Yahoo Team Report: Denver Broncos

[TXBRONC]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/den/report

Broncos Team Report
Yahoo! Sports - 12 hours, 22 minutes ago

One story that will receive far more attention leading up to training camp than it should is a perceived quarterback controversy in Denver.

The quarterback position always draws interest, and the Broncos have some big names in reserve roles, but there's really no controversy. Kyle Orton is the starter and it's not a close competition at the moment.

"There's nothing to be resolved really," Broncos coach Josh McDaniels said. "We've got a guy who's going to go into camp as the starter, no question about it and he deserves it and if somebody comes in there and plays better than he does then that player will play."

The final sentiment is a major reason why the controversy talk hasn't died. But those who have been around McDaniels understand it's his way of doing things -- he constantly promotes competition at every position, even when it's obvious there is no real competition. But he wants his veteran players to remain sharp, so he pushes a culture of competition.

With the quarterback position, the reality is that Orton is not only coming off a better season than people generally give him credit for (3,802 yards and 21 touchdowns), but Brady Quinn and Tim Tebow haven't shown they are ready to clearly beat him out. Both Quinn and Tebow are learning the system. Although Quinn's experience puts him ahead of Tebow for the second spot on the depth chart, he has yet to outplay Orton in practice.

While it's possible that Quinn comes to training camp and makes things interesting in August -- and, the coaching staff does like Quinn, and its affection for Tebow is well documented -- it would be an upset.

"It's clear Kyle is ahead," McDaniels said. "There's no question."

Another reason Orton's hold on the starting spot has been questioned is because the Broncos didn't give him much of an endorsement as their long-term starter by acquiring Quinn and Tebow this offseason. While Orton, at the moment, is not considered the quarterback of the future -- that would be Tebow -- he is the quarterback of the present.

His knowledge of the offense puts him in a good position. While the coaching staff is hopeful Quinn and Tebow will know a majority of the offense by the end of camp, Orton already has it down. That knowledge has shown during offseason practices.

"I'm really happy with the way I'm playing and just really have more confidence right now than I've ever had," Orton said.

[SOCALORADO.]

Bulls flat out refuse to fight Tim Tebow.

[claymore]

If Tim Tebow cant beat out Kyle Orton its cause he didnt want too.

[SOCALORADO.]

If Tim Tebow cant beat out Kyle Orton its cause he didnt want too.

Tim Tebow once punched Pat Bowlen. That's right. You heard me.

[Dirk]

I still say Orton is going to have a PB caliber season this year. Does he go? Probably not because the "experts" will never admit that he is a PB QB.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I still say Orton is going to have a PB caliber season this year. Does he go? Probably not because the "experts" will never admit that he is a PB QB.

If that happens, we are likely in the playoffs unless the defense completely melts down. In that case if the wins, stats, and playoffs are there, it will be hard to deny him a spot. He'll get in on fan and player votes.

I hope he can be better, and more importantly, the offense is much better this year. Unless he shows me some stuff I haven't seen him do in Chicago or here last year, I still think his numbers will be about the same and our W/L will, too... (+ or - a game or two). I also don't think anything less than 10-6 gets us in the playoffs this year.

[Lonestar]

I still say Orton is going to have a PB caliber season this year. Does he go? Probably not because the "experts" will never admit that he is a PB QB.

I think he will have a great "contract year" and as long as R Manning, Brady, Rivers, Ben, Flacco, Sanchez (media darling from NYJ) and a couple of other QBs are in the AFC he does not have a chance, lead them to and win the super bowl MAYBE. But there are way to many great QB's in the AFC for him to have a chance.

His best bet is to get to the NFC where all the old dogs are about to retire.

[claymore]

I think he will have a great "contract year" and as long as R Manning, Brady, Rivers, Ben, Flacco, Sanchez (media darling from NYJ) and a couple of other QBs are in the AFC he does not have a chance, lead them to and win the super bowl MAYBE. But there are way to many great QB's in the AFC for him to have a chance.

His best bet is to get to the NFC where all the old dogs are about to retire.

In short.... THere are 20 QB's in the league better than Kyle Orton. He will never go to the Pro Bowl.

[Tned]

In short.... THere are 20 QB's in the league better than Kyle Orton. He will never go to the Pro Bowl.

Hmmm, 20? He clearly isn't in the top 10-12 or so, but after that it's hard to say.

What would you say are your top 21 QBs?

[Northman]

In short.... THere are 20 QB's in the league better than Kyle Orton. He will never go to the Pro Bowl.

Yea, im pretty much in agreement. Especially in the AFC there are at the very least 3 QB's far superior to Orton and since thats the magic number to even get in to the pro bowl i just dont ever see it happening for him.

[claymore]

Hmmm, 20? He clearly isn't in the top 10-12 or so, but after that it's hard to say.

What would you say are your top 21 QBs?

20 Was clearly an exageration. But not that big of one. Id say that he is the 15th-20th best QB in the league. Last year.

I personally think his year will be much worse this year.

But that is JMO, going off of the talent level, and my lack of faith in Denver healing players (Ryan Clady).

[Tned]

20 Was clearly an exageration. But not that big of one. Id say that he is the 15th-20th best QB in the league. Last year.

I personally think his year will be much worse this year.

But that is JMO, going off of the talent level, and my lack of faith in Denver healing players (Ryan Clady).

I put him as a middle of the pack QB, in terms of talent and expected performance. Without him having an exceptional year, he probably never cracks the top 10 or even 12, but I kind of see him in that middle of the pack 13-20 range. I think working it the other way, we can come up with 10-12 starters last year that were clearly worse, as we can come up with 10-12 that were clearly better.

That said, like North, I agree with your main point, and that is that it will be nearly impossible for him to get to the pro-bowl. Not because some of the other QBs are media darlings, but because there are a lot of high quality, productive QBs in the AFC. The only way he goes is if he has an exceptional year, the Broncos have a GREAT year, and a number of top AFC QBs have early injuries or VERY bad seasons.

[T.K.O.]

how the hell is orton gonna get to the probowl when tebow runs the ball in from the 10 yd line every other series?;)

[claymore]

I put him as a middle of the pack QB, in terms of talent and expected performance. Without him having an exceptional year, he probably never cracks the top 10 or even 12, but I kind of see him in that middle of the pack 13-20 range. I think working it the other way, we can come up with 10-12 starters last year that were clearly worse, as we can come up with 10-12 that were clearly better.

That said, like North, I agree with your main point, and that is that it will be nearly impossible for him to get to the pro-bowl. Not because some of the other QBs are media darlings, but because there are a lot of high quality, productive QBs in the AFC. The only way he goes is if he has an exceptional year, the Broncos have a GREAT year, and a number of top AFC QBs have early injuries or VERY bad seasons.

I have nothing positive to say. :(

[slim]

I have nothing positive to say. :(

We are all shocked by this revelation.

[claymore]

We are all shocked by this revelation.

Everytime I look at PFT.com I hope the headline Reads "McDaniels Fired". :(

[slim]

Everytime I look at PFT.com I hope the headline Reads "McDaniels Fired". :(

Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane

[claymore]

Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane

http://ttoes.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/obama-hope.jpg

[T.K.O.]

Everytime I look at PFT.com I hope the headline Reads "McDaniels Fired up about broncos superbowl chances". :(

see you did have something positive to say !;)

[claymore]

see you did have something positive to say !;)

Ha!

[TXBRONC]

I still say Orton is going to have a PB caliber season this year. Does he go? Probably not because the "experts" will never admit that he is a PB QB.

If he has pro bowl caliber season great but I don't see that keeping him in Denver should Tebow be ready for the big time.

