Shanny broadcast the fact that hes going to try and move up and draft a franchise QB when no one suspects it? What if Jake takes the news badly and spreads the word? He was proven unprofessional afterall. Not only that, but Shanny didnt even know he was going to be able to draft Cutler, since he didnt even know he was going to be there, right? The Broncos were prepared for all three of those QBs being gone within the first 5 picks or so, as well as another slew of different scenarios that were all probabilities before the draft took place. Fact is, Denver didnt even know what was going to happen. Did they say, "Hey, if Cutler makes it to 8, lets start trying to move up for him" ? Probably. But no one knew, and Jake didnt deserve anything as far as the draft is concerned other than a notice in the mail saying show up for minicamps promptly at 7:00am ready to go.

Jake DID fold like a tent, and that only served to show us that he couldnt be a professional when he was called to.

Which is why hes pickin berries at this moment up in Idaho somewheres for tomorrows picnic.:coffee:


;)

Scarface
05-10-2008, 07:48 AM
mikey did what he thought was best for the team I have not problem with that, but perhaps he could have let Jake know, so he does not have to hear it from a friend. That is what is called stabbing in the back IMO..

Jake did not want to play any longer that was plain for all to see.. I do not think TPA trade had anything to do with it..

LMAO This is pro sports! Teams will always try to upgrade and they have no obligation to tell you they're doing it. If you can't take the heat of pro sports go live in the mountains....oh wait that's exactly what he did.:laugh:

elsid13
05-10-2008, 07:57 AM
Agreed on both. Many think that the DB in the third (drawing a blank on name) was brought in because of the liklyhood of losing Foxworth in '09.

It absolutely it was. With bott Foxworth and Payham (I know it misspelled) as UFA we need the depth. I like that move because it ensure that we have "vet" for that role next season. This is was what good team do, they draft for the next season to ensure they continue to be successful.

Lonestar
05-10-2008, 10:40 AM
Man Wizzer, I cant believe youre in here trying to make that argument stick. Since when does Shanny broadcast the fact that hes going to try and move up and draft a franchise QB when no one suspects it? What if Jake takes the news badly and spreads the word? He was proven unprofessional afterall. Not only that, but Shanny didnt even know he was going to be able to draft Cutler, since he didnt even know he was going to be there, right? The Broncos were prepared for all three of those QBs being gone within the first 5 picks or so, as well as another slew of different scenarios that were all probabilities before the draft took place. Fact is, Denver didnt even know what was going to happen. Did they say, "Hey, if Cutler makes it to 8, lets start trying to move up for him" ? Probably. But no one knew, and Jake didnt deserve anything as far as the draft is concerned other than a notice in the mail saying show up for minicamps promptly at 7:00am ready to go.

Jake DID fold like a tent, and that only served to show us that he couldnt be a professional when he was called to.

Which is why hes pickin berries at this moment up in Idaho somewheres for tomorrows picnic.:coffee:


;)


First of all I was not suggesting that mikey tell him 2 weeks prior.. A simple call while they are making the choice would have been sufficient..

Hey Jake Jay Cutler just fell into our reach, we think he could be the long term future here.. Just a heads up.. Thought you had the right to know before you here it somewhere else..

All of 20 seconds by Mike or Dinger or the QB coach..

IMO not to much to expect since he was the team captain, the offensive leader of the club with the best win loss record for his tenure in team history..

Did he do anything once Jay was annouced to deter his progress, have you heard of any negative that he did to cause Jay a problem? As far as I heard Jake was pure class in 2006 to help Jay learn all there was to take his position. Perhaps I have not heard it all, if so please tell me..

So Jake is picking berries in Idaho. Who on this forum would not trade places with him in a heart beat?.. Married to a super hot gal, doing what he wants to do, because he was wise in handling his money, instead of getting your clock cleaned on a weekly basis taking 4-5 days each week trying to recover enough to do it again..

As far as I can tell Jake handled the whole thing with class. Love him or hate him he was the better person for doing it this way..

Tned
05-10-2008, 01:37 PM
It absolutely it was. With bott Foxworth and Payham (I know it misspelled) as UFA we need the depth. I like that move because it ensure that we have "vet" for that role next season. This is was what good team do, they draft for the next season to ensure they continue to be successful.

Yep and with my 'blank' gone it was Jack Williams in the fourth, not the third like I said. I forgot we had no third round pick.

Acedude
05-10-2008, 04:41 PM
New guy here, hi guys.

Denver better get the O scoring, or they'll be taking a suck of hind tit for another couple of years. Maybe not total hind tit in the AFC, but sucking hind tit among the elite in the AFC. Like many have said on this thread Denver has been casting around trying to hook into some offensive flair. They better hook into something fast because they can't score TD's.

The Royal kid may be able to produce some field position, and that's a piece of the puzzle. Shanny's O is play-action, play-action, play-action. If the running game doesn't scare anybody, then the O doesn't work as it is formulated now. Shanny wants to diversify out of play-action all the time because it doesn't work if you're two TD's down, but he hasn't found the personnel to do so. Maybe he has some of the personnel now. Shanny still needs a WR that can beat any CB in the League on a straight sprint down the sideline.

Lonestar
05-10-2008, 06:36 PM
New guy here, hi guys.

Denver better get the O scoring, or they'll be taking a suck of hind tit for another couple of years. Maybe not total hind tit in the AFC, but sucking hind tit among the elite in the AFC. Like many have said on this thread Denver has been casting around trying to hook into some offensive flair. They better hook into something fast because they can't score TD's.

The Royal kid may be able to produce some field position, and that's a piece of the puzzle. Shanny's O is play-action, play-action, play-action. If the running game doesn't scare anybody, then the O doesn't work as it is formulated now. Shanny wants to diversify out of play-action all the time because it doesn't work if you're two TD's down, but he hasn't found the personnel to do so. Maybe he has some of the personnel now. Shanny still needs a WR that can beat any CB in the League on a straight sprint down the sideline.


the biggest reason last year was a lack of play from the RB position other than Marshall and the OLINE sucked for many reasons..

We IMO have not addressed the RB problem save drafting a true FB to block for a bunch of maybes..

They have picked up a bunch of WR to try and fill the #2 slot not sure if any of them are starters..

They drafted clady time will tell if his addition and the the walking wound return what remains to be seen if Nalen has much gas left and if Hamilton can stay out of the hospital..

Lots of IF's to overcome on the entire team..

Acedude
05-10-2008, 07:32 PM
the biggest reason last year was a lack of play from the RB position other than Marshall and the OLINE sucked for many reasons..

We IMO have not addressed the RB problem save drafting a true FB to block for a bunch of maybes..

They have picked up a bunch of WR to try and fill the #2 slot not sure if any of them are starters..

They drafted clady time will tell if his addition and the the walking wound return what remains to be seen if Nalen has much gas left and if Hamilton can stay out of the hospital..

Lots of IF's to overcome on the entire team..

Lot of if's. tned was talking about the O how it was doing so well 2003-2005, some of that had to do with Lelie stretching the field. That's a part of the O that has been missing. The O doesn't attack, it's a plodding O, I guess to protect the D? Denver hasn't had the OL to do anything but play-action for a few years now, they can't morph from play-action to pocket passing, it's play-action or get your QB hammered. Denver is just a little bit weaker than the AFC elite for a few years now in all phases of the game, and that's not good enough.

Denver could be getting on an upswing right now though. I like some of the additions last year. Beck, Winborn, Crowder, those are players.

Kaylore
05-10-2008, 10:10 PM
I'm loving the "Shanahan stabbed Jake in the back by drafting Jay" comment.:rolleyes: Its was funny watching Elway give up on the season when we drafted Maddox. Same thing with Brees. He just quit on his team because the "writing was on the wall" too. Oh wait - no they actually played harder and rose to the competition! That's right!:eek:

broncohead
05-10-2008, 10:41 PM
the biggest reason last year was a lack of play from the RB position other than Marshall and the OLINE sucked for many reasons..

We IMO have not addressed the RB problem save drafting a true FB to block for a bunch of maybes..

They have picked up a bunch of WR to try and fill the #2 slot not sure if any of them are starters..

They drafted clady time will tell if his addition and the the walking wound return what remains to be seen if Nalen has much gas left and if Hamilton can stay out of the hospital..

Lots of IF's to overcome on the entire team..

It's funny that you talk about the offense when we lost ball games because we couldn't get the ball out of the opposing O's hands. Doesn't matter how good our RB is, if our D is that bad again we WILL have another loosing season. And just because we didn't draft a "top" RB doesn't mean that we didn't draft a stud. Everyone has a chance to prove themselves no matter where they were drafted.

topscribe
05-10-2008, 10:55 PM
New guy here, hi guys.

Denver better get the O scoring, or they'll be taking a suck of hind tit for another couple of years. Maybe not total hind tit in the AFC, but sucking hind tit among the elite in the AFC. Like many have said on this thread Denver has been casting around trying to hook into some offensive flair. They better hook into something fast because they can't score TD's.

The Royal kid may be able to produce some field position, and that's a piece of the puzzle. Shanny's O is play-action, play-action, play-action. If the running game doesn't scare anybody, then the O doesn't work as it is formulated now. Shanny wants to diversify out of play-action all the time because it doesn't work if you're two TD's down, but he hasn't found the personnel to do so. Maybe he has some of the personnel now. Shanny still needs a WR that can beat any CB in the League on a straight sprint down the sideline.

Welcome Acedude!! :welcome: :beer:

And yes, I believe Fast Eddie is going to make a difference!

-----

broncohead
05-10-2008, 10:57 PM
the biggest reason last year was a lack of play from the RB position other than Marshall and the OLINE sucked for many reasons..

We IMO have not addressed the RB problem save drafting a true FB to block for a bunch of maybes..

They have picked up a bunch of WR to try and fill the #2 slot not sure if any of them are starters..

They drafted clady time will tell if his addition and the the walking wound return what remains to be seen if Nalen has much gas left and if Hamilton can stay out of the hospital..

Lots of IF's to overcome on the entire team..

I think that we will be fine one more year without a stud RB. We have to fix the trenches first.

Lonestar
05-10-2008, 11:24 PM
I'm loving the "Shanahan stabbed Jake in the back by drafting Jay" comment.:rolleyes: Its was funny watching Elway give up on the season when we drafted Maddox. Same thing with Brees. He just quit on his team because the "writing was on the wall" too. Oh wait - no they actually played harder and rose to the competition! That's right!:eek:


Drew breeze never did a thing till they drafted rivers.. so it was not a matter of playing at a high level before.. Had no where to go but up..

Maddox was a joke till Pit took him in on a flyer..

But Jake is Jake are you not glad he retired? Let a sleeping dog lie..

Lonestar
05-10-2008, 11:42 PM
It's funny that you talk about the offense when we lost ball games because we couldn't get the ball out of the opposing O's hands. Doesn't matter how good our RB is, if our D is that bad again we WILL have another loosing season. And just because we didn't draft a "top" RB doesn't mean that we didn't draft a stud. Everyone has a chance to prove themselves no matter where they were drafted.


I think that we will be fine one more year without a stud RB. We have to fix the trenches first.

You have obviously mixed me up with someone else..

I have advocated fixing the LOS for 4 or more years on this and Mania I doubt you will find me saying draft A RB in round one except if both of the stud DT were gone along with Williams and Albert. Or being unable to trade back in the draft o 20 or so.. Then and only then would there have been value in Stewart..

Until this year I believed mikey could make 5-7th rounders into quality OLINE guys.. But the magic man had moved on, it took me until this year to figure out Gibbs is no longer the force in DEN. His ghost has left the building.. Yes I know he left years ago but his legacy lived on in Nalen and Lepsis..

It was time to invest in a top flight OLT my choices would have been Williams and Albert.. I would have never taken clady. I hope I wrong in my assessment of him.. But mikeys past DAFTING track record save 2006-07, may prove me right in the long run.

I was pissed when we took DJ over Wilfork, or passed on DL line help to move up in the draft to pick Jay I would have taken Bunkley or Ngata in a heart beat, maybe even Hali.. Those were my only objections to picking DJ and Jay.. We needed DL help more critically than we needed another LB and QB..

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 08:26 AM
You have obviously mixed me up with someone else..

I have advocated fixing the LOS for 4 or more years on this and Mania I doubt you will find me saying draft A RB in round one except if both of the stud DT were gone along with Williams and Albert. Or being unable to trade back in the draft o 20 or so.. Then and only then would there have been value in Stewart..

