PDA

View Full Version : SI Article: Broncos Have Their QB of the Future, and It's Not Tim Tebow



Pages : [1] 2

topscribe
08-25-2010, 04:05 PM
by Ross Tucker

The Denver Broncos have been effusive in their praise of Kyle Orton this preseason. They backed it up by signing the sixth-year quarterback to a one-year extension that will pay him $9 million in 2011, $5.5 million of which is guaranteed. First-round pick Tim Tebow, on the other hand, injured his ribs in his first live NFL action and was unable to play in the Broncos second preseason game against the Detroit Lions this past weekend. The question that begs asking at this point is why did the Broncos draft Tebow in the first round?

Proponents of the decision to draft Tebow point out the Orton extension was a smart move by the Broncos because it gives Tebow time to develop without being rushed. They point out the years that Aaron Rodgers apprenticed under Brett Favre before bursting onto the scene and becoming one of the top five quarterbacks in the NFL. The Eagles' decision to turn the keys over to Kevin Kolb after he spent most of his first three years watching Donovan McNabb is another example.

That seems plausible. But what exactly do the Broncos think Tebow is going to become? Even some of his most ardent supporters think it will take him two or three years to become a starter. Thinking he can correct his throwing motion and master the pro game enough to ever become a top 10 quarterback in the NFL is probably wishful thinking at best. Instead, the upside is more likely that he can become a winning starter in the NFL with excellent leadership skills and intangibles.

Right. So the Broncos drafted Tebow to develop him so that he could one day become just like .... Kyle Orton? In Orton, the Broncos already have a winning starter who has gone 29-19 during his career despite never really being "the guy" for either the Bears or the Broncos. That record places him in the top 10 in the NFL among active quarterbacks with a sample size of at least 40 starts. It's especially impressive when you consider that Orton was surrounded by mediocre talent at the skill positions in Chicago.

The Broncos decision to trade up in April's draft for Tebow doesn't make sense. Why would Denver trade second-, third-, and fourth-round picks to get a player who can maybe, someday, if everything works out well, be as good as what it already has now?

The first answer is they didn't really know what they had in Orton. If that is the case, shame on them. Orton set career marks last year by throwing for over 21 touchdowns and 3,802 yards while completing over 62.1 percent of his passes. All this in his first year in a new offense, mind you.

The second explanation has to be that Denver believes Tebow has special skills that could someday make him superior to Orton. That's pretty hard to believe considering Orton has been running a pro-style offense since his days at Purdue and is known for both his accuracy and his football acumen.

The advantage Tebow has is his athletic ability. But even that, in light of the first two preseason games, needs to be called into question. Tebow learned the hard way in his debut against the Bengals that he simply can't play with the same reckless abandon he used in college. His penchant for plowing over defenders sure is fun to watch but it won't be very enjoyable for Tebow if he keeps it up. The defenders are faster and can chase him down with greater ease than they did in college, and they are sure to meet him with bad intentions. His feet and raw power are valuable and intoxicating assets, but ones he should only use sparingly.

Plus, anyone who watched the Broncos second preseason game against the Lions could see Orton moving around in the pocket and keeping plays alive much better than he ever has before. On more than a couple occasions, Orton found a way to elude the rush before getting the ball downfield. Maybe the newly guaranteed money in his bank account made him a little less risk-averse? Who knows.

What we do know is the Broncos have unequivocally found their starter of the present and Orton is young enough, good enough, and improving quickly enough that they should recognize, or perhaps should have recognized, that he should be their starter of the future as well. It's just a shame for the new regime in Denver that they had to send all those draft picks to Baltimore and spend a first rounder on Tebow to figure that out.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ross_tucker/08/25/tebow.orton/index.html


I haven't completely bought into this yet, but it is interesting . . .

-----

underrated29
08-25-2010, 04:19 PM
Dumb. I like orton as much as the next guy, but tebow only being as good as orton....yea, sure, and guess what Demarious Thomas is only going to be as good as keary kolbert.

Dumb.

Northman
08-25-2010, 04:26 PM
The Denver Broncos have been effusive in their praise of Kyle Orton this preseason. They backed it up by signing the sixth-year quarterback to a one-year extension that will pay him $9 million in 2011, $5.5 million of which is guaranteed. First-round pick Tim Tebow, on the other hand, injured his ribs in his first live NFL action and was unable to play in the Broncos second preseason game against the Detroit Lions this past weekend. The question that begs asking at this point is why did the Broncos draft Tebow in the first round?First, to the highlighted part. Tebow hurt his ribs trying to make a play using backup players in support. Big difference from what Kyle had to work with. Secondly, the Broncos drafted Tebow because the coach believes he can be a "franchise" Qb ala Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees.


Proponents of the decision to draft Tebow point out the Orton extension was a smart move by the Broncos because it gives Tebow time to develop without being rushed. They point out the years that Aaron Rodgers apprenticed under Brett Favre before bursting onto the scene and becoming one of the top five quarterbacks in the NFL. The Eagles' decision to turn the keys over to Kevin Kolb after he spent most of his first three years watching Donovan McNabb is another example.All very true.