[TXBRONC]

Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane

Only if hope is wishful expectation. :salute:

[topscribe]

In short.... THere are 20 QB's in the league better than Kyle Orton. He will never go to the Pro Bowl.

Okay, you've made the statement.

Now, how about the documentation?

-----

[topscribe]

Hmmm, 20? He clearly isn't in the top 10-12 or so, but after that it's hard to say.

What would you say are your top 21 QBs?

No, I don't think that is so clear. Orton was #14, as has been reported more
than once, and that was playing about 2/3 of the season injured, with a new
team (that was new to each other), in a new scheme. . . all of which virtually
none of the other QBs experienced. I would like to see him complete a healthy
season before I say where he really ranks among NFL QBs. Perhaps that will
happen this year . . .

-----

[Tned]

No, I don't think that is so clear. Orton was #14, as has been reported more
than once, and that was playing about 2/3 of the season injured, with a new
team (that was new to each other), in a new scheme. . . all of which virtually
none of the other QBs experienced. I would like to see him complete a healthy
season before I say where he really ranks among NFL QBs. Perhaps that will
happen this year . . .

-----

There are two ways to rate them. One is stats, the other is more subjective. Neither of them is in and of itself correct.

I'm sure most of us could easily list 10 to 12 QBs that we would all agree are QBs that we would want behind center before Orton. At some point, 10, 12, 15, 18, etc. we would reach the point where other QBs are not clearly more talented/productive than Orton.

Obviously, the trick to ranking QBs is to try and seperate out the QB from the system he's in and the team he's on.

Regardless of all of that, what prompted Clay's 20 QB's comment is factual, and that is that it would be VERY hard for Orton to get to the Pro Bowl with so many good QBs in the AFC.

[Northman]

There are two ways to rate them. One is stats, the other is more subjective. Neither of them is in and of itself correct.

I'm sure most of us could easily list 10 to 12 QBs that we would all agree are QBs that we would want behind center before Orton. At some point, 10, 12, 15, 18, etc. we would reach the point where other QBs are not clearly more talented/productive than Orton.

Obviously, the trick to ranking QBs is to try and seperate out the QB from the system he's in and the team he's on.

Regardless of all of that, what prompted Clay's 20 QB's comment is factual, and that is that it would be VERY hard for Orton to get to the Pro Bowl with so many good QBs in the AFC.


You also have to add in how much is he worth to his own team? Clearly, Chicago didnt think of him much and let him go in a trade. Now, Denver only signs him to a one year contract and then trades for a former first round QB and drafts another first QB this year. Thats not exactly a vote of confidence that your THE guy for the franchise.

[T.K.O.]

You also have to add in how much is he worth to his own team? Clearly, Chicago didnt think of him much and let him go in a trade. Now, Denver only signs him to a one year contract and then trades for a former first round QB and drafts another first QB this year. Thats not exactly a vote of confidence that your THE guy for the franchise.

it also tells you what the franchise thought of Cutler;)

[Northman]

it also tells you what the franchise thought of Cutler;)

Not really. When you ask around the league many will say that Jay is franchise material. You dont get that with Orton on any level. Shanahan drafted Jay to be the franchise QB. McD saw it differently but he is in a lonely group with that concept. Plus, Chicago WANTED Jay just like Tampa did. Orton just came with the package of 2 1st rounders and a 3rd.

[T.K.O.]

Not really. When you ask around the league many will say that Jay is franchise material. You dont get that with Orton on any level. Shanahan drafted Jay to be the franchise QB. McD saw it differently but he is in a lonely group with that concept. Plus, Chicago WANTED Jay just like Tampa did. Orton just came with the package of 2 1st rounders and a 3rd.

like i said "it shows what (the broncos) franchise thought of cutler....not wether or not he could someday be a franchise qb,but if they wanted him in denver or not.....they chose NOT

[Northman]

like i said "it shows what (the broncos) franchise thought of cutler....not wether or not he could someday be a franchise qb,but if they wanted him in denver or not.....they chose NOT

Well, according to McD and Pat they wanted Jay to stay. Jay was the one who wanted out of town so thus the powers that be traded him and fullfilled his request. Doesnt really say they "didnt" want him, only that they werent going to tolerate his shit anymore if you get my drift.

[T.K.O.]

Well, according to McD and Pat they wanted Jay to stay. Jay was the one who wanted out of town so thus the powers that be traded him and fullfilled his request. Doesnt really say they "didnt" want him, only that they werent going to tolerate his shit anymore if you get my drift.

while it's debatable if it was a good idea to let him go... the fact is they were not willing to "put up with his shit" as you say.

[Northman]

while it's debatable if it was a good idea to let him go... the fact is they were not willing to "put up with his shit" as you say.

For me it was a good idea to let him go. He was unhappy here and felt slighted by McD and unwilling to work on it. When he failed to call Bowlen back it just gave Pat all the answers he was looking for in terms of if Jay wanted to remain a Bronco. But had Jay gotten over his butthurt he would probably still be the starting QB in Denver. I have no doubt about that.

[Tned]

Regardless of why Cutler is gone (McDaniels wanted him gone or Cutler wanted out) the fact is that the trade clearly showed the two QBs worth in NFL value. One of them was traded for two first rounders + QB, the other was that QB thrown in with the two first rounders.

That doesn't mean that Orton won't be productive this year, or blossom into a good to great QB as some thing, but based on NFL value, clearly no NFL teams believed it or Chicago would have traded Orton for value, rather than kicking him in as a pot sweetner.

[Tempus Fugit]

Regardless of why Cutler is gone (McDaniels wanted him gone or Cutler wanted out) the fact is that the trade clearly showed the two QBs worth in NFL value. One of them was traded for two first rounders + QB, the other was that QB thrown in with the two first rounders.

That doesn't mean that Orton won't be productive this year, or blossom into a good to great QB as some thing, but based on NFL value, clearly no NFL teams believed it or Chicago would have traded Orton for value, rather than kicking him in as a pot sweetner.

What it showed was the relative worth, at that point in time, of each player to the two organizations. For the Broncos, Cutler wasn't worth as much as multiple high picks and Orton. For the Bears, he was. That's not quite the same thing as what you're claiming.

[Tned]

What it showed was the relative worth, at that point in time, of each player to the two organizations. For the Broncos, Cutler wasn't worth as much as multiple high picks and Orton. For the Bears, he was. That's not quite the same thing as what you're claiming.

Do you honestly think that if the Bears could have traded Orton for multiple high picks to another team, that they wouldn't have done so?

[topscribe]

There are two ways to rate them. One is stats, the other is more subjective. Neither of them is in and of itself correct.

I'm sure most of us could easily list 10 to 12 QBs that we would all agree are QBs that we would want behind center before Orton. At some point, 10, 12, 15, 18, etc. we would reach the point where other QBs are not clearly more talented/productive than Orton.

Obviously, the trick to ranking QBs is to try and seperate out the QB from the system he's in and the team he's on.

Regardless of all of that, what prompted Clay's 20 QB's comment is factual, and that is that it would be VERY hard for Orton to get to the Pro Bowl with so many good QBs in the AFC.

A comment is not factual simply because you or somebody else says it is
factual. Clay made the claim that there are 20 better QBs in the league than
Orton and that Orton will never make it to the Pro Bowl. I asked him to
provide documentation to show how he arrived at that conclusion. I don't
know why you think Clay was so reasonable and I was not.

And that "most of us" are capable of listing QBs does not make us a room
full of experts. The fact that few here can see that Orton has played with a
high ankle sprain during half of his last two years (and more recognized
experts are saying Orton did a "solid" job despite his injuries) and that the
team spent most of last year just orientating themselves to the new system
and each other shows that what exists here is quite the opposite.