Until this year I believed mikey could make 5-7th rounders into quality OLINE guys.. But the magic man had moved on, it took me until this year to figure out Gibbs is no longer the force in DEN. His ghost has left the building.. Yes I know he left years ago but his legacy lived on in Nalen and Lepsis..

It was time to invest in a top flight OLT my choices would have been Williams and Albert.. I would have never taken clady. I hope I wrong in my assessment of him.. But mikeys past DAFTING track record save 2006-07, may prove me right in the long run.

I was pissed when we took DJ over Wilfork, or passed on DL line help to move up in the draft to pick Jay I would have taken Bunkley or Ngata in a heart beat, maybe even Hali.. Those were my only objections to picking DJ and Jay.. We needed DL help more critically than we needed another LB and QB..


Jr, you and I have been on the same page as far as wanting to draft high and often to fix the LOS problems here. However, I think that if you beleive there is a guy you can get that is going to be a franchise QB, you have to get him. I like the Cutler pick a lot.

As far as picking Clady at 12, I wanted Williams or Albert at that spot, but reports are that Williams has a back and/or neck injury that may need surgery later on. We got burned on that type of gamble in the last draft with Ryan Harris. No need to do it again. I wanted Albert because he should be able to play tackle, and was by far the best guard in the draft. However, Denver took a beast that is a true LT at 12, so I have no complaints whatsoever about Clady. The small school competition doesn't bother me. Hall of famers like Larry Allen, Art Shell, Jackie Slater, Rayfield Wright, Bob St. Clair, Roosevelt Brown, and others came from small schools.

omac
05-11-2008, 08:34 AM
Drew breeze never did a thing till they drafted rivers.. so it was not a matter of playing at a high level before.. Had no where to go but up..

Maddox was a joke till Pit took him in on a flyer..

But Jake is Jake are you not glad he retired? Let a sleeping dog lie..

Montana had Young waiting in the wings. The Steelers just drafted Mendenhall, not because they were in dire need to replace Parker, but because they had an opportunity to pick up an RB at great value in the draft. I don't think the Broncos were looking to get a premiere QB in the draft, but when they saw an opportunity to land one who fits the profile of the QB who they want to build the team around (Elway-ish - strong arm, excellent passing skills, intelligent, mobile, tough), they did. It was a good value pick.

elsid13
05-11-2008, 08:53 AM
Jr, you and I have been on the same page as far as wanting to draft high and often to fix the LOS problems here. However, I think that if you beleive there is a guy you can get that is going to be a franchise QB, you have to get him. I like the Cutler pick a lot.

As far as picking Clady at 12, I wanted Williams or Albert at that spot, but reports are that Williams has a back and/or neck injury that may need surgery later on. We got burned on that type of gamble in the last draft with Ryan Harris. No need to do it again. I wanted Albert because he should be able to play tackle, and was by far the best guard in the draft. However, Denver took a beast that is a true LT at 12, so I have no complaints whatsoever about Clady. The small school competition doesn't bother me. Hall of famers like Larry Allen, Art Shell, Jackie Slater, Rayfield Wright, Bob St. Clair, Roosevelt Brown, and others came from small schools.

Do you realize that Williams has "short arms" for his size. It was big concern for the scouts at the senior bowl. While Clady has extremely long arms for player his size. Arm length makes a big difference. And don't buy into the Albert hype, I have watch UVA enough over the years to say he's good player but isn't elite prospect some make him out to be. He doesn't always play to his size.

JoeF
05-11-2008, 08:58 AM
Orginally Quoted from JRWiz :"It was time to invest in a top flight OLT my choices would have been Williams and Albert.. I would have never taken clady. I hope I wrong in my assessment of him.."

Curious as to why you'd hvae passed on Clady, JR. Wonderlic...somewhat lesser college competition? Those films highlighting his footwork are pretty impressive.

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 09:04 AM
Do you realize that Williams has "short arms" for his size. It was big concern for the scouts at the senior bowl. While Clady has extremely long arms for player his size. Arm length makes a big difference. And don't buy into the Albert hype, I have watch UVA enough over the years to say he's good player but isn't elite prospect some make him out to be. He doesn't always play to his size.

I knew about Williams arm length. The reason I wanted him is because I considered him the most refined LT in the draft after Long. He proved himself as a pass blocker in the ACC. Doesn't matter now though. Clady is a Denver Bronco. That makes me a fan of Ryan Clady until or unless he gives me a reason not to be.:D

elsid13
05-11-2008, 09:11 AM
I knew about Williams arm length. The reason I wanted him is because I considered him the most refined LT in the draft after Long. He proved himself as a pass blocker in the ACC. Doesn't matter now though. Clady is a Denver Bronco. That makes me a fan of Ryan Clady until or unless he gives me a reason not to be.:D

Vandy in SEC, not ACC (it early Sunday morning I understand the brain freeze). I was move concern with LT that would help the running game then the passing game. Denver is built around the ability to move the ball on the ground, PA and slant/crossing pattern (mean quick pass), so the LT doesn't have to block for long time in pass protection.

I never felt William was "mean" enough to punish DE and get to second level. I wish Michael Oher (old Miss) had come out this year because I felt he would have been the perfect fit for us.

omac
05-11-2008, 09:15 AM
Orginally Quoted from JRWiz :"It was time to invest in a top flight OLT my choices would have been Williams and Albert.. I would have never taken clady. I hope I wrong in my assessment of him.."

Curious as to why you'd hvae passed on Clady, JR. Wonderlic...somewhat lesser college competition? Those films highlighting his footwork are pretty impressive.

Also, based on the scouting reports, Albert is primarily a OG, who sparingly played LT when needed. He's projected to have a good upside as an LT in the pros, but he doesn't have the experience of the other LTs in the draft.

Scarface
05-11-2008, 09:24 AM
I've never heard Williams had short arms. Everything I read said he has a long wingspan. Anyone have the combine measurements as proof?

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 09:26 AM
Vandy in SEC, not ACC (it early Sunday morning I understand the brain freeze). I was move concern with LT that would help the running game then the passing game. Denver is built around the ability to move the ball on the ground, PA and slant/crossing pattern (mean quick pass), so the LT doesn't have to block for long time in pass protection.

I never felt William was "mean" enough to punish DE and get to second level. I wish Michael Oher (old Miss) had come out this year because I felt he would have been the perfect fit for us.

Yep, time for coffee.:coffee:

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 09:30 AM
I've never heard Williams had short arms. Everything I read said he has a long wingspan. Anyone have the combine measurements as proof?

http://walterfootball.com/combine2008OT.php

Chris Williams, Vanderbilt
Height: 6-6. Weight: 315.
Projected 40 Time: 5.13.
Combine 40 Time: 5.07.
Arm: 32 7/8. Benchx225: 21.
Projected Round: Top 20 Pick.
Chris Williams solidified his status as a top-20 prospect with a good combine.

For comparison
Jake Long 32 7/8
Ryan Clady 36 5/8
Branden Albert 35 1/2
Godser Cherilus 35 5/8
Jeff Otah 34 5/8
Sam Baker 32 3/8
Carl Nicks 35
Heath Benedict 33 4/8

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 09:56 AM
I've seen Clady's arm length listed as low as 33-1/8 and as high as 36-5/8, but I'm more apt to beleive the 36-5/8, since he was known to have the longest arms in this years draft class.

elsid13
05-11-2008, 09:59 AM
I've never heard Williams had short arms. Everything I read said he has a long wingspan. Anyone have the combine measurements as proof?

My source was BPC (the mane) who was on the field with the scouts. I take BPC stuff pretty seriously since he started DIV-I football (Hawaii and somewhere else) on the line, and has some strong contacts still in game. He also had some great insight on Desean Jackson's pro-day. Yes he does known our favorite WR from the island, but that is his story to tell not mine.

It also mention on the NFL channel.

JoeF
05-11-2008, 10:06 AM
source was BPC (the mane) who was on the field with the scouts...He also had some great insight on Desean Jackson's pro-day....

Was BPC "solid" on Royal?

Scarface
05-11-2008, 10:17 AM
My source was BPC (the mane) who was on the field with the scouts. I take BPC stuff pretty seriously since he started DIV-I football (Hawaii and somewhere else) on the line, and has some strong contacts still in game. He also had some great insight on Desean Jackson's pro-day. Yes he does known our favorite WR from the island, but that is his story to tell not mine.

It also mention on the NFL channel.

Yep, I know BPC. He used to post at the Freak back in the day.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 10:40 AM
Jr, you and I have been on the same page as far as wanting to draft high and often to fix the LOS problems here. However, I think that if you beleive there is a guy you can get that is going to be a franchise QB, you have to get him. I like the Cutler pick a lot.

As far as picking Clady at 12, I wanted Williams or Albert at that spot, but reports are that Williams has a back and/or neck injury that may need surgery later on. We got burned on that type of gamble in the last draft with Ryan Harris. No need to do it again. I wanted Albert because he should be able to play tackle, and was by far the best guard in the draft. However, Denver took a beast that is a true LT at 12, so I have no complaints whatsoever about Clady. The small school competition doesn't bother me. Hall of famers like Larry Allen, Art Shell, Jackie Slater, Rayfield Wright, Bob St. Clair, Roosevelt Brown, and others came from small schools.

I understand you post and overall agree with it.. However almost ever year one can Pick up a Franchise type QB IF you really want it... Our most desperate need over the past decade IMO has been DL.

While Jake may not have been that special QB to take DEN to the Superbowl who knows for sure that if we could have placed some heat on Manning or Ben in those Playoff games what the outcome might have been. Or for that matter having an OLINE that could protect him in the pocket, or having a great RB that could get the yardage on the ground.

If you really want a franchise OLT they are available also..

For that matter CB, MLB, RB, and DT. But mikey had depleted the talent level on this team from lousy drafting as well as poor FA choices from 2000-04 and IMO 05.

Hopefully that trend has reversed itself.

Remember folks Even Elway did not win those Superbowl without being surrounded with HOFers ZIM Sharpe and IMO TD.. Just exactly whom did Jake have in those years.. Anyone that is not blind can't not compare Lepsis with Zimmerman, tater/MA/Q/OG/Dayne with TD, or all of the wanna be TE's with Sharpe. Yes we had Al Wilson and Champ of a few of those teams without some heat on the LOS they did not matter.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 10:54 AM
Orginally Quoted from JRWiz :"It was time to invest in a top flight OLT my choices would have been Williams and Albert.. I would have never taken clady. I hope I wrong in my assessment of him.."

Curious as to why you'd hvae passed on Clady, JR. Wonderlic...somewhat lesser college competition? Those films highlighting his footwork are pretty impressive.


Both of those things concerned me, + he played two years at OLT a small school against lousy at best competition. Before that if I remember correctly he was a DL player..

When he played against topflight schools he did not fare as well.. several penalties for moving before the snap. One can score a 13 on the wunderlick almost by showing up and getting your name correct..;) And frankly that fast feet comment was a repeat of what mikey said of the foster pick we all know how that DAFT turned out...

Whereas Williams if I remember correctly had a 23 played in a topflight conference played an extra 15-20 as a pure OLT games more than clady did..

lets hope he becomes the OLT that can protect Jays blindside for the next decade or more..

topscribe
05-11-2008, 11:04 AM
I've seen Clady's arm length listed as low as 33-1/8 and as high as 36-5/8, but I'm more apt to beleive the 36-5/8, since he was known to have the longest arms in this years draft class.

In his latest presser, Shanny said Clady has 37" arms (which I assume he
might have rounded off from 36⅝). I'm sure that is correct since the Broncos
certainly knew everything they could find out about him before investing their
#12 choice in him.

-----

elsid13
05-11-2008, 11:12 AM
Was BPC "solid" on Royal?

I don't know. Let just say that BPC was unimpressed with Desean's attitude.

atwater27
05-11-2008, 11:16 AM
Lex, please refer to my signature. Thank You.

You shouldn't cap on lex. You guys are 2 of a kind!

WARHORSE
05-11-2008, 11:27 AM
New guy here, hi guys.

Denver better get the O scoring, or they'll be taking a suck of hind tit for another couple of years. Maybe not total hind tit in the AFC, but sucking hind tit among the elite in the AFC. Like many have said on this thread Denver has been casting around trying to hook into some offensive flair. They better hook into something fast because they can't score TD's.