That seems plausible. But what exactly do the Broncos think Tebow is going to become? Even some of his most ardent supporters think it will take him two or three years to become a starter. Thinking he can correct his throwing motion and master the pro game enough to ever become a top 10 quarterback in the NFL is probably wishful thinking at best. Instead, the upside is more likely that he can become a winning starter in the NFL with excellent leadership skills and intangibles.After the first preseason game i think its pretty much established his throwing motion isnt going to be a major problem.


Right. So the Broncos drafted Tebow to develop him so that he could one day become just like .... Kyle Orton? In Orton, the Broncos already have a winning starter who has gone 29-19 during his career despite never really being "the guy" for either the Bears or the Broncos. That record places him in the top 10 in the NFL among active quarterbacks with a sample size of at least 40 starts. It's especially impressive when you consider that Orton was surrounded by mediocre talent at the skill positions in Chicago.How would be just like Kyle Orton? Orton's mobility isnt that great and his deep pass accuracy is less than desired.


The Broncos decision to trade up in April's draft for Tebow doesn't make sense. Why would Denver trade second-, third-, and fourth-round picks to get a player who can maybe, someday, if everything works out well, be as good as what it already has now?Initially that is what i said. If Orton was the "man" than surround him with better players especially on defense. However, McD didnt think he was the longterm answer and drafted his eventual replacement.


The first answer is they didn't really know what they had in Orton. If that is the case, shame on them. Orton set career marks last year by throwing for over 21 touchdowns and 3,802 yards while completing over 62.1 percent of his passes. All this in his first year in a new offense, mind you.Oh, they know what they have just like the Bears knew what they had. And keep in mind, despite the pretty stats (see 2008 for all the Jay haters) its all about wins. As a Bronco Kyle Orton is at .500 just like the rest of the team. In the end, its about winning not how many yds you can put up.


The second explanation has to be that Denver believes Tebow has special skills that could someday make him superior to Orton. That's pretty hard to believe considering Orton has been running a pro-style offense since his days at Purdue and is known for both his accuracy and his football acumen.Well, ill be the first to say college ball means nothing at the pro level. But since you brought it up Mr. Tucker may i remind you that Orton never won a national championship? I mean, if we are calling a spade a spade.


The advantage Tebow has is his athletic ability. But even that, in light of the first two preseason games, needs to be called into question. Tebow learned the hard way in his debut against the Bengals that he simply can't play with the same reckless abandon he used in college.
His penchant for plowing over defenders sure is fun to watch but it won't be very enjoyable for Tebow if he keeps it up. The defenders are faster and can chase him down with greater ease than they did in college, and they are sure to meet him with bad intentions. His feet and raw power are valuable and intoxicating assets, but ones he should only use sparingly.Indeed. He learned a valuable lesson there as a ROOKIE.


Plus, anyone who watched the Broncos second preseason game against the Lions could see Orton moving around in the pocket and keeping plays alive much better than he ever has before. On more than a couple occasions, Orton found a way to elude the rush before getting the ball downfield. Maybe the newly guaranteed money in his bank account made him a little less risk-averse? Who knows.But its preseason and the playcalling is vanilla at best. And to think he can do that for 16 games with a very weak run game is quite comical on a grand scale. As for the latter comment, i doubt money had anything to do with it. Fact is, Orton is a competitor and a class act. Despite his flaws the man wants to win and i dont see him being driven strictly by money.


What we do know is the Broncos have unequivocally found their starter of the present and Orton is young enough, good enough, and improving quickly enough that they should recognize, or perhaps should have recognized, that he should be their starter of the future as well. It's just a shame for the new regime in Denver that they had to send all those draft picks to Baltimore and spend a first rounder on Tebow to figure that outSo basically you know more than not only McDaniels but the entire Bears organization who also believed that Orton wasnt the answer there either and yet traded him in a package deal for a another QB? Like i said, quite comical.

Jagsbch
08-25-2010, 04:27 PM
Peter King needs to smack some sense into Mr. Ross Tucker

Two reasons Tebow might start for Broncos in 2010

By: Peter King

I've thought all along that Tim Tebow would need a redshirt year, but two things now tell me I might be wrong.

First, Denver trading the 40th, 70th and 114th picks in a power draft to pick Tebow is a powerful statement.

Check out the draft trade chart that every team uses and you'll see how much Denver wanted to make sure it wasn't leapfrogged in the Tebow derby.

The 25th pick is worth 720 points on the chart every team in the league uses -- some more religiously than others. The 43rd pick is worth 470, the 70th worth 240, and the 114th worth 66. That totals 776.

The Broncos paid 56 more points than were necessary by the chart -- equivalent to the 199th overall pick, a late fourth-rounder -- to get Tebow. Denver, obviously, wanted to make the deal badly enough to ratchet up the compensation.

Second, and most importantly, I remember something Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels said to me over the weekend when we discussed the Tebow pick. We weren't discussing playing time, or his role, or anything at the time other than why he was smitten with the guy more than many of his peers on other NFL teams.

"When I went to Gainesville Monday to work him out,'' McDaniels said, referring to his hush-hush trip to spend the day with Tebow, "we spent about seven hours together.

We went over a lot of things. Now, understand that our offense is pretty complicated, and the terminology and the scheme is totally different from what he did at Florida. But about midway through my time there, we're going through plays, and he starts using our terminology.