I don't profess to be an expert, but at least I can see extenuating
circumstances. I've said all along I would like to see Orton play an entire year
healthy before I make a final judgment on him, and all along I have been
ridiculed for that. I guess this is not the place for logic . . .

-----

[Northman]

Clay made the claim that there are 20 better QBs in the league than
Orton and that Orton will never make it to the Pro Bowl. I asked him to
provide documentation to show how he arrived at that conclusion. I don't
know why you think Clay was so reasonable and I was not.

Clay also stated that was an exaggeration on his part.

[topscribe]

Regardless of why Cutler is gone (McDaniels wanted him gone or Cutler wanted out) the fact is that the trade clearly showed the two QBs worth in NFL value. One of them was traded for two first rounders + QB, the other was that QB thrown in with the two first rounders.

That doesn't mean that Orton won't be productive this year, or blossom into a good to great QB as some thing, but based on NFL value, clearly no NFL teams believed it or Chicago would have traded Orton for value, rather than kicking him in as a pot sweetner.

That's true. That was the perceived value of the two QBs. But then, neither
Chicago nor the league figured that Jay would throw as many INTs as TDs,
either, or that Orton would essentially outplay Jay.

Perceived value is very slippery. The whole league had a very high opinion of
Ryan Leaf, too. Debates were raging as to whether Leaf or Manning should go
first.

The Minnesota Vikings gave up seven picks to the Dallas Cowboys for Herschel
Walker. That was how much he was valued by the two teams, at least Minn.
Walker went on to record one single 1,000-yard season after that, and that
was for the Eagles. The Cowboys took the draft choices and went to and won
the Super Bowl. The Vikings have yet to win one to this day.

Sorry, but I do not view perceived value as the final word. I like to evaluate
from the results down the road. And from the results so far, it appears the
Broncos made a killing . . .

-----

[Tempus Fugit]

Do you honestly think that if the Bears could have traded Orton for multiple high picks to another team, that they wouldn't have done so?

1.) You're missing my point.

2.) I don't know what the Bears would have been thinking, given the options they had as backups.


As I was pointing out, a trade between two teams is not proof of full NFL value. It's proof of how the two teams agree to the intersection of value and demand for the players involved at that moment in time. Teams like the Patriots, Colts, Saints and Chargers were certainly not going to be willing to cough up multiple first round picks for Jay Cutler, for example.

As the saying goes "It only takes one".

[topscribe]

Clay also stated that was an exaggeration on his part.

In this thread? I didn't see it.

Doesn't matter, though. Claims such as that have been loosely thrown out all along . . .

-----

[Northman]

That's true. That was the perceived value of the two QBs. But then, neither Chicago nor the league figured that Jay would throw as many INTs as TDs, either, or that Orton would essentially outplay Jay.

True, but then again i bet no one would of thought Manning would go 26TDs/23INTs in his 4th year either.


Perceived value is very slippery. The whole league had a very high opinion of Ryan Leaf, too. Debates were raging as to whether Leaf or Manning should go first.Not sure how this really applies to Jay's circumstance. He just came off a pro bowl year whereas Leaf was pretty much a bum right from the word go.


Sorry, but I do not view perceived value as the final word. I like to evaluate from the results down the road. And from the results so far, it appears the Broncos made a killing . . .

-----Based off what? An 8-8 season? Way too early to tell who made out on this.

[Northman]

1.) You're missing my point.

2.) I don't know what the Bears would have been thinking, given the options they had as backups.


As I was pointing out, a trade between two teams is not proof of full NFL value. It's proof of how the two teams agree to the intersection of value and demand for the players involved at that moment in time. Teams like the Patriots, Colts, Saints and Chargers were certainly not going to be willing to cough up multiple first round picks for Jay Cutler, for example.

As the saying goes "It only takes one".

Thats because said teams already have franchise QB's in place.

[Northman]

In this thread? I didn't see it.

Doesn't matter, though. Claims such as that have been loosely thrown out all along . . .

-----

Well, he isnt that far off. Orton was ranked 25th in 2008 and that was while being healthy.

[Tempus Fugit]

Thats because said teams already have franchise QB's in place.

Obviously, and that's the point I was making. Regardless of name/position, players will have different values to different teams based upon a combination of things including need, talent evaluation, available alternatives, etc...

That's why pointing to a specific trade is not necessarily indicative of a player's "NFL value".

[Ravage!!!]

I still say Orton is going to have a PB caliber season this year. Does he go? Probably not because the "experts" will never admit that he is a PB QB.

But they are just one/third the vote. Players and fans have the rest. I'm betting we'll see who wins those votes. B ut you are competing against guys that aren't considered average to mediocre QBs in Manning, Brady, Rothlesburger, Rivers, Palmer, and now Sanchez... he's going to have to pick up his game in order to get votes of those.

[topscribe]

True, but then again i bet no one would of thought Manning would go 26TDs/23INTs in his 4th year either.

You just reinforced my point, NM. Manning tore up the league from his second
year on, while Leaf . . . well, you know. Perceived value.


Not sure how this really applies to Jay's circumstance. He just came off a pro bowl year whereas Leaf was pretty much a bum right from the word go.

You've got to think more deeply, NM. The comment was about perceived value.
How could you miss that?

But that also reinforces my point. What put Cutler into the Pro Bowl instead
of Rivers was perceived value. Both QBs went on the next year to prove the
fallacy of that selection.


Based off what? An 8-8 season? Way too early to tell who made out on this.

Statistically. I know some here hate stats, but the fact is Orton had better
stats all around. He passed for 3,802 yards, 21 TDs, 12 INTs, a 7.0 Y/A,
11.3 Y/C, 62% comp, and 86.8 QBR, whereas Cutler achieved 3,666 yards,
27 TDs, 26 INTs, 6.6 Y/A, 10.9 Y/C, 61% comp, and 76,8 QBR. And Orton was
actually 8-7 last year, not 8-8 . . . as opposed to Cutler's 7-9. (And Cutler
was healthy.)

I expect Cutler eventually to outplay Orton and a whole lot of other QBs if
Martz (a superb QB coach) has anything to say about it, but it isn't way too
early to tell who outplayed whom last year. That has already happened and is
in the record books for all to see.

Nonetheless, I don't mean for this to turn into a Cutler/Orton debate (which I
have always personally avoided). My point is perceived value . . . sometimes
those placing the value on given players are wrong . . . sometimes dead
wrong.

Just as you said, it's too early to tell the ultimate outcome of the mutual
displacement of QBs, it is too early to make a final judgment on the value of
the respective QBs. As I have repeated ad nauseam, I want to see a healthy
year out of Orton before I make mine . . .

-----

[topscribe]

Well, he isnt that far off. Orton was ranked 25th in 2008 and that was while being healthy.

While being healthy? Orton played the last half of 2008 with a high ankle sprain.
Is that healthy? Orton was healthy until the second Lions game, IIRC. Do you
have any idea where Orton ranked during the first seven games of 2008, when
he was indeed healthy?

-----

[Ravage!!!]

1.) You're missing my point.

2.) I don't know what the Bears would have been thinking, given the options they had as backups.


As I was pointing out, a trade between two teams is not proof of full NFL value. It's proof of how the two teams agree to the intersection of value and demand for the players involved at that moment in time. Teams like the Patriots, Colts, Saints and Chargers were certainly not going to be willing to cough up multiple first round picks for Jay Cutler, for example.

As the saying goes "It only takes one".