The Royal kid may be able to produce some field position, and that's a piece of the puzzle. Shanny's O is play-action, play-action, play-action. If the running game doesn't scare anybody, then the O doesn't work as it is formulated now. Shanny wants to diversify out of play-action all the time because it doesn't work if you're two TD's down, but he hasn't found the personnel to do so. Maybe he has some of the personnel now. Shanny still needs a WR that can beat any CB in the League on a straight sprint down the sideline.


Welcome Ace. I like you. The whole hind tit thing was a nice touch. lol.....:beer:

Always lookin for fresh looks around here...........:salute:

WARHORSE
05-11-2008, 11:37 AM
First of all I was not suggesting that mikey tell him 2 weeks prior.. A simple call while they are making the choice would have been sufficient..

Hey Jake Jay Cutler just fell into our reach, we think he could be the long term future here.. Just a heads up.. Thought you had the right to know before you here it somewhere else..

All of 20 seconds by Mike or Dinger or the QB coach..

IMO not to much to expect since he was the team captain, the offensive leader of the club with the best win loss record for his tenure in team history..

Did he do anything once Jay was annouced to deter his progress, have you heard of any negative that he did to cause Jay a problem? As far as I heard Jake was pure class in 2006 to help Jay learn all there was to take his position. Perhaps I have not heard it all, if so please tell me..

So Jake is picking berries in Idaho. Who on this forum would not trade places with him in a heart beat?.. Married to a super hot gal, doing what he wants to do, because he was wise in handling his money, instead of getting your clock cleaned on a weekly basis taking 4-5 days each week trying to recover enough to do it again..

As far as I can tell Jake handled the whole thing with class. Love him or hate him he was the better person for doing it this way..


So whats the difference when the draft is over and Shanny tells Jake, hey, dont read a whole lot into us picking Cutler at 11. We had him rated number one on our board and when he fell within our reach, we had to take him. This is a move for the future, youre doing a fine job Jake, no worries.

Does that make it any different? You either take it for what its worth, or you spend your time mistrusting what you heard, and you let it affect you. Once Jake saw Cutlers arm in camp, things started to unravel.

Thats good that Jake made his own decision for his own life. I think he stepped out on his own terms, and every man has that right. Classy? No. He did not step out with class. He didnt thank the Broncos organization for helping him be the best QB hes ever been. He rejected the fans because he never did understand his position when it comes to being the franchise signal caller in Denver. Highlighting his teamates while going out the door was the only good thing he did, if you look outside selfish reasons for his retiring.

Jake did not agree with the moves of the coaching staff and it bothered him. Thats why he did not acknowledge the Broncos org while moving on.

No class.

Just sass.



Good for him. He does it his own way. Everyone respects that right.

Class??

He never showed class here.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 11:49 AM
So whats the difference when the draft is over and Shanny tells Jake, hey, dont read a whole lot into us picking Cutler at 11. We had him rated number one on our board and when he fell within our reach, we had to take him. This is a move for the future, youre doing a fine job Jake, no worries.

Does that make it any different? You either take it for what its worth, or you spend your time mistrusting what you heard, and you let it affect you. Once Jake saw Cutlers arm in camp, things started to unravel.

Thats good that Jake made his own decision for his own life. I think he stepped out on his own terms, and every man has that right. Classy? No. He did not step out with class. He didnt thank the Broncos organization for helping him be the best QB hes ever been. He rejected the fans because he never did understand his position when it comes to being the franchise signal caller in Denver. Highlighting his teamates while going out the door was the only good thing he did, if you look outside selfish reasons for his retiring.

Jake did not agree with the moves of the coaching staff and it bothered him. Thats why he did not acknowledge the Broncos org while moving on.

No class.

Just sass.



Good for him. He does it his own way. Everyone respects that right.

Class??

He never showed class here.

Well, thank you for your opinion, but not everyone shares it, including me.
What is it he owed the Broncos again? My answer is nothing. He was paid
for a service, and he provided it. What do you think I owe my employer
after a term of employment? My eternal gratitude for stepping out and
keeping me out of the gutter? They wanted what I had to offer, and I
exchanged it for pay. Same with Jake.

Jake quarterbacked the Broncos to three playoff years and the winningest
record in pro football, if I am correct. If he did not want to play football
anymore, he should have done exactly what he did: quit.

What else was there to do?

If we do not appreciate what Jake has done here, then I believe we are the
ones with the problem of ingratitude.

-----

Ziggy
05-11-2008, 11:56 AM
I understand you post and overall agree with it.. However almost ever year one can Pick up a Franchise type QB IF you really want it... Our most desperate need over the past decade IMO has been DL.

While Jake may not have been that special QB to take DEN to the Superbowl who knows for sure that if we could have placed some heat on Manning or Ben in those Playoff games what the outcome might have been. Or for that matter having an OLINE that could protect him in the pocket, or having a great RB that could get the yardage on the ground.

If you really want a franchise OLT they are available also..

For that matter CB, MLB, RB, and DT. But mikey had depleted the talent level on this team from lousy drafting as well as poor FA choices from 2000-04 and IMO 05.

Hopefully that trend has reversed itself.

Remember folks Even Elway did not win those Superbowl without being surrounded with HOFers ZIM Sharpe and IMO TD.. Just exactly whom did Jake have in those years.. Anyone that is not blind can't not compare Lepsis with Zimmerman, tater/MA/Q/OG/Dayne with TD, or all of the wanna be TE's with Sharpe. Yes we had Al Wilson and Champ of a few of those teams without some heat on the LOS they did not matter.


Exactly which franchise defensive tackle was there in that draft at #11?

Kaylore
05-11-2008, 01:00 PM
Drew breeze never did a thing till they drafted rivers.. so it was not a matter of playing at a high level before...Had no where to go but up..
I'm not sure what your point is here. This just proves that Brees elevated his game when competition came in rather than giving up.



Maddox was a joke till Pit took him in on a flyer..
So you're saying that if we drafted someone "better" than Elway, he would have given up and tanked the season like Jake did? Or are your saying that Maddox wasn't good enough to push Elway?

Either point is stupid. When a rookie comes in in the first round, it's expected that he'll take over. It's the vet's job to see to it that he doesn't. Elway never stopped competing. Montana didn't give up when Young came in. Young was good enough to push him. Jake gave up and said "screw it" which amounts to cowardice.


But Jake is Jake are you not glad he retired? Let a sleeping dog lie..
You're the one who started making accusations that he was "betrayed by the coaching staff" and insinuated that he did the logical thing by giving up. That's a total load.

I loved Jake here. I think Jake, when he wanted to be, was a very solid QB for us. Unfortunately he needed a top five defense and a top five running game if we were ever going to get to the promised land with him. We weren't able to put both together. Jake needed everything around him running smoothly to be effective. He would never take over a game and be a factor. He was too one dimensional. Jay is someone who can force defenses to adjust to his game. He also is better on third down and has more fourth quarter comebacks than Jake had his whole career in Denver. I'm definitely glad we've moved on.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 01:33 PM
Jake gave up and said "screw it" which amounts to cowardice.

That's a little bit harsh, Kahn. A better term just might be values. Maybe Jake
just understands there are more important things in life than football . . .

At any rate, it's not for us to judge that in him, is it?

-----

Inkana7
05-11-2008, 01:55 PM
That's a little bit harsh, Kahn. A better term just might be values. Maybe Jake
just understands there are more important things in life than football . . .

At any rate, it's not for us to judge that in him, is it?

-----

This is an internet message board, judging people is precisely what we're here for.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 01:57 PM
This is an internet message board, judging people is precisely what we're here for.


Welcome to the board! :welcome:



:beer:



-----

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 02:44 PM
So whats the difference when the draft is over and Shanny tells Jake, hey, dont read a whole lot into us picking Cutler at 11. We had him rated number one on our board and when he fell within our reach, we had to take him. This is a move for the future, you're doing a fine job Jake, no worries.

Had mikey made this call or for that matter his QB coach or OC, before he had heard about this from a friend of his in Idaho, where he was during the draft, that had to ask him whats going on you had a career year took you team to the AFCCG

Does that make it any different? You either take it for what its worth, or you spend your time mistrusting what you heard, and you let it affect you. Once Jake saw Cutlers arm in camp, things started to unravel.

Once Jake saw the new playbook or the drop back passer part of it that had been dormant during Jakes stay in DEN. IMO that is when it hit him that the "Hey Jake do not read anything into getting what we considered to be the best QB in the draft when he fell into our laps" chat they had at some time after it was announced.

That was when it hit him that mikey was blowing smoke up his ass.

Thats good that Jake made his own decision for his own life. I think he stepped out on his own terms, and every man has that right. Classy? No. He did not step out with class. He didn't thank the Broncos organization for helping him be the best QB hes ever been. He rejected the fans because he never did understand his position when it comes to being the franchise signal caller in Denver. Highlighting his teammates while going out the door was the only good thing he did, if you look outside selfish reasons for his retiring.

Jake did not agree with the moves of the coaching staff and it bothered him. Thats why he did not acknowledge the Broncos org while moving on.

No class.

Just sass.



Good for him. He does it his own way. Everyone respects that right.

Class??

He never showed class here.



Sorry that Jake did not show the class that you deemed necessary and deference to the Bronco FO that I'm sure you would have considering what happened during the year..

Not all of us Humans have that warm and fuzzy love for mikey and company that you do..

I never heard ONE bad word out of Jakes mouth about the time he spent with DEN after he retired. If you have some please by all means let me know..

Just because he would have rather leave the game on his terms doth not make him a bad guy..

Just because he chose not to go to TPA and it caused DEN to lose another 7th round pick, only those really petty in nature would hold that against him..

If that is what your real problem with Jake let it go and be in peace like Jake seems to be..

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 02:51 PM
Exactly which franchise defensive tackle was there in that draft at #11?

Aksed and answer in post 72 this thread..

Bunkley or Ngata in a heart beat, maybe even Hali.

Those would have been the guys I would have taken.. We perhaps would not have even moved up to do so..

But it is moot now..

topscribe
05-11-2008, 02:57 PM
Aksed and answer in post 72 this thread..

Bunkley or Ngata in a heart beat, maybe even Hali.

Those would have been the guys I would have taken.. We perhaps would not have even moved up to do so..

But it is moot now..

They brought in Robertson, and Shanny said they had their eyes on Powell.

I think that is why they felt free to fortify the LT position.

-----

Tned
05-11-2008, 02:59 PM
Aksed and answer in post 72 this thread..

Bunkley or Ngata in a heart beat, maybe even Hali.

Those would have been the guys I would have taken.. We perhaps would not have even moved up to do so..

But it is moot now..

I find no fault in picking Jay. I think it was a great move for the future of the franchise. I think they waited too long to beef up the o-line and in reality probably had the priorities backwards in terms of last year getting D ends and this year O-line. We should have immediately followed the Cutler/Walker/Scheffler/Marshal draft with one that got one or more high potential O-linemen, then after the offensive talent was on the field, then focus on shoring up the D-line.

A D tackle or 2 was not going to make the Broncos an elite defense, so we would be better off continuing the FA route with bandaid pickups, while focusing on building an offense (players and OC) that could get back to the high 20's, low 30's in scoring, while fielding a solid, if not spectacular defense to support the offense.

Requiem / The Dagda
05-11-2008, 03:02 PM
They brought in Robertson, and Shanny said they had their eyes on Powell.

I think that is why they felt free to fortify the LT position.

-----

He was talking about when we moved up to draft Cutler in 2006.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 03:07 PM
He was talking about when we moved up to draft Cutler in 2006.

:doh: Well, guess I need another pot of coffee or two.

But that is even a worse conclusion on JR's part. It is no secret I was a huge
Jake fan, but I was tickled, and I remain tickled, that the Broncos did
maneuver themselves into where they could get Cutler. :beer:

-----

Tned
05-11-2008, 03:12 PM
:doh: Well, guess I need another pot of coffee or two.

But that is even a worse conclusion on JR's part. It is no secret I was a huge
Jake fan, but I was tickled, and I remain tickled, that the Broncos did
maneuver themselves into where they could get Cutler. :beer:

-----

Ditto. I posted this on mania a couple months after the draft:

Thread Title was: I had a dream...


I had a dream...

A lot of people on this board seem to think that I am a Jake lover, Jakester, worshipper, Jake applogist, etc. You pick the moniker.

I thought I would set the record straight on where I stand with Jake, and what my dream was not so long ago.