He's so smart about football that he was able to begin to speak my language and talk apples to apples. He'd already translated what he knew of our scheme into my words. That's something that carried a lot of weight with me.''

McDaniels also said: "The football traits he has is the stuff you die for.''

That tells me McDaniels will find something this year for Tebow to do. I don't know what it is. But last year, I don't think we saw everything McDaniels had to offer in terms of offensive play-calling. There's a lot inside him I think he's waiting to script and put in the hands of some offensive talent he mined and developed...

McDaniels made it clear to me the best quarterback will start.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/04/27/mailbag/index.html#ixzz0xehSRgNz



sportsillustrated (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/04/27/mailbag/index.html#ixzz0xefK3WcK)

SOCALORADO.
08-25-2010, 04:30 PM
The whole premise of the article is based on the belief by the writer that Tebows ceiling in the NFL is only as high as Ortons.
That makes the entire article CR@PP0L@.

rcsodak
08-25-2010, 04:34 PM
Dumb. I like orton as much as the next guy, but tebow only being as good as orton....yea, sure, and guess what Demarious Thomas is only going to be as good as keary kolbert.

Dumb.
Well, using the small sampling we have, how do you know DT ISNT colbert? And I'd be thrilled if TT became as smart of QB as Orton....with a stronger arm. But until he shows it........
I like TT but just think if those picks had been used on D help instead. Sure begs the question.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
08-25-2010, 05:05 PM
I've stressed it as well. I'm worried we drafted a QB in the first round that won't be better than Orton.... and its not because I think Orton is good.

As of right now, we don't know what TT will be. I feel confident that he'll never be much of a passing QB. In the NFL, that will end up costing you. But I also feel we pretty much know what Orton is, and thats a QB that gets your coaches using first round picks to replace you.

broncobryce
08-25-2010, 05:17 PM
Ross Tucker has been hanging with Jim Miller too much. (orton homer)
I like Orton as much as the next guy, but Tebow's upside is much higher than Orton.

dogfish
08-25-2010, 05:24 PM
geez top, way to pour out a puddle of gas and leave the matches sitting next to it. . .

muse
08-25-2010, 05:45 PM
Peter King needs to smack some sense into Mr. Ross Tucker

Two reasons Tebow might start for Broncos in 2010

By: Peter King

I've thought all along that Tim Tebow would need a redshirt year, but two things now tell me I might be wrong.

First, Denver trading the 40th, 70th and 114th picks in a power draft to pick Tebow is a powerful statement.

Check out the draft trade chart that every team uses and you'll see how much Denver wanted to make sure it wasn't leapfrogged in the Tebow derby.

The 25th pick is worth 720 points on the chart every team in the league uses -- some more religiously than others. The 43rd pick is worth 470, the 70th worth 240, and the 114th worth 66. That totals 776.

The Broncos paid 56 more points than were necessary by the chart -- equivalent to the 199th overall pick, a late fourth-rounder -- to get Tebow. Denver, obviously, wanted to make the deal badly enough to ratchet up the compensation.

Second, and most importantly, I remember something Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels said to me over the weekend when we discussed the Tebow pick. We weren't discussing playing time, or his role, or anything at the time other than why he was smitten with the guy more than many of his peers on other NFL teams.

"When I went to Gainesville Monday to work him out,'' McDaniels said, referring to his hush-hush trip to spend the day with Tebow, "we spent about seven hours together.

We went over a lot of things. Now, understand that our offense is pretty complicated, and the terminology and the scheme is totally different from what he did at Florida. But about midway through my time there, we're going through plays, and he starts using our terminology.

He's so smart about football that he was able to begin to speak my language and talk apples to apples. He'd already translated what he knew of our scheme into my words. That's something that carried a lot of weight with me.''

McDaniels also said: "The football traits he has is the stuff you die for.''

That tells me McDaniels will find something this year for Tebow to do. I don't know what it is. But last year, I don't think we saw everything McDaniels had to offer in terms of offensive play-calling. There's a lot inside him I think he's waiting to script and put in the hands of some offensive talent he mined and developed...

McDaniels made it clear to me the best quarterback will start.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/04/27/mailbag/index.html#ixzz0xehSRgNz



sportsillustrated (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/04/27/mailbag/index.html#ixzz0xefK3WcK)

Posted: Tuesday April 27, 2010 1:43PM

Everything you need to know about that article right there.

Northman
08-25-2010, 05:49 PM
The whole premise of the article is based on the belief by the writer that Tebows ceiling in the NFL is only as high as Ortons.
That makes the entire article CR@PP0L@.

Which of course he bases off one preseason game. :lol:

topscribe
08-25-2010, 05:50 PM
geez top, way to pour out a puddle of gas and leave the matches sitting next to it. . .

Well, the article was 3 hours old when I posted it (as opposed to the one Jags
posted above, which is 4 months old), and a conversation piece. I just thought
that is what takes place on a discussion board: conversation.