In this case, it wasn't just 'one" though. There were many teams trying to trade for Cutler after McD let it be known he was trading for Cassle. Everyone knows that Detroit, Washington, and Tampa Bay were also willing to trade the 2 round picks for Cutler. None were willing to trade for Orton. In fact, McD pointed out the he specifically chose to trade with Chicago over Washington because both teams were willing to toss in their QBs along with the 2 first round picks, and McD wanted Orton over Campbell.

[Tned]

A comment is not factual simply because you or somebody else says it is
factual. Clay made the claim that there are 20 better QBs in the league than
Orton and that Orton will never make it to the Pro Bowl. I asked him to
provide documentation to show how he arrived at that conclusion. I don't
know why you think Clay was so reasonable and I was not.

I haven't done so. I've pretty much been on your side of the Orton debate in this thread.


And that "most of us" are capable of listing QBs does not make us a room
full of experts. The fact that few here can see that Orton has played with a
high ankle sprain during half of his last two years (and more recognized
experts are saying Orton did a "solid" job despite his injuries) and that the
team spent most of last year just orientating themselves to the new system
and each other shows that what exists here is quite the opposite.

As I've said, there is still some question as to what type of QB he can/will be.


I don't profess to be an expert, but at least I can see extenuating
circumstances. I've said all along I would like to see Orton play an entire year
healthy before I make a final judgment on him, and all along I have been
ridiculed for that. I guess this is not the place for logic . . .

-----

Your taking your frustration with others out on me. I have done nothing that was illogical.

The ONLY part of Clay's comment I agreed with was actually what North pointed out, and that is that is very unlikely that Orton will get to the Pro-Bowl, considering the current crop of QBs in the AFC that are likely to suck up the QB PB spots.

That is NOT a knock on Orton.

[topscribe]

I haven't done so. I've pretty much been on your side of the Orton debate in this thread.

Well then, I'll just quietly put my gun back into my holster . . . :D



As I've said, there is still some question as to what type of QB he can/will be.

Absolutely. That's why I said I want to see a healthy year out of Orton. I
haven't seen that yet.



Your taking your frustration with others out on me. I have done nothing that was illogical.

The ONLY part of Clay's comment I agreed with was actually what North pointed out, and that is that is very unlikely that Orton will get to the Pro-Bowl, considering the current crop of QBs in the AFC that are likely to suck up the QB PB spots.

That is NOT a knock on Orton.

I apologize. I didn't mean to do that. I guess I was arguing generically more
than I was with you. But it was rather knee-jerk, so again I apologize.

And it would appear very difficult for Orton to achieve the Pro Bowl. As you
mentioned, there are too many very good QBs. But you know, he doesn't have
to be in their class to get us where we want to be. Whether he can is still in
the air, of course. It's obvious that I think he can. But I'm not making any
predictions. I just don't know. And neither does anybody else, even McD, I'm
sure, which is my point.

-----

[Tempus Fugit]

In this case, it wasn't just 'one" though. There were many teams trying to trade for Cutler after McD let it be known he was trading for Cassle. Everyone knows that Detroit, Washington, and Tampa Bay were also willing to trade the 2 round picks for Cutler. None were willing to trade for Orton. In fact, McD pointed out the he specifically chose to trade with Chicago over Washington because both teams were willing to toss in their QBs along with the 2 first round picks, and McD wanted Orton over Campbell.

You do not know whether any of them were willing to trade for Orton, although it's probably true that Orton was not on their 'wish' lists. The rest of your post continues to make my point. Detroit, Washington and Tampa Bay were all teams desperate for a QB, and made high offers for Cutler as a result.

I'm not coming down anywhere on the Orton/Cutler comparison in this thread. I'm just talking about the 'NFL value' claim within the context of a specific trade.

[Northman]

You just reinforced my point, NM. Manning tore up the league from his second
year on, while Leaf . . . well, you know. Perceived value.

Not really, if your trying to compare leaf to Cutler your way off base. Cutler has already done far more than leaf ever did so thus Jay's "perceived value" is much higher.


You've got to think more deeply, NM. The comment was about perceived value. How could you miss that?

I didnt miss anything bro. Its pretty standard logic that Cutler is worth far more than Leaf.


But that also reinforces my point. What put Cutler into the Pro Bowl instead of Rivers was perceived value. Both QBs went on the next year to prove the fallacy of that selection.

Incorrect again. What put Jay into the pro bowl was that he had a great year statistically and although down the stretch he wasnt near as good as Rivers the voting had already taken place. Although one could argue that Rivers deserved it more there's no denying that Jay shined in 08'.


Statistically. I know some here hate stats, but the fact is Orton had better stats all around. He passed for 3,802 yards, 21 TDs, 12 INTs, a 7.0 Y/A, 11.3 Y/C, 62% comp, and 86.8 QBR, whereas Cutler achieved 3,666 yards, 27 TDs, 26 INTs, 6.6 Y/A, 10.9 Y/C, 61% comp, and 76,8 QBR. And Orton was actually 8-7 last year, not 8-8 . . . as opposed to Cutler's 7-9. (And Cutler was healthy.)

And? Jay outperformed Orton in 08'. Maybe the surrounding teams? I dunno, you make the call. Some would argue that Orton had a much better team in 08' compared to Jay, especially on the defensive side.


I expect Cutler eventually to outplay Orton and a whole lot of other QBs if Martz (a superb QB coach) has anything to say about it, but it isn't way too early to tell who outplayed whom last year. That has already happened and is in the record books for all to see.

As with everything, stats arent the be all end all. All i know is that despite Orton's great stat year we still dropped in 3rd down conversions and in scoring. Despite his great year we were still an 8-8 team.


As I have repeated ad nauseam, I want to see a healthy
year out of Orton before I make mine . . .

-----

And, ive seen what he can do being healthy and i just think he is average. Plain and simple. I dont need to wait another year to make that judgement. I watched him at Chicago, seen the value placed on him there and seen what he did here and he is just a average Qb. He's a great guy and team player but an average QB. Nothing wrong with that.

[Tned]

That's true. That was the perceived value of the two QBs. But then, neither
Chicago nor the league figured that Jay would throw as many INTs as TDs,
either, or that Orton would essentially outplay Jay.

Perceived value is very slippery. The whole league had a very high opinion of
Ryan Leaf, too. Debates were raging as to whether Leaf or Manning should go
first.

The Minnesota Vikings gave up seven picks to the Dallas Cowboys for Herschel
Walker. That was how much he was valued by the two teams, at least Minn.
Walker went on to record one single 1,000-yard season after that, and that
was for the Eagles. The Cowboys took the draft choices and went to and won
the Super Bowl. The Vikings have yet to win one to this day.

Sorry, but I do not view perceived value as the final word. I like to evaluate
from the results down the road. And from the results so far, it appears the
Broncos made a killing . . .

-----

A more accurate term then perceived value would be "current market value". That was their current market value. It is very possible that after 2009 Cutler would be worth less and Orton more, but at that time Orton's market value was clearly very low.


In this thread? I didn't see it.

Doesn't matter, though. Claims such as that have been loosely thrown out all along . . .

-----

If you had seen where I questioned him about their being 20 QB's better than Orton, you might not have replied to me the way you did with the logic crack. I asked him to list his top 21 QBs, and he responded that the 20 better comment was an exageration, but that he was pointing out that Orton wasn't likely to get to the Probowl (paraphrasing as I haven't gone back to quote it).


Obviously, and that's the point I was making. Regardless of name/position, players will have different values to different teams based upon a combination of things including need, talent evaluation, available alternatives, etc...

That's why pointing to a specific trade is not necessarily indicative of a player's "NFL value".

Yes, your points have been fine, other than not being clear why you are making the point.