First, I think there are a handful of QB's that I would love to have behind center for the Broncos and that I think are Elite or soon to be. Palmer, Brady, either Manning, McNabb (when healthy), Ben (I think, jury is still out), and maybe one or two more that are escaping me.

After this group of QB's, I think there is another group of 10 or so QB's that are about equal. Some of these QB's do some things better than others; have up and down years; they are good enough to help their team win, but not good enough to carry the team. Some of them are better suited for some teams than others. I think Jake is among this group.

A perfect example is Jake and Bledsoe. Bledsoe needs an offensive line that is big and can play straight up pass blocking and give him time to throw, and then he can be very effective. Put Jake behind the same line and he probably won't do well, because he tends to throw a low ball that is tipped a lot, and is better mixing up pocket and bootleg throws, so he is better suited to an offense like the Broncos. Put Bledsoe in that same offensive scheme (Broncos) and he won't do well, because he can't move well enough to make the bootleg offense work, and our o-line isn't good enough to straight up pass block all day.

So, do I think Jake is Elite? No. Do I think he is in the next tier of QB's and a good fit in Denver? Yes.

However, I would be lieing if I said that when the Broncos are down in the fourth quarter that I have faith that Jake is going to lead us from behind. I just don't feel confident in those situations. On the other hand, when the Broncos have a 6 point lead and Brady is on the field with the ball, I'm like, Oh darn (keepin it clean) not again.

So, what was my dream?

When the Broncos traded for Washington's '06 first round pick, during to the '05 draft, I was hoping that Washington would have a horrible 2-4 win season and we would get a shot at Leinart. At the time, Leinart was considered the undisputed number one pick if he came out, and was expected to be the number one pick again in '06. Obviously, things changed.

Early in the season, I focused on the Washington games almost as much as Denver's, because I was hoping for a horrible season for WSH, and a great pick for us. As the season went on, I realized my dream was dead.

Now we fast forward to a few weeks before the draft, and we start making moves to move up in the draft. At this point, I start thinking, maybe Shanny will go for it and move up to pick Young, who looked like he could be a good fit for our offense, given some polish. At the time, Cutler was starting to make headlines as he raced up the mock-drafts, but I still wasn't thinking much about him.

Come draft day, Shanny moves up and get's Cutler. Was that my dream? Not exactly, because I hand't really considered Cutler one of the top guys (I don't follow NCAA football) and had only heard his name on sports center and stuff, but Shanny moving up to grab a QB that could be OUR guy for a decade or more, that was my dream.

So, in summary, I think Jake is a great fit for our offense, and is under appreciated by a lot of forum members, but at the same time I hoped, but didn't think it would happen, that Shanny would do something bold and get something more than a good fit, but got an elite QB.

I hope that Cutler is that elite QB, but only time will tell.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:16 PM
I'm not sure what your point is here. This just proves that Brees elevated his game when competition came in rather than giving up.



So you're saying that if we drafted someone "better" than Elway, he would have given up and tanked the season like Jake did? Or are your saying that Maddox wasn't good enough to push Elway?

Either point is stupid. When a rookie comes in in the first round, it's expected that he'll take over. It's the vet's job to see to it that he doesn't. Elway never stopped competing. Montana didn't give up when Young came in. Young was good enough to push him. Jake gave up and said "screw it" which amounts to cowardice.

John and the head coach hated each other had to have a buffer coach between the two of them.. Danny boy wanted to trade John, maddox did nothing else but piss john off. I've heard many say do not compare Jake and John in the same sentence.

I remember Jake saying once he was thankful each day that someone would actually pay him for playing pro football, at no time in college did he dream he would continue to the pros.

Hardly someone to compare to JOHN IMO..

You're the one who started making accusations that he was "betrayed by the coaching staff" and insinuated that he did the logical thing by giving up. That's a total load.

If you say so.. that is my opinion, after the golden child was drafted it was a matter of time before Jake was gone regardless of how good he might have played. The only reason he did not started the season with Jay was he had already committed that FUBAR with greasy, had to have the time for the vets on the teams to come around... IMO

I loved Jake here. I think Jake, when he wanted to be, was a very solid QB for us. Unfortunately he needed a top five defense and a top five running game if we were ever going to get to the promised land with him. We weren't able to put both together. Jake needed everything around him running smoothly to be effective. He would never take over a game and be a factor. He was too one dimensional. Jay is someone who can force defenses to adjust to his game. He also is better on third down and has more fourth quarter comebacks than Jake had his whole career in Denver. I'm definitely glad we've moved on.

And Jay is not going to get to the promised land with the team that Jake had around him either. Please do not play the Jay can carry this team crap cause even though he has a great arm, and perhaps a better mind. Even John had to have help a pretty decent top ten D and HOF type players on Offense in the names of ZIM, TD, Sharpe, Rod and a bunch of other top notch players in Griff , Eddie Mac and the rest of the OLINE he had..

Right now mikey is grasping at straws drafting injured players hoping that they will come back strong as ever and he become a hero again by finding late round talent to haul his sorry drafting ass out of the fire..

Had he not blown almost totally to hell the 2000-04 drafts he has a huge hole to dig out of. IMO

In fact had he come up with a couple of decent (Real Starters) players every year can you say for sure Jake could have not beaten PIT that year?

BY real starters I mean someone that could actually on another team also.. Right now with the exception of Poorti$$ & Price every one of our traded/cut talent are backups at best with their new teams.. One even has to wonder if price would have went to somewhere besides BAL that was loaded with surrounding talent, if he would have had such a good year.. Same for poorti$$ had he not gone to team that believed in the run and had damned good OLINE would he still be in the league.. OR started?

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:20 PM
They brought in Robertson, and Shanny said they had their eyes on Powell.

I think that is why they felt free to fortify the LT position.

-----

That is fair I had NO issue with getting a OLT You know I have been bitching about the LOS for years now..

I just do not think clady was the way to go.. there were others that IMO are better choices..

Requiem / The Dagda
05-11-2008, 03:28 PM
Well JR, there weren't better choices.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:31 PM
I find no fault in picking Jay. I think it was a great move for the future of the franchise. I think they waited too long to beef up the o-line and in reality probably had the priorities backwards in terms of last year getting D ends and this year O-line. We should have immediately followed the Cutler/Walker/Scheffler/Marshal draft with one that got one or more high potential O-linemen, then after the offensive talent was on the field, then focus on shoring up the D-line.

A D tackle or 2 was not going to make the Broncos an elite defense, so we would be better off continuing the FA route with bandaid pickups, while focusing on building an offense (players and OC) that could get back to the high 20's, low 30's in scoring, while fielding a solid, if not spectacular defense to support the offense.

Overall it was probably the best thing to do IF they would have acknowledged that this team was a few years away from contending..

They expected Jay to come in and be another JOHN the fans did also how many morons called for the super bowl last year 2006 before the season started and then again last year getting to the playoffs.

Most folks are so optimistic to see the reality that the talent level on this past few years squad at not remotely close to that of the Super bowl winners were..

Unless we develop a defense that can stop the run consistently meaning top ten and be able to run ourselves consistently we are not going anywhere..

If these rookies contribute this year and the others from 2006-07 improve again this year then with a couple of first day impact choices next year then 2009 and beyond will be special..

but unless four or five other AFC elite team melt down we are not sniffing playoffs till 2010.

MOtorboat
05-11-2008, 03:34 PM
Overall it was probably the best thing to do IF they would have acknowledged that this team was a few years away from contending..

They expected Jay to come in and be another JOHN the fans did also how many morons called for the super bowl last year 2006 before the season started and then again last year getting to the playoffs.

Most folks are so optimistic to see the reality that the talent level on this past few years squad at not remotely close to that of the Super bowl winners were..

Unless we develop a defense that can stop the run consistently meaning top ten and be able to run ourselves consistently we are not going anywhere..

If these rookies contribute this year and the others from 2006-07 improve again this year then with a couple of first day impact choices next year then 2009 and beyond will be special..

but unless four or five other AFC elite team melt down we are not sniffing playoffs till 2010.

Why does the organization have to acknowledge anything?

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:34 PM
Well JR, there weren't better choices.


well dream, that is you opinion which you are entitled to.. I do not share them..:salute:

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:36 PM
Why does the organization have to acknowledge anything?


I guess they do not have to. But then that is not being honest with your fan base..

Truth in advertising ring true for you?

Just seems to be the right thing to do.. IMO

BTW I assume you were not in harms way with the recent spate of twisters..

MOtorboat
05-11-2008, 03:40 PM
I guess they do not have to. But then that is not being honest with your fan base..

Truth in advertising ring true for you?

Just seems to be the right thing to do.. IMO

BTW I assume you were not in harms way with the recent spate of twisters..

Mike Shanahan and Pat Bowlen have made it clear that every year is a year they want to win. They drafted Cutler because they expected Plummer to play another year or two and make this team good. It would not be worth it, imo, to move up to get Ngata, the only worthwhile defensive tackle in that draft, but it was worthwhile in moving up to get a franchise quarterback. Did Shanahan fail to get a decent defensive line assembled...yes...he did, but it had little or nothing to do with the Cutler pick.

No...I was not anywhere near the latest spat...I'm not sure which town it was in, but it was closer to cswil and Niner.

Requiem / The Dagda
05-11-2008, 03:40 PM
well dream, that is you opinion which you are entitled to.. I do not share them..:salute:

I'm just wondering how you can even make that assessment unless you watched Clady extensively and compared him to Williams (I'm assuming he was the tackle you wanted) -- I mean, otherwise it really doesn't make sense.

Tned
05-11-2008, 03:42 PM
I guess they do not have to. But then that is not being honest with your fan base..

Truth in advertising ring true for you?

Just seems to be the right thing to do.. IMO

BTW I assume you were not in harms way with the recent spate of twisters..

Come on Jr, that's ridiculous. If the team was 2-14, then maybe a coach saying, "we have made some strides, but in all reality it will take us some time...." might be in order, but where the Broncos stand in the NFL, nobody, not even the coaches can clearly define 'when' the team will be a SB contender.

You say 2010 before the team even sniffs the playoffs. That is simply rhetoric. There is no fact or science to a statement like that. Just like there wouldn't have been if Shanny said, "we drafted Jay because we won't be competitive for 2-3 years."

The team had just come from the AFCCG, and while very few predicted the damage that Kubiak's departure and Heimerdingers arrival would cause, there was no reason to believe the team would hover around .500 for two years.

Instead, what was expected, and I am sure by the coaching staff as well, is that the Broncos would continue '06 where they left of in '05, then in '07 Jake and Jay would compete for the starting job.

You make it sound like the Broncos were a 2 win team in '05 and Shanny needed to temper expectations in '06 by giving this 'speech' you suggest.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 03:47 PM
Mike Shanahan and Pat Bowlen have made it clear that every year is a year they want to win. They drafted Cutler because they expected Plummer to play another year or two and make this team good. It would not be worth it, imo, to move up to get Ngata, the only worthwhile defensive tackle in that draft, but it was worthwhile in moving up to get a franchise quarterback. Did Shanahan fail to get a decent defensive line assembled...yes...he did, but it had little or nothing to do with the Cutler pick.

No...I was not anywhere near the latest spat...I'm not sure which town it was in, but it was closer to cswil and Niner.


And I want to win also and hope to win the lotto each week.

But when I talk to my customers/clients I do not lie to them, nor do I give them false hopes about the products I represent....

If mikey is the genius everyone says he is then either he is stupid or lying about real expectations, given the talent level of this team the past few years..

Do you not agree with this?

Tned
05-11-2008, 03:49 PM
And I want to win also and hope to win the lotto each week.

But when I talk to my customers/clients I do not lie to them, nor do I give them false hopes about the products I represent....

If mikey is the genius everyone says he is then either he is stupid or lying about real expectations, given the talent level of this team the past few years..

Do you not agree with this?

No, I don't agree. You have created an either or (stupid or lying) to suit your hatred for the man. It doesn't take into account the other realities of life in the NFL.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 04:01 PM
Come on Jr, that's ridiculous. If the team was 2-14, then maybe a coach saying, "we have made some strides, but in all reality it will take us some time...." might be in order, but where the Broncos stand in the NFL, nobody, not even the coaches can clearly define 'when' the team will be a SB contender.

To lead the fan base along thinking he is going to take us tot the promised land while not outright saying it just the mention for Pat or Mikes mouth that our goal each year is winning the Superbowl is IMO disingenuous..