-----

milehigh
08-25-2010, 05:51 PM
Jagsbch you can't honestly believe Tebow is ready to start this year. I don't care how much you like him.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 05:52 PM
Which of course he bases off one preseason game. :lol:

As opposed to those who have had Tebow crowned as Elway's heir- apparent,
based off a draft selection? :lol:

-----

Northman
08-25-2010, 05:54 PM
As opposed to those who have had Tebow crowned as Elway's heir- apparent,
based off a draft selection? :lol:

-----


Certainly not me. Most of that nonsense is coming from the Gator fans.

dogfish
08-25-2010, 05:59 PM
The second explanation has to be that Denver believes Tebow has special skills that could someday make him superior to Orton. That's pretty hard to believe considering Orton has been running a pro-style offense since his days at Purdue and is known for both his accuracy and his football acumen.

yea. . . it's pretty hard to believe, IF you've never watched the guy play a down of football. . .

:rolleyes:

clearly, there's a reason this guy's writing for a comic book publication. . .

let's take a look at the vision of someone who actually knows what he's talking about:



Examining Jon Gruden's Unhealthy Obsession With Tim Tebow
Jon Gruden has only been out of football for a month, technically, but he's already having trouble adjusting. Case in point: This rather remarkable interview he did with the Sun-Sentinel on Sunday.

Gruden starts off by describing how he misses the game (it's only been four weeks!), hints that his next job might be in the college ranks, then goes kind of fanboy on the subject of Tebow:

"No question. The hard part is, you have to isolate the option. That's why Tim Tebow is so interesting to me. He's like Brandon Jacobs playing quarterback. He's 250 pounds. He's the strongest human being who's ever played the position. Ever. He will kick the living [expletive] out of a defensive lineman. He'll fight anybody. He is rare. Tebow is the kind of guy who could revolutionize the game. He's the 'wildcat' who can throw. Most of the teams that have the wildcat back there, it's Ronnie Brown, it's Jerious Norwood, it's whoever you want to say it is. This guy here is 250 pounds of concrete cyanide, man. And he can throw. He throws well enough at any level to play quarterback."

But Gruden wasn't done.

"When he was a high school senior, they played Armwood in the state championship game. I have tape. He has an 80-yard touchdown run that put them in the lead. When it flipped around, and Armwood had the ball, what position do you think Tebow was playing? He was playing nose guard - and he disrupted about 10 plays. This guy is totally different. He's got Rich Gannon, Drew Brees, that kind of makeup as a team guy. What he said after the Ole Miss game, I said, 'That's my favorite football player I've ever seen in my whole life.' I said, 'I want Florida to win every game that kid plays from now on.'"

I wonder if the Brett Favre shrine in Peter King's home is bigger than Gruden's backyard Tim Tebow topiary hedge?

http://deadspin.com/5150666/examining-jon-grudens-unhealthy-obsession-with-tim-tebow

no one will know what's going to happen with tebow until he gets out there and plays a few years, but to suggest that he doesn't have special skills that orton doesn't share is just staggeringly ignorant. . . anyone who has working eyes can see that tebow has a rare skill set. . . trying to marginalize it is laughable. . .

pnbronco
08-25-2010, 06:02 PM
geez top, way to pour out a puddle of gas and leave the matches sitting next to it. . .

I think a few fire crackers were left there too........:eek:


IMO sports writers are like the rest of us. They try to make predictions on the info that they know or think they do. They are also human and their bias will always come into play. Just a quick reminder that Peter King picked the Bears to go to the Super last year...........:lol:

For the record I think Tebow is great kid and love his work ethics. I just want him to have the time he needs to develop......:D

Northman
08-25-2010, 06:10 PM
IMO sports writers are like the rest of us. They try to make predictions on the info that they know or think they do. They are also human and their bias will always come into play.

Absolutely. This is guy is clearly crazy. I think i attribute it more to logical posting. I just dont see the sense of posting an article that is this ridiculous.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 06:20 PM
Absolutely. This is guy is clearly crazy. I think i attribute it more to logical posting. I just dont see the sense of posting an article that is this ridiculous.

Maybe it's because I don't think it is "ridiculous." As I said, I don't fully buy into
it, but how "ridiculous" it is depends on personal opinion. Yours was not my only
consideration . . .

-----

Northman
08-25-2010, 06:22 PM
Maybe it's because I don't think it is "ridiculous." As I said, I don't fully buy into
it, but how "ridiculous" it is depends on personal opinion. Yours was not my only
consideration . . .

-----

Probably should of been mate. Just saying.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 06:23 PM
Probably should of been mate. Just saying.

Never will be, mate. Just saying . . .

-----

honz
08-25-2010, 06:39 PM
Stupid article. The Broncos obviously expect Tebow to be better than Orton.

dogfish
08-25-2010, 06:43 PM
Probably should of been mate. Just saying.

:lol::lol:

claymore
08-25-2010, 06:51 PM
Life is like a box of Chocolates.

claymore
08-25-2010, 06:52 PM
Maybe it's because I don't think it is "ridiculous." As I said, I don't fully buy into
it, but how "ridiculous" it is depends on personal opinion. Yours was not my only
consideration . . .

-----

Top you are really pissing me off with this Orton shit. :mad:

topscribe
08-25-2010, 06:53 PM
Life is like a box of Chocolates.

I know boxed chocolates are romantic, but I've always preferred a simple Hershey bar . . .

-----

claymore
08-25-2010, 06:54 PM
I know boxed chocolates are romantic, but I've always preferred a simple Hershey bar . . .