Some posters act like the Broncos and Bears made a 'swap' of QBs, which is not the case. The Bears gave the Broncos the asking price for Cutler, which was two firsts and a QB. Therefore, you can't make a valid case that Orton's value was anything close to Cutler's at the time of that trade, or the Bears could have traded Orton for two firsts and a QB, and then if they still wanted Cutler, trade three first for him, which the Broncos surely would have jumped on.

Yes, we can argue and play Devil's Advocate until the cows come home, but we have to stay somewhat grounded in the facts of the discussion for it to be germane.

[Tned]

And it would appear very difficult for Orton to achieve the Pro Bowl. As you
mentioned, there are too many very good QBs. But you know, he doesn't have
to be in their class to get us where we want to be. Whether he can is still in
the air, of course. It's obvious that I think he can. But I'm not making any
predictions. I just don't know. And neither does anybody else, even McD, I'm
sure, which is my point.

-----

And I wasn't discussing anything in regard to whether or not he could do the job for the Broncos, but instead where he ranked among current NFL QBs, and whether he had a 'likely' shot at getting to the Pro Bowl.

[topscribe]

Not really, if your trying to compare leaf to Cutler your way off base. Cutler has already done far more than leaf ever did so thus Jay's "perceived value" is much higher.



I didnt miss anything bro. Its pretty standard logic that Cutler is worth far more than Leaf.



Incorrect again. What put Jay into the pro bowl was that he had a great year statistically and although down the stretch he wasnt near as good as Rivers the voting had already taken place. Although one could argue that Rivers deserved it more there's no denying that Jay shined in 08'.



And? Jay outperformed Orton in 08'. Maybe the surrounding teams? I dunno, you make the call. Some would argue that Orton had a much better team in 08' compared to Jay, especially on the defensive side.



As with everything, stats arent the be all end all. All i know is that despite Orton's great stat year we still dropped in 3rd down conversions and in scoring. Despite his great year we were still an 8-8 team.



And, ive seen what he can do being healthy and i just think he is average. Plain and simple. I dont need to wait another year to make that judgement. I watched him at Chicago, seen the value placed on him there and seen what he did here and he is just a average Qb. He's a great guy and team player but an average QB. Nothing wrong with that.

Wow, NM, you really missed the point. I stopped reading your post at the
"comparing Cutler to Leaf" comment. That is not what I was doing. :tsk:

-----

[T.K.O.]

In this case, it wasn't just 'one" though. There were many teams trying to trade for Cutler after McD let it be known he was trading for Cassle. Everyone knows that Detroit, Washington, and Tampa Bay were also willing to trade the 2 round picks for Cutler. None were willing to trade for Orton. In fact, McD pointed out the he specifically chose to trade with Chicago over Washington because both teams were willing to toss in their QBs along with the 2 first round picks, and McD wanted Orton over Campbell.

chicago offered not only the picks the broncos wanted....but the best available qb to trade at the time

[Northman]

Wow, NM, you really missed the point. I stopped reading your post at the
"comparing Cutler to Leaf" comment. That is not what I was doing. :tsk:

-----

Doesnt sound like your really know what point your trying to make. Never the less, i know what im talking about so my points stand.

[topscribe]

A more accurate term then perceived value would be "current market value". That was their current market value. It is very possible that after 2009 Cutler would be worth less and Orton more, but at that time Orton's market value was clearly very low.

No, I properly used the term "perceived value." I understand that fair market
value is based on perceived value, which was my point. Perhaps I failed in
conveying it properly.

-----

[Northman]

N Perhaps I failed in
conveying it properly.

-----

http://www.nleastchatter.com/realdirtymets/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/darth-vader-epic-fail.jpg

[topscribe]

Doesnt sound like your really know what point your trying to make. Never the less, i know what im talking about so my points stand.

We've been through this before, NM. I never bother to write if I don't know my
own point. Maybe I have just been writing on an academic level for too long.
I'll have to evaluate that. At any rate, I have failed to get it across for some
reason . . .

-----

[Northman]

We've been through this before, NM. I never bother to write if I don't know my
own point. Maybe I have just been writing on an academic level for too long.
I'll have to evaluate that. At any rate, I have failed to get it across for some
reason . . .

-----

Its alright mate. Its all good. Time to go cook some din din for the wife and me. :beer:

[Ravage!!!]

chicago offered not only the picks the broncos wanted....but the best available qb to trade at the time

Yes, and Washington had better draft choices. We took te best QB in McD's opinion at the time. But then, one year later, has chosen to replace that QB with a 1st round pick.... in which he had to give up several picks to acquire.

[topscribe]

Its alright mate. Its all good. Time to go cook some din din for the wife and me. :beer:

Thanks for setting a good example on how to respond and to end a discussion.

I hope others take notice and try to emulate your example. :beer:

-----

[Lonestar]

Well, he isnt that far off. Orton was ranked 25th in 2008 and that was while being healthy.

IIRC KO had a high ankle sprain in 2008 and played on it.

But then I could be wrong about this ALSO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[topscribe]

IIRC KO had a high ankle sprain in 2008 and played on it.

But then I could be wrong about this ALSO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

You aren't. Somewhere is the lowlight where he incurred the injury if anyone
wants to find it. It was in their second game against Detroit, the eighth game
of the season. The line collapsed, and he ran out to the right, squarely into
about three defenders. One of them landed on his ankle as he went down, and
his cleats got caught in the turf.

Orton missed the next game, which Grossman took over. Then Orton came back
in the game following that, against Green Bay. Bad mistake. He had neither the
velocity nor the accuracy on his passes that he had exhibited during the first
seven games, and he now could not get out of anybody's way (sound like 2009,
perhaps?), which I'm sure has contributed to his image of immobility.

Anyway, as a Green Bay fan (second to the Broncos, of course), I saw the
whole thing when he came back and delighted in Green Bay's 37-3 vanquish of
the Bears on that day. :D

-----

[Tned]

You aren't. Somewhere is the lowlight where he incurred the injury if anyone
wants to find it. It was in their second game against Detroit, the eighth game
of the season. The line collapsed, and he ran out to the right, squarely into
about three defenders. One of them landed on his ankle as he went down, and
his cleats got caught in the turf.

Orton missed the next game, which Grossman took over. Then Orton came back
in the game following that, against Green Bay. Bad mistake. He had neither the
velocity nor the accuracy on his passes that he had exhibited during the first
seven games, and he now could not get out of anybody's way (sound like 2009,
perhaps?), which I'm sure has contributed to his image of immobility.

Anyway, as a Green Bay fan (second to the Broncos, of course), I saw the
whole thing when he came back and delighted in Green Bay's 37-3 vanquish of
the Bears on that day. :D

-----

He also didn't get a chance to recover in Denver, because Simms couldn't fill in.

[topscribe]

He also didn't get a chance to recover in Denver, because Simms couldn't fill in.

Exactly. I hate being a broken record, but that is why I want to see a healthy
year out of Orton. It was really weird: a high ankle sprain on one foot in the
middle of the season, then a high ankle sprain on the other foot the very next
year. How many times would that happen? And Orton and his respective teams
were doing quite well up to those respective points.

Orton must be wondering what he needs to repent of . . .

-----

[Tempus Fugit]

Yes, your points have been fine, other than not being clear why you are making the point.

Because they are two different values. "NFL value" is not the same as a specific trade value. I was just noting that and explaining what I meant. I honestly didn't expect it to be controversial in any way, or to spawn a sub-thread.


Yes, we can argue and play Devil's Advocate until the cows come home, but we have to stay somewhat grounded in the facts of the discussion for it to be germane.