You say 2010 before the team even sniffs the playoffs. That is simply rhetoric. There is no fact or science to a statement like that. Just like there wouldn't have been if Shanny said, "we drafted Jay because we won't be competitive for 2-3 years."

NO facts but the odds are not in our favor with SAN being as talented as they are KC on the rise as well as OAK (if the moron will let his coach do his job) this division is not going to be a cake walk like so many folks think..
JAX a BUF CLE are all on the rise and have been rebuilding for a few more years than we have been.

The team had just come from the AFCCG, and while very few predicted the damage that Kubiak's departure and Heimerdingers arrival would cause, there was no reason to believe the team would hover around .500 for two years.

Instead, what was expected, and I am sure by the coaching staff as well, is that the Broncos would continue '06 where they left of in '05, then in '07 Jake and Jay would compete for the starting job.

You make it sound like the Broncos were a 2 win team in '05 and Shanny needed to temper expectations in '06 by giving this 'speech' you suggest.


There was not doubt in my mind that mikey had intentions of dumping Jake at the first opportunity. Just like he did when he brought his boy greasy on board..

Only he knew he had to have the veterans on board first, unlike what happened the time before.. When he arbitrarily made the switch without it..

By changing the system to one that was designed for the drop back pocket passing that Jay was more used to that was the telling blow for Jake.. IMO

Tned
05-11-2008, 04:04 PM
There was not doubt in my mind that mikey had intentions of dumping Jake at the first opportunity. Just like he did when he brought his boy greasy on board..

Only he knew he had to have the veterans on board first, unlike what happened the time before.. When he arbitrarily made the switch without it..

By changing the system to one that was designed for the drop back pocket passing that Jay was more used to that was the telling blow for Jake.. IMO

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, so I tend to doubt that Shanahan intentionally tanked a season to make it 'easier' to install Cutler. If he didn't care about blowing off an entire season, then he could have just dealt with some upset veterans by benching Plummer right away.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 04:12 PM
No, I don't agree. You have created an either or (stupid or lying) to suit your hatred for the man. It doesn't take into account the other realities of life in the NFL.

contrary to your persistent statement of me hating mikey, I do not hate mikey the coach. I do not trust mikey the GM to do the right thing for the club.

So IF you wish to believe I hate him I can not change your mind on this..

For mikey not to know that talent level is STUPID most fans know we do not stack up against the elite teams..

If he is unwilling to acknowledge the lack of talent he is lying..

Seems pretty simple to me..

Let me ask do you believe that last years talent/experience level was that of say NE, INDY, SAN, PIT or JAX, maybe even CLE, HOU, TEN or BUF.

How about the coaching?

Tned
05-11-2008, 04:17 PM
Let me ask do you believe that last years talent/experience level was that of say NE, INDY, SAN, PIT or JAX, maybe even CLE, HOU, TEN or BUF.

How about the coaching?

What does last year's talent have to do with an announcement following the '06 draft?

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 04:18 PM
I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, so I tend to doubt that Shanahan intentionally tanked a season to make it 'easier' to install Cutler. If he didn't care about blowing off an entire season, then he could have just dealt with some upset veterans by benching Plummer right away.


I did not see it that way but then, who Am I?

I saw a kid with a new QB under the Christmas tree..

I wonder when the revised playbook (more passing game) was given to Jake to study before or after the draft?

I think he was OK with Jake playing for most of the season giving the rook time to adjust.. and for the other players to come on board with the up coming switch..

Even you started a thread about implementing a passing system without having the players to play it.. any doubt in your mind about that?

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 04:19 PM
What does last year's talent have to do with an announcement following the '06 draft?

have no idea what your talkinfg about here..

Tned
05-11-2008, 04:22 PM
I did not see it that way but then, who Am I?

I saw a kid with a new QB under the Christmas tree..

I wonder when the revised playbook (more passing game) was given to Jake to study before or after the draft?

I think he was OK with Jake playing for most of the season giving the rook time to adjust.. and for the other players to come on board with the up coming switch..

Even you started a thread about implementing a passing system without having the players to play it.. any doubt in your mind about that?

No doubt in my mind. I just don't think it was a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation, where the coach brought in a scheme he knew Jake would fail at so he could 'justify' giving Jay the job sooner. That is simply ludicrous.

Instead, Kubiak was gone, the Broncos had just been shut down in the AFCCG and Shanny brought in his old buddy Heimerdinger to retool the passing game.

Where Shanahan blew it was in ensuring that the scheme and play calling didn't change until the players on the field could implement it, OR possibly for assuming the players on the field 'could' handle the new scheme. HOWEVER, I do not think he intentionally put in a system he knew would fail so that he could justify replacing Jake with Jay.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 04:45 PM
No doubt in my mind. I just don't think it was a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation, where the coach brought in a scheme he knew Jake would fail at so he could 'justify' giving Jay the job sooner. That is simply ludicrous.

Instead, Kubiak was gone, the Broncos had just been shut down in the AFCCG and Shanny brought in his old buddy Heimerdinger to retool the passing game.

Where Shanahan blew it was in ensuring that the scheme and play calling didn't change until the players on the field could implement it, OR possibly for assuming the players on the field 'could' handle the new scheme. HOWEVER, I do not think he intentionally put in a system he knew would fail so that he could justify replacing Jake with Jay.

OK if you say so..

Lets see, Kubes Jakes closest mentor is gone, new guy whom he does not have any history at all, customizes the new system for new kid. New guy comes from the same town as Jay played in the year before.

If you were in Jakes shoes, this does not raise any red flags for you?

elsid13
05-11-2008, 05:03 PM
I did not see it that way but then, who Am I?

I saw a kid with a new QB under the Christmas tree..

I wonder when the revised playbook (more passing game) was given to Jake to study before or after the draft?

I think he was OK with Jake playing for most of the season giving the rook time to adjust.. and for the other players to come on board with the up coming switch..

Even you started a thread about implementing a passing system without having the players to play it.. any doubt in your mind about that?

Nothing changed with this offense it the same basic philosophy. What has changes is the use of more Ace sets and 3 Wide. That was done to off set the 3/4 defense that Denver was/is seeing. The ACE set allows the QB and line more balance attack and 3 WR set allows the offense to spread the field and prevent the LB for blitzing.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 05:09 PM
Nothing changed with this offense it the same basic philosophy. What has changes is the use of more Ace sets and 3 Wide. That was done to off set the 3/4 defense that Denver was/is seeing. The ACE set allows the QB and line more balance attack and 3 WR set allows the offense to spread the field and prevent the LB for blitzing.

Yep and if we had the OLINE and WR's to carry it off then no problems..

Certainly made a huge difference in those SAN games..

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 06:55 PM
I find no fault in picking Jay. I think it was a great move for the future of the franchise. I think they waited too long to beef up the o-line and in reality probably had the priorities backwards in terms of last year getting D ends and this year O-line. We should have immediately followed the Cutler/Walker/Scheffler/Marshal draft with one that got one or more high potential O-linemen, then after the offensive talent was on the field, then focus on shoring up the D-line.

A D tackle or 2 was not going to make the Broncos an elite defense, so we would be better off continuing the FA route with bandaid pickups, while focusing on building an offense (players and OC) that could get back to the high 20's, low 30's in scoring, while fielding a solid, if not spectacular defense to support the offense.

Several months ago Shanahan I think revealed some of his reasons for drafting Jay three years ago. In the article that was written Shanahan pointed out that Jay is student of game whereas Jake was not. Jay will put in the time to study Monday-Saturday where Jake just was wanted the game plan given to him on Saturday. (This is not an exact quote.)

Now that wasn't first time I heard comments Dave Krieger said something similar right about the time Jay was drafted. He said in his article that Jake always practices hard when he is here but does go beyond that. (Again this not an exact quote.)

elsid13
05-11-2008, 06:58 PM
Several months ago Shanahan I think revealed some of his reasons for drafting Jay three years ago. In the article that was written Shanahan pointed out that Jay is student of game whereas Jake was not. Jay will put in the time to study Monday-Saturday where Jake just was wanted the game plan given to him on Saturday. (This is not an exact quote.)

Now that wasn't first time I heard comments Dave Krieger said something similar right about the time Jay was drafted. He said in his article that Jake always practices hard when he is here but does go beyond that. (Again this not an exact quote.)

You right. Jay is gym rat and lives for football. Could anyone see Jake going to ATL to train with his teammates in the offseason? Jake had other interests and played football because that what people thought he should do. Jay lives and breath the game.

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 07:00 PM
No doubt in my mind. I just don't think it was a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation, where the coach brought in a scheme he knew Jake would fail at so he could 'justify' giving Jay the job sooner. That is simply ludicrous.

Instead, Kubiak was gone, the Broncos had just been shut down in the AFCCG and Shanny brought in his old buddy Heimerdinger to retool the passing game.

Where Shanahan blew it was in ensuring that the scheme and play calling didn't change until the players on the field could implement it, OR possibly for assuming the players on the field 'could' handle the new scheme. HOWEVER, I do not think he intentionally put in a system he knew would fail so that he could justify replacing Jake with Jay.

It was made clear publically that when Heimerdinger was hired the playbook was going to be opened up. I have no doubt Shanahan would have let Jake know this at the time of Heimerdinger's hiring.

broncohead
05-11-2008, 07:07 PM
Basically we wanted to go into a new direction. Jake had his chance to be the "guy" but the new playbook didn't play to his strength. He had his chance but didn't rice to the occation.

omac
05-11-2008, 07:12 PM
Both of those things concerned me, + he played two years at OLT a small school against lousy at best competition. Before that if I remember correctly he was a DL player..

When he played against topflight schools he did not fare as well.. several penalties for moving before the snap. One can score a 13 on the wunderlick almost by showing up and getting your name correct..;) And frankly that fast feet comment was a repeat of what mikey said of the foster pick we all know how that DAFT turned out...

Whereas Williams if I remember correctly had a 23 played in a topflight conference played an extra 15-20 as a pure OLT games more than clady did..

lets hope he becomes the OLT that can protect Jays blindside for the next decade or more..

Boise State did beat Oregon St., USC, and Oklahoma. In that Fiesta Bowl against a pretty good defensive team in Oklahoma (ranked 17th in the nation in both points allowed and yards allowed), they scored 43 points, with their QB getting 262 yards and 3 TDs. Oklahoma is a big school program. As a sophomore, Clady was their best lineman and had only recently shifted to the left side. He probably did a pretty good job protecting his QB Zabransky, or he wouldn't have completed all those passes and TDs. I haven't seen the game, though, so I'm basing this on posted articles. None have mention of how many times Zabransky was sacked from the left side, but their are mentions of when the Sooners QB was sacked.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/600899.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap?gid=200701010024
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/ryanclady.html
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_preview_2006_fiesta.html
http://www.broncosports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9900&ATCLID=736125

So, that leads me to believe he's played well against some big name schools, and some considered him their best lineman, even as a sophomore.

Based on nfldraftcountdown, Albert's only started 2 games as a LT, and is primarily a guard who can project well as a LT (as in upside, not experience).

Tned
05-11-2008, 07:15 PM
Basically we wanted to go into a new direction. Jake had his chance to be the "guy" but the new playbook didn't play to his strength. He had his chance but didn't rice to the occation.

That's a slightly oversimplified view of history. It wasn't just Jake that didn't rise to the occasion. The entire offense struggled, before and after Jay took over.

The problem wasn't people not 'rising' to the occasion. The problem was Heimerdinger introducing a scheme and calling plays that the talent on the field "could not" execute. He did it in "06 and '07 and subsequently is gone in '08. That's the simple view.

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 07:21 PM
Boise State did beat Oregon St., USC, and Oklahoma. In that Fiesta Bowl against a pretty good defensive team in Oklahoma (ranked 17th in the nation in both points allowed and yards allowed), they scored 43 points, with their QB getting 262 yards and 3 TDs. Oklahoma is a big school program. As a sophomore, Clady was their best lineman and had only recently shifted to the left side. He probably did a pretty good job protecting his QB Zabransky, or he wouldn't have completed all those passes and TDs. I haven't seen the game, though, so I'm basing this on posted articles. None have mention of how many times Zabransky was sacked from the left side, but their are mentions of when the Sooners QB was sacked.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/600899.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap?gid=200701010024
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/ryanclady.html
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_preview_2006_fiesta.html
http://www.broncosports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9900&ATCLID=736125

So, that leads me to believe he's played well against some big name schools, and some considered him their best lineman, even as a sophomore.