-----

I knew it. The hershey highway!

topscribe
08-25-2010, 06:55 PM
Top you are really pissing me off with this Orton shit. :mad:

Good. I have been pissed off by the flooding of the media with all all this Tebow
adulation and worship. I like the kid, I really do, but it has been like too many
chocolates: nauseating.

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
08-25-2010, 06:55 PM
Orton is the now. Tebow is the future. I don't care who you are or what you say, like it or not McDaniels' fate is directly tied to Tebow. The Tim Tebow fan club and world media will not allow McDaniels (aka Pat Bowlen) to simply ignore Tebow for several years just in case Orton has success.

Eventually, Bowlen will feel pressured to actually play the guy who sold all those jerseys for him and will lean on McDaniels to at least give Tebow a shot. It's business, plain and simple and Pat Bowlen is a business man first and Broncos Fan second.

If Tebow fails (which he's NEVER done), McDaniels will end up outta here. If he succeeds, McDaniels will have bought himself several years to continue his team tear down and rebuild experiment.

Orton is pretty much going to have to take us to the promised land (spoken Superbowl) or Orton/Tebow will become another Favre/Rodgers, McNabb/Kolb, or Brees/Rivers. Not even McDaniels is headstrong enough and has the kind of stroke to hold back that eventual storm. Tebow will be the starting QB for the Denver Broncos one day, and it won't be because Kyle Orton is retiring after a long, storied career as the Denver Broncos starting QB. McDaniels has 2 years to get Tebow ready to start. After then, I have a feeling Bowlen will step in and make it happen. We've seen it too many times, already.

Northman
08-25-2010, 06:59 PM
Orton is the now. Tebow is the future. I don't care who you are or what you say, like it or not McDaniels' fate is directly tied to Tebow. The Tim Tebow fan club and world media will not allow McDaniels (aka Pat Bowlen) to simply ignore Tebow for several years just in case Orton has success.

Eventually, Bowlen will feel pressured to actually play the guy who sold all those jerseys for him and will lean on McDaniels to at least give Tebow a shot. It's business, plain and simple and Pat Bowlen is a business man first and Broncos Fan second.

If Tebow fails (which he's NEVER done), McDaniels will end up outta here. If he succeeds, McDaniels will have bought himself several years to continue his team tear down and rebuild experiment.

Orton is pretty much going to have to take us to the promised land (spoken Superbowl) or Orton/Tebow will become another Favre/Rodgers, McNabb/Kolb, or Brees/Rivers. Not even McDaniels is headstrong enough and has the kind of stroke to hold back that eventual storm. Tebow will be the starting QB for the Denver Broncos one day, and it won't be because Kyle Orton is retiring after a long, storied career as the Denver Broncos starting QB. McDaniels has 2 years to get Tebow ready to start. After then, I have a feeling Bowlen will step in and make it happen. We've seen it too many times, already.


Indeed. At best if Orton somehow proves to be as good as a Drew Brees than he will be just traded and Tebow fills in like Rivers did.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 06:59 PM
Orton is the now. Tebow is the future. I don't care who you are or what you say, like it or not McDaniels' fate is directly tied to Tebow. The Tim Tebow fan club and world media will not allow McDaniels (aka Pat Bowlen) to simply ignore Tebow for several years just in case Orton has success.

Eventually, Bowlen will feel pressured to actually play the guy who sold all those jerseys for him and will lean on McDaniels to at least give Tebow a shot. It's business, plain and simple and Pat Bowlen is a business man first and Broncos Fan second.

If Tebow fails (which he's NEVER done), McDaniels will end up outta here. If he succeeds, McDaniels will have bought himself several years to continue his team tear down and rebuild experiment.

Orton is pretty much going to have to take us to the promised land (spoken Superbowl) or Orton/Tebow will become another Favre/Rodgers, McNabb/Kolb, or Brees/Rivers. Not even McDaniels is headstrong enough and has the kind of stroke to hold back that eventual storm. Tebow will be the starting QB for the Denver Broncos one day, and it won't be because Kyle Orton is retiring after a long, storied career as the Denver Broncos starting QB. McDaniels has 2 years to get Tebow ready to start. After then, I have a feeling Bowlen will step in and make it happen. We've seen it too many times, already.

Hafta disagree, HP. McDaniels' fate is tied up in wins - in playoffs and SBs. If
he achieves them, it won't make a difference who is QB, whether Tebow is
All-Pro or busts, whether Orton becomes Franchise or gets shipped. If McD
wins, he stays with Mr. Bowlen's blessing. If he doesn't, he's gone. That is the
only criterion.

-----

topscribe
08-25-2010, 07:01 PM
Indeed. At best if Orton somehow proves to be as good as a Drew Brees than he will be just traded and Tebow fills in like Rivers did.

That will be if Tebow turns out as good as Rivers.

Stay tuned . . .

-----

claymore
08-25-2010, 07:01 PM
Good. I have been pissed off by the flooding of the media with all all this Tebow
adulation and worship. I like the kid, I really do, but it has been like too many
chocolates: nauseating.

-----

I hear you 100%. I like the kid as a human being, but all the Tebow worship is ridiculous. Ive had to put up with it to a larger degree here in El paso though.