Yes, but I was distinguishing between two general values, not playing Devil's Advocate with Orton v. Cutler specifics.

[Tned]

Because they are two different values. "NFL value" is not the same as a specific trade value. I was just noting that and explaining what I meant. I honestly didn't expect it to be controversial in any way, or to spawn a sub-thread.



Yes, but I was distinguishing between two general values, not playing Devil's Advocate with Orton v. Cutler specifics.

In the case of Orton v Cutler, clearly Orton's value was way, way, way lower than Cutler's. That's a given. Not really sure what the point of hypothetically wondering if a Seattle or Carolina GM might have secretly valued Orton over Cutler.

[T.K.O.]

Yes, and Washington had better draft choices. We took te best QB in McD's opinion at the time. But then, one year later, has chosen to replace that QB with a 1st round pick.... in which he had to give up several picks to acquire.

so he should'nt plan for the future?...ok you win he should have kept a qb who asked to be traded multiple times and stuck with the the only qb who could almost run his system......a GM you are not.
i'm buzzed and it seems elementary to me....what's your excuse?:laugh:

[T.K.O.]

orton is orton...if you put a good enough team around him? he'll get you to the playoffs...and as we all know "anything can happen after that !"
i think it's just been sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooong we don't know how to act:laugh:

[gobroncsnv]

Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien... all got rings. None very memorable.
Dilfer could be argued as below average. All had good enough teams around them to win a SB. and we've seen what happens to "THE best" when not a good enough team around him. If our D is like last year, and our oline is like last year, then Orton is not good enough. If those aspects of our team improve enough, then Orton COULD be good enough.

[Tempus Fugit]

In the case of Orton v Cutler, clearly Orton's value was way, way, way lower than Cutler's. That's a given. Not really sure what the point of hypothetically wondering if a Seattle or Carolina GM might have secretly valued Orton over Cutler.

:noidea:

I'm not really sure what the point of trying to turn this into a Cutler/Orton thing is. I made a correction on a small, but important point. I was not comparing the 'value' of the two players. As I noted earlier, I didn't expect such a basic post to spawn a sub-thread. The trade was not about "NFL value". It was a trade specific value. That's a pretty basic, but potentially significant, difference, particularly when pondering whether one side of the deal overpaid/underpaid.

[atwater27]

Offseason threads.... slit my wrists now.

[Lonestar]

Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien... all got rings. None very memorable.
Dilfer could be argued as below average. All had good enough teams around them to win a SB. and we've seen what happens to "THE best" when not a good enough team around him. If our D is like last year, and our oline is like last year, then Orton is not good enough. If those aspects of our team improve enough, then Orton COULD be good enough.

Just to make sure I get this correct.

You'd rather have a super star QB to win a SB with than a great team around a good QB to win it.

WTH is the difference.

John went to multiple SBs as a super star QB and we got our asses handed to us each time. Not so those last times. He had a well roundd team behind him and we handed out asses.

Many of tose super star QB's that have won rings would not have down it without play from both sides of the LOS and in some cases they had help with wrs that made thise wins possible same thing applies to having a quality OL and rbs behind you.

Manning carried his team to the playoffs countless years and until their d stepped up they could not get to the SB.

All of this hand wringing about we have to have rocket arm to win is crap. Any team/fan that is expecting the QB to carry the team is crazy IMHO.

We have to have a good TEAM overall and then we can win.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Ravage!!!]

Yes, and Washington had better draft choices. We took te best QB in McD's opinion at the time. But then, one year later, has chosen to replace that QB with a 1st round pick.... in which he had to give up several picks to acquire.


so he shouldn't plan for the future?...ok you win he should have kept a qb who asked to be traded multiple times and stuck with the the only qb who could almost run his system......a GM you are not.
i'm buzzed and it seems elementary to me....what's your excuse?:laugh:

you are changing the topic of discussion, again.

My statement said NOTHING of the kind, or even suggested it (I even posted the quote you responded to so you can look again). I pointed out, that our coach passed up on better draft picks in favor of a specific QB. Then turns around and spends multiple draft picks to select a QB to REPLACE that very same QB. What on green-friggin-earth does that have ANYTHING to do with what you just asked? You are turning into a Wiz, and always falling to the Cutler discussion because you are obsessed. Get over it.

Shouldn't plan for the future? :confused: you have to be more than buzzed dude, you have to flat-out whacked. If he was planning for the future, he just as easily could have/should have taken the better draft picks knowing that Orton wasn't any more of a long term solution than Campbell would have been.

[Ravage!!!]

Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien... all got rings. None very memorable.
Dilfer could be argued as below average. All had good enough teams around them to win a SB. and we've seen what happens to "THE best" when not a good enough team around him. If our D is like last year, and our oline is like last year, then Orton is not good enough. If those aspects of our team improve enough, then Orton COULD be good enough.

This has been talked about a lot. Yes, he COULD be good enough. But look at the last SUper Bowl champions over the last 20 years. Look at ANY team that is considered to be perennial SB contenders. They aren't the teams that have Dilfer, Johnson, Rypiens behind center.

The teams that are always in contention are those that DO have the stud QB, and if you are contenders, then you always have a chance without having to have such a STRONG team around the QB to make up the difference for that LACK of talent. Thats why those names always come up in this discussion, because they are the rarity rather than the norm. There are always exceptions to the rule. I would rather take my chances on the higher percentage than try and rely on the odd occurrence.

[TXBRONC]

This has been talked about a lot. Yes, he COULD be good enough. But look at the last SUper Bowl champions over the last 20 years. Look at ANY team that is considered to be perennial SB contenders. They aren't the teams that have Dilfer, Johnson, Rypiens behind center.

The teams that are always in contention are those that DO have the stud QB, and if you are contenders, then you always have a chance without having to have such a STRONG team around the QB to make up the difference for that LACK of talent. Thats why those names always come up in this discussion, because they are the rarity rather than the norm. There are always exceptions to the rule. I would rather take my chances on the higher percentage than try and rely on the odd occurrence.

I agree with you about having top flight quarterback but at the same time you still solid talent and depth around him so that you can have a shot winning it every year.

[Ravage!!!]

I agree with you about having top flight quarterback but at the same time you still solid talent and depth around him so that you can have a shot winning it every year.

absolutely. But we've seen that it starts with the QB position.

[jhildebrand]

so he should'nt plan for the future?

Like he is on Defense with 9 of 11 starters well into their 30's? :confused:

[Bosco]

Like he is on Defense with 9 of 11 starters well into their 30's? :confused:

And young developmental prospects behind almost all of them.

[Tned]

:noidea:

I'm not really sure what the point of trying to turn this into a Cutler/Orton thing is. I made a correction on a small, but important point. I was not comparing the 'value' of the two players. As I noted earlier, I didn't expect such a basic post to spawn a sub-thread. The trade was not about "NFL value". It was a trade specific value. That's a pretty basic, but potentially significant, difference, particularly when pondering whether one side of the deal overpaid/underpaid.

:confused:

Ok, thanks for clearing up that possibly, potentially, just maybe, significant point.

:confused:

[Lonestar]

Like he is on Defense with 9 of 11 starters well into their 30's? :confused:

I did not realize that once you hit 30 your doomed.

Many Defensive NFL players are in their 30's and most are playing at a VERY high level.

If we were talking everyone was 35+ you just may have a valid compliant.

BUt since IIRC J Williams is the old timer at 34 IIRC and most of them are 30-34 who cares? Green for WAS played at a high level till he was 42.

IF we had not drafted replacements for most of them or had them on the roster already I could see your concerns.