Based on nfldraftcountdown, Albert's only started 2 games as a LT, and is primarily a guard who can project well as a LT (as in upside, not experience).

Excellent post Omac. :beer: Clady was widely considered the best offensive tackle in the draft after Long regardless of the fact that he didn't play against a lot of top flight defensive ends.

omac
05-11-2008, 07:24 PM
Ditto. I posted this on mania a couple months after the draft:

Thread Title was: I had a dream...

Hey man, great post! I hadn't read that before. :cheers:

omac
05-11-2008, 07:38 PM
Basically we wanted to go into a new direction. Jake had his chance to be the "guy" but the new playbook didn't play to his strength. He had his chance but didn't rice to the occation.

Yeah, that is the bottom line. After the AFCCG meltdown, Shanny was looking to take the offense in another direction. Either Jake stepped up, or he'd eventually be suplanted sooner than later by the incumbent. Heck, only an injury kept Brees from relinquishing his job to Rivers; Favre's kept Rogers on the bench for 3(4?) years. McNabb is doing the same thing with Kolb. Lossman couldn't with Edwards.

The Broncos got a QB who they thought could make their team better in the future, since they didn't believe their at the time current QB could win them a superbowl. That, and the way they got him, was not backstabbing at all.

omac
05-11-2008, 07:40 PM
Excellent post Omac. :beer: Clady was widely considered the best offensive tackle in the draft after Long regardless of the fact that he didn't play against a lot of top flight defensive ends.

Thanks man! :cheers:

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 07:49 PM
Yeah, that is the bottom line. After the AFCCG meltdown, Shanny was looking to take the offense in another direction. Either Jake stepped up, or he'd eventually be suplanted sooner than later by the incumbent. Heck, only an injury kept Brees from relinquishing his job to Rivers; Favre's kept Rogers on the bench for 3(4?) years. McNabb is doing the same thing with Kolb. Lossman couldn't with Edwards.

The Broncos got a QB who they thought could make their team better in the future, since they didn't believe their at the time current QB could win them a superbowl. That, and the way they got him, was not backstabbing at all.

I think Shanahan gave Plummer a more fair chance to keep his job. While Jake was never a great pocket passer, why didn't he come back to Denver during the offseason and work at being a better pocket passer. I'm not saying he would become great pocket passer, however he might have gotten a little better had he spent some extra time at it.

Tned
05-11-2008, 07:52 PM
I think Shanahan gave Plummer a more fair chance to keep his job. While Jake was never a great pocket passer, why didn't he come back to Denver during the offseason and work at being a better pocket passer. I'm not saying he would become great pocket passer, however he might have gotten a little better had he spent some extra time at it.

The only way he was going to be a better pocket passer in Denver was if he spent the entire offseason giving the O-line steroid shots so they could actually "create and maintain" a pocket to pass from. Same problem Jay has had for his 21 games.

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 07:57 PM
The only way he was going to be a better pocket passer in Denver was if he spent the entire offseason giving the O-line steroid shots so they could actually "create and maintain" a pocket to pass from. Same problem Jay has had for his 21 games.

I don't agree. He was weak at reading an entire field. Jay with same talent around him still threw for over 3,000 yards.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 08:02 PM
I think Shanahan gave Plummer a more fair chance to keep his job. While Jake was never a great pocket passer, why didn't he come back to Denver during the offseason and work at being a better pocket passer. I'm not saying he would become great pocket passer, however he might have gotten a little better had he spent some extra time at it.

I don't think Jake really wanted the job anymore. I believe he was essentially
through with football before that season began. It was just a matter of
picking his spot to leave. He found the spot, and he left.

In short, he didn't come back and work at being a better pocket passer
because he didn't want to. He wanted to go home and do what he's doing now.

And if it made any difference to him, he would have my blessing.

-----

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 08:08 PM
I don't think Jake really wanted the job anymore. I believe he was essentially
through with football before that season began. It was just a matter of
picking his spot to leave. He found the spot, and he left.

In short, he didn't come back and work at being a better pocket passer
because he didn't want to. He wanted to go home and do what he's doing now.

And if it made any difference to him, he would have my blessing.

-----

I don't think so. Jake was never one to come in on his time off to work at improving his play.

topscribe
05-11-2008, 08:16 PM
I don't think so. Jake was never one to come in on his time off to work at improving his play.

I don't think Jake was ever all that dedicated to football. That is why he
seldom came in on his time off. He had quite enough, and he quit. That's the
thing to do if you've had your fill.

Jake took an ongoing beating, mental and physical, from the time he walked
onto the field as a Cardinal. I don't think I would be too interested in it after
all that, either.

-----

Acedude
05-11-2008, 08:23 PM
And I want to win also and hope to win the lotto each week.

But when I talk to my customers/clients I do not lie to them, nor do I give them false hopes about the products I represent....

If mikey is the genius everyone says he is then either he is stupid or lying about real expectations, given the talent level of this team the past few years..

Do you not agree with this?

Shanahan isn't a genius, that's for sure.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 09:37 PM
You right. Jay is gym rat and lives for football. Could anyone see Jake going to ATL to train with his teammates in the offseason? Jake had other interests and played football because that what people thought he should do. Jay lives and breath the game.

Seemed to me that the off season before the 13-3 year Jake and Gary sat down and studied game film of every play he had played since his coming to town.. The improvements made during the 2005 were plain for all to see.

I do not think that Jake just decided to learn the game plan on SAT since they are usually implemented on Wed through Fridays..

Perhaps he is not the mastermind, but frankly the 13-3 season there were few things that had anyone, but the Jake haters, to want for much UNTIL the PIT game.. Then the team had a melt down, NO one had a great game, except BEN that is..

If memory serves correct, during the regular season Jake set a broncos record for the number of passes thrown between PICKS. Was closing in on an NFL record.

2005 season #8 in the QB rating, second to last for starters for Picks thrown.

Tear Jake down all Y'all want but I'll remember the the winning percentage until the scheme was changed in 2006. 70+%

Will Jay be better becuase he is still a student of the game, time will tell.

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 09:42 PM
Originally Posted by Jrwiz
And I want to win also and hope to win the lotto each week.

But when I talk to my customers/clients I do not lie to them, nor do I give them false hopes about the products I represent....

If mikey is the genius everyone says he is then either he is stupid or lying about real expectations, given the talent level of this team the past few years..

Do you not agree with this?


No, I don't agree. You have created an either or (stupid or lying) to suit your hatred for the man. It doesn't take into account the other realities of life in the NFL.

No it sure doesn't sure doesn't take any other realities of life in the NFL.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 09:50 PM
Boise State did beat Oregon St., USC, and Oklahoma. In that Fiesta Bowl against a pretty good defensive team in Oklahoma (ranked 17th in the nation in both points allowed and yards allowed), they scored 43 points, with their QB getting 262 yards and 3 TDs. Oklahoma is a big school program. As a sophomore, Clady was their best lineman and had only recently shifted to the left side. He probably did a pretty good job protecting his QB Zabransky, or he wouldn't have completed all those passes and TDs. I haven't seen the game, though, so I'm basing this on posted articles. None have mention of how many times Zabransky was sacked from the left side, but their are mentions of when the Sooners QB was sacked.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/600899.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap?gid=200701010024
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/ot/ryanclady.html
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_preview_2006_fiesta.html
http://www.broncosports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9900&ATCLID=736125

So, that leads me to believe he's played well against some big name schools, and some considered him their best lineman, even as a sophomore.

Based on nfldraftcountdown, Albert's only started 2 games as a LT, and is primarily a guard who can project well as a LT (as in upside, not experience).

Thanks for the info, one bowl game against one team doth not make him into a superstar..

Do you seriously think OK was thinking the broncos from Id was going toe give them a game? No body gave them a chance it was a total surprise to everyone it spoiled OK's perfect season if I remember correctly.

Do you think perhaps, just perhaps they caught them unprepared that day?

Do you really think the sooners practiced all that hard after watching game film of them?

Do you think they prepared for this game like they did for conference games?

Remember the adage "on any given Sunday".

All that bowl game did was lead me to believe that OK was totally unprepared for th game. Whether it was the coaches that didn't take a WAC team taht plays football on BLUE astro turf seriously or the players or perhaps both..


I'd still rather had Albert or Williams.. Albert could always play guard if he failed at OLT whereas clady is a true and only Left tackle..

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 10:02 PM
You right. Jay is gym rat and lives for football. Could anyone see Jake going to ATL to train with his teammates in the offseason? Jake had other interests and played football because that what people thought he should do. Jay lives and breath the game.

I don't think he came to the pros with idea that he was here to please other people. He just didn't have the desire to commit himself to improve himself as a quarterback. If other players can be criticized for committing themselves to put extra time then it's a fair criticism of Plummer as well.

omac
05-11-2008, 11:01 PM
I don't agree. He was weak at reading an entire field. Jay with same talent around him still threw for over 3,000 yards.

I agree; although for it, Jay was getting pummelled. But that's the kind of QB he is, even at Vanderbilt. He'd take the incoming contact to deliver the ball.

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 11:06 PM
I agree; although for it, Jay was getting pummelled. But that's the kind of QB he is, even at Vanderbilt. He'd take the incoming contact to deliver the ball.

SOONER rather than later that will end a career..

I'm glad we are FINALLY upgrading the OLINE hope it is enough..

TXBRONC
05-11-2008, 11:07 PM
I agree; although for it, Jay was getting pummelled. But that's the kind of QB he is, even at Vanderbilt. He'd take the incoming contact to deliver the ball.

Exactly, it was difficult, fact is that even with a bad offensive line he still read the entire field and make plays.

omac
05-11-2008, 11:31 PM
Thanks for the info, one bowl game against one team doth not make him into a superstar..

I mentioned 3 teams, and that was just during that season.


Do you seriously think OK was thinking the broncos from Id was going toe give them a game? No body gave them a chance it was a total surprise to everyone it spoiled OK's perfect season if I remember correctly.

Do you think perhaps, just perhaps they caught them unprepared that day?

Do you really think the sooners practiced all that hard after watching game film of them?

Do you think they prepared for this game like they did for conference games?

Remember the adage "on any given Sunday".

All that bowl game did was lead me to believe that OK was totally unprepared for th game. Whether it was the coaches that didn't take a WAC team taht plays football on BLUE astro turf seriously or the players or perhaps both..

Your post just sounds lik a whole bunch of excuses; at least the Oklahoma coach didn't make any excuses. In one of the articles I posted, you'd see that Oklahoma thought beforehand that they were a worthy opponent. You're trying to make it sound like a one-time thing, but they also have beaten USC that same year. Read the scout article that talks about Boise St. as a team, that they're a veteran team that's answered numerous challenges. No matter, for them to score 43 points against a defense that allowed an average of 15 points, that's huge.


I'd still rather had Albert or Williams.. Albert could always play guard if he failed at OLT whereas clady is a true and only Left tackle..

Okay you obviously didn't even read the scouting reports. Clady started his freshman year at RT, so ... no, he's not just a LT; he can move to the right side.

Albert is a primarily a guard, who's started all of 2 games at LT. To call him a LT who could play guard is way off; he's a guard who might project well in the pros as a LT. And if we're looking at potential, since that's all Albert is as a LT, potential ....

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/profile_display.cfm?Prospect_ID=1309


Clady is a top ten talent. Although Jake Long is the top tackle prospect in this year's draft, Clady has the higher pro ceiling. He is a terrific athlete, but is still learning the position. On talent alone, he is above Joe Thomas (last year's top drafted tackle). A top pick for sure, Clady has the ability to contribute right away. He could anchor an offensive line for years.

So if Albert projects into a potentially good LT, Clady projects into a better LT than both Long and Thomas.

On your small school argument, I've already mentioned Oklahoma and USC as opponents they've beaten. You've given excuses for the win against Oklahoma.

omac
05-11-2008, 11:43 PM
I don't think Jake really wanted the job anymore. I believe he was essentially
through with football before that season began. It was just a matter of
picking his spot to leave. He found the spot, and he left.

In short, he didn't come back and work at being a better pocket passer
because he didn't want to. He wanted to go home and do what he's doing now.

And if it made any difference to him, he would have my blessing.

-----

Hey, he no longer has the passion to play football? That's fine and all, but if you're gonna stay one more season, you have to give it your best as a professional. If he really wanted that and he wasn't going to put in the effort, it just wouldn't be fair to the team.