BroncoWave
08-25-2010, 07:03 PM
Hafta disagree, HP. McDaniels' fate is tied up in wins - in playoffs and SBs. If
he achieves them, it won't make a difference who is QB, whether Tebow is
All-Pro or busts, whether Orton becomes Franchise or gets shipped. If McD
wins, he stays with Mr. Bowlen's blessing. If he doesn't, he's gone. That is the
only criterion.

-----

Agreed. If somehow Orton led us to a Super Bowl but Tebow was a huge bust McD would still be our coach for several more years. I think all the "McD's career is tied to Tebow's" is kinda a load of crap. Now there is a good chance that how Tebow turns out could affect our wins and losses which could in affect determine McD's fate, but I don't think there will necessarily be a direct correlation between the two.

Northman
08-25-2010, 07:04 PM
That will be if Tebow turns out as good as Rivers.

Stay tuned . . .

-----

Of course. But the bar isnt set very high in Denver right now.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 07:05 PM
Agreed. If somehow Orton led us to a Super Bowl but Tebow was a huge bust McD would still be our coach for several more years. I think all the "McD's career is tied to Tebow's" is kinda a load of crap. Now there is a good chance that how Tebow turns out could affect our wins and losses which could in affect determine McD's fate, but I don't think there will necessarily be a direct correlation between the two.

I think you hit the nail on the head. So, on the other side, if Tebow ends up an
All-Pro but the Broncos never get to the Super Bowl, I think McD is gone, all the
same . . .

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
08-25-2010, 07:20 PM
Hafta disagree, HP. McDaniels' fate is tied up in wins - in playoffs and SBs. If
he achieves them, it won't make a difference who is QB, whether Tebow is
All-Pro or busts, whether Orton becomes Franchise or gets shipped. If McD
wins, he stays with Mr. Bowlen's blessing. If he doesn't, he's gone. That is the
only criterion.

-----

Maybe to Broncos fans, but not to the rest of the world. Like I said, If we win a Championship (which is HIGHLY unlikely), maybe Orton gets to stay (Trent Dilfer didn't in Baltimore) but remember, if you're not winning Championships, then there's always "room for improvement". Even the playoffs are not enough anymore, ask McNabb or Favre.

I know you're not very fond of Tebow, but you're underestimating the PHENOMENON that is Tim Tebow. No other player has ever gotten the media attention, both good and bad, that Tebow has. No single player has ever had the fan base just coming out of college. Even Michael Jordan didn't have record #s of fans from UNC running out and buying his Bulls Jersey before he ever played a game. The stakes are too high for both McDaniels and Bowlen not to start Tebow at some point.

It's just a fact. You can believe all you want that McDaniels is stubborn enough to play Orton no matter what anyone else says. If Orton doesn't get us to the playoffs this year, he's losing his starting spot and likely traded. If he does, he might get to play out that nice fat $9 mil deal next year before he is replaced by Tebow the following year.

The only other possible scenario is that Orton becomes Drew Brees/Peyton Manning this year and becomes so irreplaceable that McDaniels has make a decision to trade Tebow. Tebow will not be denied. Orton and Tebow will not be able to coexist if Tebow is ready to play. As soon as Tebow is ready he WILL take over.

Those are my feelings on it.

HORSEPOWER 56
08-25-2010, 07:29 PM
Agreed. If somehow Orton led us to a Super Bowl but Tebow was a huge bust McD would still be our coach for several more years. I think all the "McD's career is tied to Tebow's" is kinda a load of crap. Now there is a good chance that how Tebow turns out could affect our wins and losses which could in affect determine McD's fate, but I don't think there will necessarily be a direct correlation between the two.

True, but just looking at the probabilities, what do you think the chances are of Orton leading us to a Championship and Tebow busting, or at the very least not being ready to play next season? Both will pretty much have to happen. I wouldn't even bet your money on that happening.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 07:34 PM
Maybe to Broncos fans, but not to the rest of the world. Like I said, If we win a Championship (which is HIGHLY unlikely), maybe Orton gets to stay (Trent Dilfer didn't in Baltimore) but remember, if you're not winning Championships, then there's always "room for improvement". Even the playoffs are not enough anymore, ask McNabb or Favre.

I know you're not very fond of Tebow, but you're underestimating the PHENOMENON that is Tim Tebow. No other player has ever gotten the media attention, both good and bad, that Tebow has. No single player has ever had the fan base just coming out of college. Even Michael Jordan didn't have record #s of fans from UNC running out and buying his Bulls Jersey before he ever played a game. The stakes are too high for both McDaniels and Bowlen not to start Tebow at some point.

It's just a fact. You can believe all you want that McDaniels is stubborn enough to play Orton no matter what anyone else says. If Orton doesn't get us to the playoffs this year, he's losing his starting spot and likely traded. If he does, he might get to play out that nice fat $9 mil deal next year before he is replaced by Tebow the following year.

The only other possible scenario is that Orton becomes Drew Brees/Peyton Manning this year and becomes so irreplaceable that McDaniels has make a decision to trade Tebow. Tebow will not be denied. Orton and Tebow will not be able to coexist if Tebow is ready to play. As soon as Tebow is ready he WILL take over.

Those are my feelings on it.

No, you don't know I'm not fond of Tebow, and I don't know where you
possibly could have gotten that idea. I just got through saying in another
post that I like him. I also am taking the realistic approach that he has to
prove himself (which is the only position I have ever taken toward Orton, BTW).