But we seems to have a few budding stars as DB's in mcBath, SMith (IMO), Cox whom everyone seems to like and there is one other CB that I can not recall.

As for DL Baker (NT) and Thomas (DE) as well as Ayers are all kiddies not to mention the oldest other guys on the DL are, Bannon and Green both in their 9th year.

Your acting as if someone over 30 should be in a wheelchair. I'm guessing your 18-25 or so.


If you are worried about the old man Dawkins, that happens to be one of the easiest spots on the team for a rookie to step in and fall into place If they are a good one and Mc BAth just may be.

Please do not be a chicken little on this. The sky is not falling this year or next after that if these kiddies do not step up then I may be worried.
This is one of the youngest DEfenses in the league team for that matter. One of the reasons for inconsistency.

[TXBRONC]

How many 40 year old nose tackles are there? Comparing Darrell Green a corner back to a nose tackle is ludicrous.

The fact is we do have several players who are 30 or over and long replacements will have to be found. Some may already be on the roster but that remains to be seen. The likelihood that any of them play until they are 40 is slim.

[T.K.O.]

who cares about all this negative crapola.....I GOT TIX FOR THE BRONCOS vs JETS !!!!1/2 pricers at that :elefant::beer::D

sooooooooooo stoked ! sorry,carry on

[TXBRONC]

who cares about all this negative crapola.....I GOT TIX FOR THE BRONCOS vs JETS !!!!1/2 pricers at that :elefant::beer::D

sooooooooooo stoked ! sorry,carry on

Congrats little buckaroo! :salute: :D

Seriously have a safe trip and enjoy the game. :cool:

[Bosco]

How many 40 year old nose tackles are there? Comparing Darrell Green a corner back to a nose tackle is ludicrous.

The fact is we do have several players who are 30 or over and long replacements will have to be found. Some may already be on the roster but that remains to be seen. The likelihood that any of them play until they are 40 is slim.

With the exception of Mario Haggan (who just turned 30) we have some developmental prospects behind every single one of our aging starters.

Defensive end = Ryan McBean, Marcus Thomas, LeKevin Smith

Nose tackle = Chris Baker with Ron Fields as the intermediate stop gap if needed

Cornerback = Alphonso Smith, Perrish Cox, Tony Carter, Syd'quan Thompson

Safety = Darcel McBath, Josh Barrett, David Bruton

[topscribe]

How many 40 year old nose tackles are there? Comparing Darrell Green a corner back to a nose tackle is ludicrous.

The fact is we do have several players who are 30 or over and long replacements will have to be found. Some may already be on the roster but that remains to be seen. The likelihood that any of them play until they are 40 is slim.

Not really. Ordinarily, age is more of a factor in the skill positions. I gave the
Green example elsewhere.


Nonetheless, I don't think anybody has said any of them are going to play until
they are 40. Did I miss something?

-----

[TXBRONC]

With the exception of Mario Haggan (who just turned 30) we have some developmental prospects behind every single one of our aging starters.

Defensive end = Ryan McBean, Marcus Thomas, LeKevin Smith

Nose tackle = Chris Baker with Ron Fields as the intermediate stop gap if needed

Cornerback = Alphonso Smith, Perrish Cox, Tony Carter, Syd'quan Thompson

Safety = Darcel McBath, Josh Barrett, David Bruton

As I said those replacements might be on the roster but then again they might not.

[T.K.O.]

Congrats little buckaroo! :salute: :D

Seriously have a safe trip and enjoy the game. :cool:

while i don't really mind the "little buckaroo" title....i dont think anyone tipping the scales just over 2 bills and was alive when kennedy was shot can be considered as such;)

[jhildebrand]

I did not realize that once you hit 30 your doomed.

Many Defensive NFL players are in their 30's and most are playing at a VERY high level.

If we were talking everyone was 35+ you just may have a valid compliant.

BUt since IIRC J Williams is the old timer at 34 IIRC and most of them are 30-34 who cares? Green for WAS played at a high level till he was 42.

IF we had not drafted replacements for most of them or had them on the roster already I could see your concerns.

But we seems to have a few budding stars as DB's in mcBath, SMith (IMO), Cox whom everyone seems to like and there is one other CB that I can not recall.

As for DL Baker (NT) and Thomas (DE) as well as Ayers are all kiddies not to mention the oldest other guys on the DL are, Bannon and Green both in their 9th year.

Your acting as if someone over 30 should be in a wheelchair. I'm guessing your 18-25 or so.


If you are worried about the old man Dawkins, that happens to be one of the easiest spots on the team for a rookie to step in and fall into place If they are a good one and Mc BAth just may be.

Please do not be a chicken little on this. The sky is not falling this year or next after that if these kiddies do not step up then I may be worried.
This is one of the youngest DEfenses in the league team for that matter. One of the reasons for inconsistency.

Find me one other NFL roster with 9 of 11 starters on D 30+ in age. Go back in time if you feel the need. Then tell me how they fared. :coffee:

[Bosco]

As I said those replacements might be on the roster but then again they might not.

What's your point? That they might not work out?

Welcome to the NFL.

[Lonestar]

Find me one other NFL roster with 9 of 11 starters on D 30+ in age. Go back in time if you feel the need. Then tell me how they fared. :coffee:
really not concerned with any other team. IF they were 35 plus I 'd worry but we jhave two old farts the rest are 7-9 years vets I think you have to realize they are not long term and it will take a while for the rookies to fall into place.

As someone mentioned we have a lot of kiddies that are int heir 2-4 years about time for them to step up or be moved out.

Are you expecting a super bowl ring this year?

I'm not and know of few that are.

I know that Roma was not built in a year or two I have faith that the mix of oldies and kiddies will pay off .


I realize that you and few others have no faith in the new guy but he just may surprise you if you give him a chance.

[TXBRONC]

Not really. Ordinarily, age is more of a factor in the skill positions. I gave the
Green example elsewhere.


Nonetheless, I don't think anybody has said any of them are going to play until
they are 40. Did I miss something?

-----

Yes really. Guys like Green and Farve are a rarity.

[jhildebrand]

Are you expecting a super bowl ring this year?


Isn't that the point, Jrwiz? :confused:

Even if I wasn't, and I am not, expecting to be in the big game (Josh would never publicly admit they aren't) than that is more reason to pass on some of these 30+ players especially the FA's that were brought in i.e. Jamal and get the youth some playing time and experience.

SD began this run of owning the AFCW by playing A LOT of their youth!




I realize that you and few others have no faith in the new guy but he just may surprise you if you give him a chance.

I was fair and open with the guy last year. My criticism of him began when the team was 5-0. I was flamed for no end for it as well. In the end, the guy proved me right.

This will be a new season. As such, I will begin the new season with a fair and open mind (not to mention sig :D) and re-judge him based on this season.

[T.K.O.]

Even if I wasn't, and I am not, expecting to be in the big game (Josh would never publicly admit they aren't)




.

i sure as hell hope not ! you show me a coach who takes his team into a long season with expectations of failure....and i'll show you a team that does'nt stand a chance:salute:

[TXBRONC]

Isn't that the point, Jrwiz? :confused:

Even if I wasn't, and I am not, expecting to be in the big game (Josh would never publicly admit they aren't) than that is more reason to pass on some of these 30+ players especially the FA's that were brought in i.e. Jamal and get the youth some playing time and experience.

SD began this run of owning the AFCW by playing A LOT of their youth!




I was fair and open with the guy last year. My criticism of him began when the team was 5-0. I was flamed for no end for it as well. In the end, the guy proved me right.

This will be a new season. As such, I will begin the new season with a fair and open mind (not to mention sig :D) and re-judge him based on this season.