He'd have your blessing to leave, and that's fine, but he'd also have your blessing not to take every opportunity to make himself perform better for the good of the team, while he's still in the team? That's way off. Better if he decided to retire before the start of that season instead, if he wasn't going to put in the effort to become better.

omac
05-11-2008, 11:44 PM
SOONER rather than later that will end a career..

I'm glad we are FINALLY upgrading the OLINE hope it is enough..

Yeah, it's taken me a while to admit that we needed help in the OL, but I do agree with you. :cheers:

Lonestar
05-11-2008, 11:48 PM
I mentioned 3 teams, and that was just during that season.



Your post just sounds lik a whole bunch of excuses; at least the Oklahoma coach didn't make any excuses. In one of the articles I posted, you'd see that Oklahoma thought beforehand that they were a worthy opponent. You're trying to make it sound like a one-time thing, but they also have beaten USC that same year. Read the scout article that talks about Boise St. as a team, that they're a veteran team that's answered numerous challenges. No matter, for them to score 43 points against a defense that allowed an average of 15 points, that's huge.



Okay you obviously didn't even read the scouting reports. Clady started his freshman year at RT, so ... no, he's not just a LT; he can move to the right side.

Albert is a primarily a guard, who's started all of 2 games at LT. To call him a LT who could play guard is way off; he's a guard who might project well in the pros as a LT. And if we're looking at potential, since that's all Albert is as a LT, potential ....

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/profile_display.cfm?Prospect_ID=1309



So if Albert projects into a potentially good LT, Clady projects into a better LT than both Long and Thomas.

On your small school argument, I've already mentioned Oklahoma and USC as opponents they've beaten. You've given excuses for the win against Oklahoma.

I still think having a small school OLT as the top choice is one I would not have made.. He played three season as a OT rt or left is doth not matter.. before that he was a DL player two seasons in the playing in the WAC does not excite me whatsoever..

I watched WAC play for close to 15 years before UTEP move out of it.. It is designed for Offense and very few teams from the WAC play much in the way of defense and I'd guess certainly the number of starting WAC DE's in the NFL could be counted on one hand..

So he had maybe 5 games against quality players in his college career.. this next year he will get 16.. Time will tell if he makes the grade..

topscribe
05-11-2008, 11:54 PM
Hey, he no longer has the passion to play football? That's fine and all, but if you're gonna stay one more season, you have to give it your best as a professional. If he really wanted that and he wasn't going to put in the effort, it just wouldn't be fair to the team.

He'd have your blessing to leave, and that's fine, but he'd also have your blessing not to take every opportunity to make himself perform better for the good of the team, while he's still in the team? That's way off. Better if he decided to retire before the start of that season instead, if he wasn't going to put in the effort to become better.

Yes, it's easy for us to sit in our favorite chair, watch them on TV, and decide
we know what they should and should not do, and what they have and
haven't done, isn't it?

So when did I say he wasn't doing his best before he quit? I get a little
irritated when people begin to put words into my mouth.

But I'll back off now and let you judge these things for Jake. I'm just not
that kind of expert. :coffee:

-----

omac
05-12-2008, 12:01 AM
Yes, it's easy for us to sit in our favorite chair, watch them on TV, and decide
we know what they should and should not do, and what they have and
haven't done, isn't it?

So when did I say he wasn't doing his best before he quit? I get a little
irritated when people begin to put words into my mouth.

But I'll back off now and let you judge these things for Jake. I'm just not
that kind of expert. :coffee:

-----

Sorry, I guess I misread your post. I thought you felt Jake's heart was no longer in football, and thus he wasn't willing to put in the time to make himself a better pocket passer. That's what it sounded like to me.

(added) Btw, it was never my point that he wanted to retire. I'm still of the impression he decided to retire only after being traded to the Bucs, so no, I don't think he was thinking retirement before, during, or even a little after the season.

omac
05-12-2008, 12:14 AM
I still think having a small school OLT as the top choice is one I would not have made.. He played three season as a OT rt or left is doth not matter.. before that he was a DL player two seasons in the playing in the WAC does not excite me whatsoever..

I watched WAC play for close to 15 years before UTEP move out of it.. It is designed for Offense and very few teams from the WAC play much in the way of defense and I'd guess certainly the number of starting WAC DE's in the NFL could be counted on one hand..

So he had maybe 5 games against quality players in his college career.. this next year he will get 16.. Time will tell if he makes the grade..

True, time will tell if he, or any of them for that matter will make the grade or not. Here's hoping he does. :cheers:

topscribe
05-12-2008, 12:18 AM
Sorry, I guess I misread your post. I thought you felt Jake's heart was no longer in football, and thus he wasn't willing to put in the time to make himself a better pocket passer. That's what it sounded like to me.

Well, maybe he wasn't. Maybe he fully realized that he is not a pocket passer,
and what's the use? A person can become only as good as he can become,
and Jake played at the level where I'm sure he knew what he could do, and
not do, at any phase of the game.

He was a decent pocket passer when the running game was popping and he
was running frequent bootlegs and rollouts. But when they expected him to
drop back and try to emulate Peyton Manning . . . well, he wasn't Peyton
Manning, and he knew it.

We had two coordinators who tried to adapt the personnel to their systems
instead of adapting the systems to the personnel. I remember people that
were remarking back then how the rollout and bootleg were disappearing.
Moreover, the pitchout had already disappeared, the play around which the
zone blocking system revolved.

Jake studied his butt off before the 2005 season, and rollouts and bootlegs
abounded, and the running game was really humping with MA and Tater.
Jake almost broke the record for the straight number of passes without an
interception, you remember, and the team went 13-3.

I don't care what the job is, if the job fit isn't there, then who is doing the
job will be ineffective. As long as the running game was working and Jake
was sprinting outside, he fit his job. When they put him back in the pocket
the job fit was gone.

And often, when that happens, the worker will throw up his hands and quit.

-----

omac
05-12-2008, 12:30 AM
Well, maybe he wasn't. Maybe he fully realized that he is not a pocket passer,
and what's the use? A person can become only as good as he can become,
and Jake played at the level where I'm sure he knew what he could do, and
not do, at any phase of the game.

He was a decent pocket passer when the running game was popping and he
was running frequent bootlegs and rollouts. But when they expected him to
drop back and try to emulate Peyton Manning . . . well, he wasn't Peyton
Manning, and he knew it.

We had two coordinators who tried to adapt the personnel to their systems
instead of adapting the systems to the personnel. I remember people that
were remarking back then how the rollout and bootleg were disappearing.
Moreover, the pitchout had already disappeared, the play around which the
zone blocking system revolved.

Jake studied his butt off before the 2005 season, and rollouts and bootlegs
abounded, and the running game was really humping with MA and Tater.
Jake almost broke the record for the straight number of passes without an
interception, you remember, and the team went 13-3.

I don't care what the job is, if the job fit isn't there, then who is doing the
job will be ineffective. As long as the running game was working and Jake
was sprinting outside, he fit his job. When they put him back in the pocket
the job fit was gone.

And often, when that happens, the worker will throw up his hands and quit.

-----

Maybe that is what happened with Jake; maybe that happened to our defense too.

I was for the move in a new direction, but I'm pretty sure Jake could still start effectively for at least a few more years in teams that are very Denver-like in their offense, like Tampa (tough battle with Garcia), Tennesse (yes, over Vince Young easily), Jacksonville (before Garrard went on fire), Oakland, who all run their offense's similar to Denver. Even a team like Minnesota, who's not too Denver like, he'd probably beat out any of their starters. Put him in an offense that Denver ran frequently, and that some teams are copying now, and he'll do pretty good.

topscribe
05-12-2008, 12:37 AM
Maybe that is what happened with Jake; maybe that happened to our defense too.

That was the other coordinator I was talking about: the defensive one.



I was for the move in a new direction, but I'm pretty sure Jake could still start effectively for at least a few more years in teams that are very Denver-like in their offense, like Tampa (tough battle with Garcia), Tennesse (yes, over Vince Young easily), Jacksonville (before Garrard went on fire), Oakland, who all run their offense's similar to Denver. Even a team like Minnesota, who's not too Denver like, he'd probably beat out any of their starters. Put him in an offense that Denver ran frequently, and that some teams are copying now, and he'll do pretty good.
Omac, I don't think Jake would have played good ball anymore. When a QB
is done, he's done, and Jake was done. His ineffectiveness in 2006 was not
due to his lack of effort. His will was broken, IMO. It's not that he wouldn't;
he couldn't. And when the Broncos shipped him out, I think that was the
proverbial straw.

Jake is not a quarterback anymore. He's now that 1432 Franklin Pike Circle
hero: husband, father, handiman around the house, and handball player.
He is us now. And he is happy, by all reports.

Jake was once a good quarterback. He never will be again.

-----

sneakers
05-12-2008, 01:00 AM
We were never going to win a Super Bowl with Jake Plummer. It just wasn't happening. The fact that we did so well with him is a testament to the coaching of Shanahan and Kubiak. If anything the experiment was the Jake Plummer era and I'm glad its over.

Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler, and Brad Johnson won one. Minus the super bowl victories, I think plummer has had a better career than all 3.

omac
05-12-2008, 02:36 AM
That was the other coordinator I was talking about: the defensive one.



Omac, I don't think Jake would have played good ball anymore. When a QB
is done, he's done, and Jake was done. His ineffectiveness in 2006 was not
due to his lack of effort. His will was broken, IMO. It's not that he wouldn't;
he couldn't. And when the Broncos shipped him out, I think that was the
proverbial straw.

Jake is not a quarterback anymore. He's now that 1432 Franklin Pike Circle
hero: husband, father, handiman around the house, and handball player.
He is us now. And he is happy, by all reports.

Jake was once a good quarterback. He never will be again.

-----

Well, at least he was able to have a career most people can only dream about. :cheers:

omac
05-12-2008, 02:48 AM
Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler, and Brad Johnson won one. Minus the super bowl victories, I think plummer has had a better career than all 3.

Plummer might definitely have been able to win superbowls with those teams, but those teams were excellent defensive teams. Denver's identity is as an offensive team.

sneakers
05-12-2008, 04:26 AM
Plummer might definitely have been able to win superbowls with those teams, but those teams were excellent defensive teams. Denver's identity is as an offensive team.

Agreed.

So perhaps, some bronco fans (not us of course :D) shouldn't put all the teams failure or success on plummer (or cutler nowadays) by saying that plummer is the winningist QB in bronco history or that Cutler isn't any good since he doesn't have a winning record...because there are many more factors as we have demonstrated in our 2 posts.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 05:52 AM
Hey, he no longer has the passion to play football? That's fine and all, but if you're gonna stay one more season, you have to give it your best as a professional. If he really wanted that and he wasn't going to put in the effort, it just wouldn't be fair to the team.

He'd have your blessing to leave, and that's fine, but he'd also have your blessing not to take every opportunity to make himself perform better for the good of the team, while he's still in the team? That's way off. Better if he decided to retire before the start of that season instead, if he wasn't going to put in the effort to become better.

I couldn't agree more, if what Top said is the case (and quite honestly I don't agree) then he either need to put forth a greater effort or retire before the start of the season.

omac
05-12-2008, 06:22 AM
Agreed.

So perhaps, some bronco fans (not us of course :D) shouldn't put all the teams failure or success on plummer (or cutler nowadays) by saying that plummer is the winningist QB in bronco history or that Cutler isn't any good since he doesn't have a winning record...because there are many more factors as we have demonstrated in our 2 posts.

Definitely agree. :beer:

Tned
05-12-2008, 06:35 AM
Hey, he no longer has the passion to play football? That's fine and all, but if you're gonna stay one more season, you have to give it your best as a professional. If he really wanted that and he wasn't going to put in the effort, it just wouldn't be fair to the team.

He'd have your blessing to leave, and that's fine, but he'd also have your blessing not to take every opportunity to make himself perform better for the good of the team, while he's still in the team? That's way off. Better if he decided to retire before the start of that season instead, if he wasn't going to put in the effort to become better.

I know recently this 'passion for the game' thing has been popularized lately, and the 'he quit' during the season and "wouldn't work Monday through Friday", etc.

I think one problem with this latest problem is that if that was the case, if Jake had 'quit' on his team and lost his desire to play, and "this" was the reason the team struggled in '06, then how do you explain the staunch support from his teammates during his 11 games as a starter and after he was replaced?