And it makes no difference what the fans inside Denver, or outside Denver, or
on Mars or the moon think. It is what Mr. Bowlen thinks. Period. He wants
wins. He wants playoff wins and Super Bowls. Period. He vividly demonstrated
that when he fired his dear friend Mike Shanahan.

If Orton stays as QB and the Broncos go to the Super Bowl, McDaniels stays.
If Tebow ends up All-Pro but the Broncos can't get there, McDaniels goes. It's
that simple . . .

-----

dogfish
08-25-2010, 08:47 PM
as excited as i am to see what tebow can do, i'm kinda with top on this one. . . if (and my expectations of the team as a whole are moderately low right now, but i'm never going to write off a season before it's played), IF orton can play better and more consistently than last year, AND lead us to a playoff win. . . there doesn't need to be any rush to get tim out there full time. . .

it depends on the circumstances. . . if orton's limitations are on full display and clearly hindering the team, then i do think you have to at least think about making a switch, depending on where tebow is. . .

i was fully and vocally in favor of bencing plummer for cutler when shanahan did, because i thought plummer had thrown in the towel and couldn't possibly play much worse-- he was butt out there, plain and simple. . . i don't care what our record was-- i'm utterly convinced that the defense and running game dragged him to that point, and i doubt we could have sustained it any longer. . . it's what shanahan thought, and he knows a hell of a lot more than i do. . .

but i trust orton more than i ever would have trusted plummer. . . think what you will about KO's ability, but he's not a bum. . . he works hard, and approaches his job with a professional attitude that plummer never had. . . his pysical skills aren't elite, but they're not as poor as some people make them out to be, either-- at the very least, he has adequate talent to play competitively at this level. . . plus, he has cool initials and a sick neckbeard. . .

there were times last year when this offense was downright maddening to watch, but IMO, playcalling and poor interior OL performance (and polumbus! :frusty: ) have to share a chunk of the blame. . . my issue with orton, aside from the brutal immobility (get to that in a minute), has been what i considered timid play. . . hesitation, leading to the checkdown or throw out of bounds-- sometimes he just looks indecisive to me. . . it's why people call him captain checkdown. . . i've often wondered whether he's not just more or less psychically neutered from constantly being told to be a game manager and not make mistakes. . .

naturally i'm waiting to see what happens when we play for real, but to this point all indications are that he's looking more confident and letting it rip a little more. . . if he can do that, there's no reason to think we won't see him play better this year-- yea, even without marshall. . . i don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to lose a bit of that hesitancy with a second year in the scheme, and he's been putting adequate zip on the ball in the short and intermediate routes. . .

to me, the number one question really is the mobility issue. . . i thought he was flat brutal last year, and i think most people besides top agree with that. . . i'm actually quite eager to see if top's assertion that he's not a statue when his ankles are healthy proves to be correct, because i have to admit i was very pleased to see him duck away from the rush several times in the detroit game. . .

you guys all saw it too, i know you did. . . not to be confused with randall cunningham, but it was enough to get the job done. . . a lot if not most of the league's best QBs are pretty limited in that respect, it kinda tends to come with the position. . . i don't need the mike vick experience out there-- just a guy who's at least nimble enough to sidestep 330-pounders and get the ball off. . . if kyle can throw it better than he did last year, he doesn't have to run like tebow. . .

and then, the obvious progression of the question is, "can he actually STAY healthy this year?"

he hasn't had much success at it, dating back to college. . . and it wouldn't matter if he DID have sick mobility when healthy, if he can't ever stay healthy. . . he has a LOT to prove this year, and you know he's as aware of it as anyone-- but if it's bothering him, he sure isn't showing it. . .

plummer pretty much cried like a little girl and got ready to take his ball and go home when we drafted cutler-- dude crumbled like a sandcastle in the tide. . . it doesn't look like orton's going to do that. . . by all accounts, he's handled his business like a pro this offseason. . .

i'm actually looking forward to seeing what he can do this year, in a system that's designed to get big production out of the passing game. . . he was a prospect that i liked coming out of purdue, and he's not by any means too old to improve. . . shit, how old was gannon when the light finally went on? it happens sometimes with quarterbacks. . . it's probably the most difficult, complicated position in all of pro sports. . .

looked at in context, orton's numbers from last year weren't terrible, and a moderate bump this year would push them into the pretty damn solid range. . . if he adds a few hundred yards and four-five touchdowns, you're looking at a pretty good season-- i certainly don't think those numbers are impossible, by any means. . . unless his ankles simultaneously burst into flames, as clay says. . . :laugh:

i also understand the realities of the situation. . . in all probability, tebow IS going to be the starting quarterback of this team in the not-too-distant future. . . i'm willing to let that story write itself, though. . .

there are a number of different perfectly good reasons for tebow to take the job from orton-- but hype sure doesn't count as one in my book. . . i want him to get the job because he earned it, and/or because he's the guy that gives us the best chance to win. . . i'm in pretty much complete disagreement with any other scenario that gives him the job, barring something like injury obviously. . . i'm not at all on board with saying "he's the first round pick, so he has to start, simple as that". . . NURRR!!

i'm in no hurry if the guy ahead of him is playing well and we're winning games. . . of course, i do think it's pretty clear that kyle's going to have to be GOOD, not just adequate, if he's going to have any hope of holding tebow off for long. . . IMO, anything short of winning the division at the very least is going to result in him looking at some pretty dim prospects for starting here in 2011-- and even that's assuming that we don't tank as a squad, in which case tebow could potentially end up playing regardless. . .