I haven't written off this coach nor do I rant in every thread that I think that he should be fired.

[jhildebrand]

I haven't written off this coach nor do I rant in every thread that I think that he should be fired.

I hope you didn't think I insinuated that in any way :D

I like McD the coach A LOT. I just don't like McD the D coordinator, GM, talent scout, etc...

At the end of the day, I post the good and the bad but usually my critical posts are the only ones that get noticed :lol:

I have yet to advocate his removal, as well!

[TXBRONC]

I hope you didn't think I insinuated that in any way :D

I like McD the coach A LOT. I just don't like McD the D coordinator, GM, talent scout, etc...

At the end of the day, I post the good and the bad but usually my critical posts are the only ones that get noticed :lol:

I have yet to advocate his removal, as well!

No I know you didn't insinuate that nor I can I recall you ever asking for him to be removed in any thread.

The idea that raising critical questions is the same thing as hating on the coach and wanting him to be fired doesn't hold water.

[jhildebrand]

The idea that raising critical questions is the same thing as hating on the coach and wanting him to be fired doesn't hold water.

BUMP BUMP BUMP :bump:

[Lonestar]

Isn't that the point, Jrwiz? :confused:

Even if I wasn't, and I am not, expecting to be in the big game (Josh would never publicly admit they aren't) than that is more reason to pass on some of these 30+ players especially the FA's that were brought in i.e. Jamal and get the youth some playing time and experience.

SD began this run of owning the AFCW by playing A LOT of their youth!




I was fair and open with the guy last year. My criticism of him began when the team was 5-0. I was flamed for no end for it as well. In the end, the guy proved me right.

This will be a new season. As such, I will begin the new season with a fair and open mind (not to mention sig :D) and re-judge him based on this season.


you act like 30+ year old can't play

not sure how many 30+ guys we had on those super blow teams But I'm guessing since many of them retired after wards it was 8-10 of them.

SOmetime you just can't have 53 guys not eh team that are all the same age 24-28 and if you do they all retire at the same time.

[jhildebrand]

you act like 30+ year old can't play

Where did I say that or even insinuate as much? :confused:



not sure how many 30+ guys we had on those super blow teams But I'm guessing since many of them retired after wards it was 8-10 of them.

8-10 on a roster is a far cry from 9 on one unit. Shouldn't that tell you something? :confused:



SOmetime you just can't have 53 guys not eh team that are all the same age 24-28 and if you do they all retire at the same time.

I never said they should. Some guys 30+ belong. However, FA isn't to build a team or a unit. It is there to enhance a team or get you that ONE piece to get you over the hump.

You already said you weren't expecting the Super Bowl so I would think you could at least realize as much.

At some point you have to have youth and at some point you have to be able to get that youth some experience.

[topscribe]

Where did I say that or even insinuate as much? :confused:



8-10 on a roster is a far cry from 9 on one unit. Shouldn't that tell you something? :confused:



I never said they should. Some guys 30+ belong. However, FA isn't to build a team or a unit. It is there to enhance a team or get you that ONE piece to get you over the hump.

You already said you weren't expecting the Super Bowl so I would think you could at least realize as much.

At some point you have to have youth and at some point you have to be able to get that youth some experience.

I really think you're a bit too concerned about chronological age. There is not
one among those players who has exhibited any evidence that he cannot still
play at a high level. That is where my concern lies: obvious production. That
has been there with every one of them.

Regarding overall age and the future, nearly every one of the depth players
is young, and many of them are very promising. I really believe the Broncos
are building a strong defensive unit that will remain so for years into the
future . . .

-----

[Bosco]

SD began this run of owning the AFCW by playing A LOT of their youth! And alot of people believe that is a significant factor in their constant playoff choking despite having arguably the league's most talented roster.

Personally, I prefer the Patriot way when it comes to that.

[Lonestar]

Isn't that the point, Jrwiz? :confused:

Even if I wasn't, and I am not, expecting to be in the big game (Josh would never publicly admit they aren't) than that is more reason to pass on some of these 30+ players especially the FA's that were brought in i.e. Jamal and get the youth some playing time and experience.

SD began this run of owning the AFCW by playing A LOT of their youth!




I was fair and open with the guy last year. My criticism of him began when the team was 5-0. I was flamed for no end for it as well. In the end, the guy proved me right.

This will be a new season. As such, I will begin the new season with a fair and open mind (not to mention sig :D) and re-judge him based on this season.

And SAN had how many years drafting on the top 10 before they let the kiddies play.

And bedside who else did they have to play.

Last year YOU saw what happened when we played guys that were so small or raw down the strecth. We folded on D like a $20 tent in a F3 tornado.



Every good team I have seen has to have some balance.

BTW that SAN team that won all of those divison banners is now looking at how the hell are we going to keep all of these top 5 players.

Got to have a mix. Aging vets and newbies to take their spot learning from the old farts.

Last year fields had NO ONE to talk to this year (although I think he is a loser at NT) he will have JW and so will Baker.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[jhildebrand]

I really think you're a bit too concerned about chronological age. There is not
one among those players who has exhibited any evidence that he cannot still
play at a high level. That is where my concern lies: obvious production. That
has been there with every one of them.

Regarding overall age and the future, nearly every one of the depth players
is young, and many of them are very promising. I really believe the Broncos
are building a strong defensive unit that will remain so for years into the
future . . .

-----

Well Jamal Williams hasn't played a full season in how long? :confused:

As much as I love Dawk, he did have some breakdowns late last season. I am not so sure his decline wont be faster than Lynch's.

How does anybody truly know what the "depth" players are without having seen them play any significant snaps? :confused:

[jhildebrand]

And alot of people believe that is a significant factor in their constant playoff choking despite having arguably the league's most talented roster.


Like who? Article? Link? I have YET to see one credible source mention SD's youth from 4 seasons ago be the reason they choked last season

:lol:

What is never disputed is the fact they do have one of the best and deepest rosters in the league at many positions. I cannot say that is a bad thing esepcially when Rivers is getting as good as he is.

[topscribe]

Well Jamal Williams hasn't played a full season in how long? :confused:

As much as I love Dawk, he did have some breakdowns late last season. I am not so sure his decline wont be faster than Lynch's.

How does anybody truly know what the "depth" players are without having seen them play any significant snaps? :confused:

You never saw Thomas or McBean play? You never saw McBath? Woodyard?

So Dawkins got beat a couple times on his way to the Pro Bowl? I've seen
Polamalu get beaten, too. They are playing against other pros, you know.

But all you can point to in the secondary is Dawkins? Aren't there others back
there? People keep thinking Champ has lost a step. From what? The 4.19 he
ran early in his career? So what has he slowed down to? 4.3? 4.4? He showed
last year he could still run step for step with Desean Jackson.

Fact is, I'm not so worried about age as you are. If they were all 35+, as JR
said, yes. But you are talking about players who are 30-35. There are a lot of
players in that age range who are playing at a high level in the NFL.

-----

[Lonestar]

Well Jamal Williams hasn't played a full season in how long? :confused:

As much as I love Dawk, he did have some breakdowns late last season. I am not so sure his decline wont be faster than Lynch's.

How does anybody truly know what the "depth" players are without having seen them play any significant snaps? :confused:


Did not start one game in 08 but played in it for that matter started 103 games from 02 on out of a possible 112. not counting on the last season where he went on IR after the first game with a torn muscle.

Not seeing the issue that you are.

[Bosco]

Like who? Article? Link? I have YET to see one credible source mention SD's youth from 4 seasons ago be the reason they choked last season It's been discussed on a couple coaching sites I frequent and I've heard it mentioned by the talking heads on NFLN as well.