These are guys that were just in the AFCCG, are working to make the playoffs, in some cases working to have a job the next year and the team was united in supporting Jake and saying the team's struggles were not because of him.

Do you guys really think players from Rod Smith to Kyle Johnson supported Jake Plummer, who the theory is 'quit on the team' blindly out of loyalty, after a player quit and put in no effort to win?

Tned
05-12-2008, 06:50 AM
We had two coordinators who tried to adapt the personnel to their systems
instead of adapting the systems to the personnel. I remember people that
were remarking back then how the rollout and bootleg were disappearing.
Moreover, the pitchout had already disappeared, the play around which the
zone blocking system revolved.


This is a fact that some fans either don't seem to get or refuse to admit. The coordinators (assistant head coaches, actually in Heimerdinger and Bates) brought in 'their' systems and didn't factor in or care whether or not the talent on the field could exececute their systems, rather than doing what good coordinators do, which is to adapt a system to the talent on the field. To get the most out of the talent on the field.

It seems that these fans see it as an either/or, or maybe it just is easier to blame a player or two for the failure, then the organization. Not sure. By either/or, I mean that these fans are saying the organization had to change because they were too predictable, other teams had figured out what the Broncos were doing, etc., etc.

However, even if the previous was true and the Broncos needed to move in a new direction in terms of the schemes they ran (more pocket passing, less smoke and mirrors on offense, less reliance on the blitz to create pressure on defense), then there needed to be a transition plan. You don't take the same players you had on the field in the AFCCG who were not capable of running these new philosiphies with success and just put them in a position to fail. Instead, you start drafting and aquiring players through FA that will fit the new philosiphy and AFTER you have those players in place, THEN introduce the scheme changes.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 07:24 AM
I know recently this 'passion for the game' thing has been popularized lately, and the 'he quit' during the season and "wouldn't work Monday through Friday", etc.

I think one problem with this latest problem is that if that was the case, if Jake had 'quit' on his team and lost his desire to play, and "this" was the reason the team struggled in '06, then how do you explain the staunch support from his teammates during his 11 games as a starter and after he was replaced?

These are guys that were just in the AFCCG, are working to make the playoffs, in some cases working to have a job the next year and the team was united in supporting Jake and saying the team's struggles were not because of him.

Do you guys really think players from Rod Smith to Kyle Johnson supported Jake Plummer, who the theory is 'quit on the team' blindly out of loyalty, after a player quit and put in no effort to win?

I'm guessing part of your first paragraph is based on a post of mine because something along those lines. If that's the case that's not exactly what I was saying. There was article just last season where Shanahan did say something to the effect Jay is more of a student of the game and that put in great effort than Jake did. I also said Krieger had written something similar the year before. His comment was that Jake would never be criticized for being lazy while he had come in but he didn't ever put in anything above was required of him.

lex
05-12-2008, 10:00 AM
This is a fact that some fans either don't seem to get or refuse to admit. The coordinators (assistant head coaches, actually in Heimerdinger and Bates) brought in 'their' systems and didn't factor in or care whether or not the talent on the field could exececute their systems, rather than doing what good coordinators do, which is to adapt a system to the talent on the field. To get the most out of the talent on the field.

It seems that these fans see it as an either/or, or maybe it just is easier to blame a player or two for the failure, then the organization. Not sure. By either/or, I mean that these fans are saying the organization had to change because they were too predictable, other teams had figured out what the Broncos were doing, etc., etc.

However, even if the previous was true and the Broncos needed to move in a new direction in terms of the schemes they ran (more pocket passing, less smoke and mirrors on offense, less reliance on the blitz to create pressure on defense), then there needed to be a transition plan. You don't take the same players you had on the field in the AFCCG who were not capable of running these new philosiphies with success and just put them in a position to fail. Instead, you start drafting and aquiring players through FA that will fit the new philosiphy and AFTER you have those players in place, THEN introduce the scheme changes.

You make valid points all over the place however, I think its also worth pointing out that just because the names are the same, it doesnt mean the personnel is. Over time there has been an erosion on the offensive line. Can we all honestly say that Nalen, Hamilton and Lepsis were as good in 2006 as they were in 2005? We've been so fixated on drafting other areas and relying on this old idea that we can get linemen later in the draft and have been either slow to recognize that this is not as much so anymore or that we've felt other areas were a greater crisis when addressing needs in the draft. We havent really had much in the way of younger lineman pushing the vets. Without someone legitimate to push them its harder to notice a fall off since the scrubs we have for backups provide little to no basis for comparison. We've been trying to get by with guys. Ive been noticing our oline getting ragdolled with greater frequency for a few years now. Perhaps this dovetails with what youre saying, or perhaps its age? Either way its pretty apparent the difference more recently vs the Oline several years ago.

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 10:22 AM
Well, at least he was able to have a career most people can only dream about. :cheers:

He had commented several times about being amazed to be playing in the NFL, now whether he totally meant that no one knows for sure..

But if he did he did some pretty good things, considering..

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 10:37 AM
This is a fact that some fans either don't seem to get or refuse to admit. The coordinators (assistant head coaches, actually in Heimerdinger and Bates) brought in 'their' systems and didn't factor in or care whether or not the talent on the field could exececute their systems, rather than doing what good coordinators do, which is to adapt a system to the talent on the field. To get the most out of the talent on the field.

It seems that these fans see it as an either/or, or maybe it just is easier to blame a player or two for the failure, then the organization. Not sure. By either/or, I mean that these fans are saying the organization had to change because they were too predictable, other teams had figured out what the Broncos were doing, etc., etc.

However, even if the previous was true and the Broncos needed to move in a new direction in terms of the schemes they ran (more pocket passing, less smoke and mirrors on offense, less reliance on the blitz to create pressure on defense), then there needed to be a transition plan. You don't take the same players you had on the field in the AFCCG who were not capable of running these new philosiphies with success and just put them in a position to fail. Instead, you start drafting and aquiring players through FA that will fit the new philosiphy and AFTER you have those players in place, THEN introduce the scheme changes.


Your correct here, but I think mikey and group thought they could make the transition with the existing players because they were mikeys creations..

About two weeks after the season was over the light bulb went off. Hey dude we did not have the:
WRs to spread the field.
RBs to be a credible threat.
OLINE beef to make the blocks.
TE's that could LOS block and get out in routes for passing at the same time..;)

Why they did not get it before the season was over is beyond me.

Why they did not replace Lepsis during the season when it was obvious to everyone his knee was not what it used to be..

2006 was a total cluster **** for the Broncos in all phases..

Hopefully the Draft and FAs acquired this year will help to turn it around, so we can win a few more than last year and start to restock a severely depleted talent pool.

Kaylore
05-12-2008, 11:10 AM
I really don't buy that our schemes were different between '05 and '06. The "scheme" wasn't the problem. Nor was it us trying to run a scheme that we didn't have the players to execute. Coyer was still the defensive coordinator. Heimerdinger was the new offensive coordinator, and while he brought variations, these were still in the context of Mike Shanahan's offense and general philosophy. The play declined because we no longer had an every down running back, Lepsis got hurt, our defense wore down, our special teams sucked and Plummer stopped caring.

If you want to argue that the personnel were worse and that hurt the scheme, then I can agree there. However I know it wasn't Shanahan wanting to run a certain plan forcing a square peg in a round hole and stubbornly refusing to adjust. We did all we could to protect Jake and he kept screwing up. People forget the crap he threw out there. Half his mistakes weren't even under duress; He was just playing horribly. Shanahan put off starting Jay as long as he could - probably longer than he should have - but ultimately he had no choice or he would have looked dishonest with his "best players will play" philosophy. After the change was made, many of the vets predictably gave up on the season.

We weren't going anywhere with Jake as a QB - especially that year, with that line and that rushing attack. Was it all Jake's fault? No. But the other things on the team fell apart enough that all his weaknesses were totally exposed and Jake didn't want to put in the type to eliminate those defects. The rest is history.

Az Snake
05-12-2008, 11:50 AM
That was the other coordinator I was talking about: the defensive one.



Omac, I don't think Jake would have played good ball anymore. When a QB
is done, he's done, and Jake was done. His ineffectiveness in 2006 was not
due to his lack of effort. His will was broken, IMO. It's not that he wouldn't;
he couldn't. And when the Broncos shipped him out, I think that was the
proverbial straw.

Jake is not a quarterback anymore. He's now that 1432 Franklin Pike Circle
hero: husband, father, handiman around the house, and handball player.
He is us now. And he is happy, by all reports.

Jake was once a good quarterback. He never will be again.

-----


I disagree a bit.

He never was "shipped out".
He was relegated to the bench at the time.

He was traded to Tampa after it became apparent that Jake would not return just like he promised.

If you remember that season after the Broncos drafted Jay, the offense changed radically.

Where were the bootlegs ?
Where were the roll-outs ?

The passing game was mainly in the pocket, a prep for Jay.
Sure, Jake knew the day was coming, but I don't think his will was broken.


One can tell much about one's character by the look in their eyes.

Jake had that fire in his eyes that inspired teammates.

People like Jake can never get their will broken.

Jake just walked away from the game on his own terms.
Was Barry Sander's will broken ?
Was Jim Brown's will broken ?

What Mr. Brown, Barry and Jake have in common is that they all said screw it, and walked away.

Jake was not given the latitude he needed to perform.
A QB like Jake has to be able to react and adapt.

That's where I disagree top.

Jake felt the pressure that was on the Bronco organization and Shanny to start Jay. He knew it was inevitable.

Jake was fed up with the media and the NFL.
Jake was able to balance reality.
He wasn't even allowed to wear a little tribute to Pat.

Jake was not flashy, he wore denims and flannel shirts.
He was ridiculed for the frugal vehicle that he drove.

He gave his mom all his money.
He organized charities that still are growing.

Jake is still healthy, has a lovely family and is set for life.

Jake's will was not broken and if he chose, he could have continued his career for many more years.

Jake still holds many Bronco records.

It was Jake's will that told him to walk away and never come back.

Good for Jake and I wish him well.




.




.

topscribe
05-12-2008, 12:00 PM
I disagree a bit.

He never was "shipped out".
He was relegated to the bench at the time.

He was traded to Tampa after it became apparent that Jake would not return just like he promised.

If you remember that season after the Broncos drafted Jay, the offense changed radically.

Where were the bootlegs ?
Where were the roll-outs ?

The passing game was mainly in the pocket, a prep for Jay.
Sure, Jake knew the day was coming, but I don't think his will was broken.


One can tell much about one's character by the look in their eyes.

Jake had that fire in his eyes that inspired teammates.

People like Jake can never get their will broken.

Jake just walked away from the game on his own terms.
Was Barry Sander's will broken ?
Was Jim Brown's will broken ?

What Mr. Brown, Barry and Jake have in common is that they all said screw it, and walked away.

Jake was not given the latitude he needed to perform.
A QB like Jake has to be able to react and adapt.

That's where I disagree top.

Jake felt the pressure that was on the Bronco organization and Shanny to start Jay. He knew it was inevitable.

Jake was fed up with the media and the NFL.
Jake was able to balance reality.
He wasn't even allowed to wear a little tribute to Pat.

Jake was not flashy, he wore denims and flannel shirts.
He was ridiculed for the frugal vehicle that he drove.

He gave his mom all his money.
He organized charities that still are growing.

Jake is still healthy, has a lovely family and is set for life.

Jake's will was not broken and if he chose, he could have continued his career for many more years.

Jake still holds many Bronco records.

It was Jake's will that told him to walk away and never come back.

Good for Jake and I wish him well.

.

Maybe it was just a bad choice of words on my part, but you just elaborated
on what I said by "his will was broken." I didn't mean he left with his tail
between his legs like a whipped puppy. I meant that he no longer had the
will to excel as a QB in the NFL. And he didn't. He made that clear.

But the first attribute toward success is desire. Once desire is gone, you
cannot set goals . . . your drive, perseverence, and resourcefulness are
gone with it. Jake had lost his desire, for football, that is. Perhaps I should
say his desire shifted, and now he is doing what he wanted to do.

No, I believe his days of high level play in football are well behind him, gone
forever, and I believe he realized that. This is why he has refused to come
back, even though Gruden went so far as to fly out to Idaho to bring him
back with him.

It's over. For football. It has just begun. For the rest of his life.

The king is dead. Long live the king.

-----