BUT. . . what happens if orton does improve, the O-line comes together with a healthy clady and kupes, somebody like ayers or moss actually steps up. . . and say we end up winning a playoff game this year. . . i'm not gonna run out and bet on it, but stranger things have MOST certainly happened in football than an 8-8 team getting to 10-6 the next year and winning a game in the wild card round. . .

at that point, do you want or expect the team to bench orton just for the sake of getting the high draft pick on the field to satisfy the hype? not me. . . as far as the media and the tebow bandwaggoners go, **** those people! they're not denver broncos fans, and i would hope bowlen and mcdaniels would be disdainful of their opinions. . . who cares what BSPN says? i'm with josh on this one, i just want to win some mother****ing GAMES for a change!

i really don't care how, or who's under center. . . and although they may not flood the air and internet waves because they don't have an agenda to push, i'm pretty sure there are more than enough broncos fans who agree with me to keep butts in the seat. . . hell, they sell out every game whether we're any good or not. . .

Ravage!!!
08-25-2010, 09:00 PM
If/when we don't make the playoffs this year... Tebow is the QB next season. McD's career is tied to that player. Just as Ditka's career was tied to Williams. McD's first two seasons have been surrounded with "QB controversy" whether that be for trading one away, or moving up and taking a chance on another. That doesn't go unnoticed, no matter how much we feel that we know what Bowlen is looking for and what he'll do.

dogfish
08-25-2010, 09:04 PM
Maybe to Broncos fans, but not to the rest of the world.

until the rest of the world starts buying broncos season tickets, why should bowlen and co. give a shit what they think?


if tebow is as irresistible as you say due to his on the field ability, hallelujah! but i'm pretty sure mcdaniels is stubborn enough to tell the rest of the world to go to hell if he doesn't think tebow's going to help us win the. . . uhh, *ahem!*. . . game. . . mort and john clayton can bitch about it all they want, and jagsguy on here and all his teboworshipping brethren around the blogoshpere-- i'm pretty sure josh isn't listening to any of those guys. . .

Sconnie Bronco
08-25-2010, 09:14 PM
as excited as i am to see what tebow can do, i'm kinda with top on this one. . . if (and my expectations of the team as a whole are moderately low right now, but i'm never going to write off a season before it's played), IF orton can play better and more consistently than last year, AND lead us to a playoff win. . . there doesn't need to be any rush to get tim out there full time. . .

it depends on the circumstances. . . if orton's limitations are on full display and clearly hindering the team, then i do think you have to at least think about making a switch, depending on where tebow is. . .

i was fully and vocally in favor of bencing plummer for cutler when shanahan did, because i thought plummer had thrown in the towel and couldn't possibly play much worse-- he was butt out there, plain and simple. . . i don't care what our record was-- i'm utterly convinced that the defense and running game dragged him to that point, and i doubt we could have sustained it any longer. . . it's what shanahan thought, and he knows a hell of a lot more than i do. . .

but i trust orton more than i ever would have trusted plummer. . . think what you will about KO's ability, but he's not a bum. . . he works hard, and approaches his job with a professional attitude that plummer never had. . . his pysical skills aren't elite, but they're not as poor as some people make them out to be, either-- at the very least, he has adequate talent to play competitively at this level. . . plus, he has cool initials and a sick neckbeard. . .

there were times last year when this offense was downright maddening to watch, but IMO, playcalling and poor interior OL performance (and polumbus! :frusty: ) have to share a chunk of the blame. . . my issue with orton, aside from the brutal immobility (get to that in a minute), has been what i considered timid play. . . hesitation, leading to the checkdown or throw out of bounds-- sometimes he just looks indecisive to me. . . it's why people call him captain checkdown. . . i've often wondered whether he's not just more or less psychically neutered from constantly being told to be a game manager and not make mistakes. . .

naturally i'm waiting to see what happens when we play for real, but to this point all indications are that he's looking more confident and letting it rip a little more. . . if he can do that, there's no reason to think we won't see him play better this year-- yea, even without marshall. . . i don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to lose a bit of that hesitancy with a second year in the scheme, and he's been putting adequate zip on the ball in the short and intermediate routes. . .

to me, the number one question really is the mobility issue. . . i thought he was flat brutal last year, and i think most people besides top agree with that. . . i'm actually quite eager to see if top's assertion that he's not a statue when his ankles are healthy proves to be correct, because i have to admit i was very pleased to see him duck away from the rush several times in the detroit game. . .

you guys all saw it too, i know you did. . . not to be confused with randall cunningham, but it was enough to get the job done. . . a lot if not most of the league's best QBs are pretty limited in that respect, it kinda tends to come with the position. . . i don't need the mike vick experience out there-- just a guy who's at least nimble enough to sidestep 330-pounders and get the ball off. . . if kyle can throw it better than he did last year, he doesn't have to run like tebow. . .

and then, the obvious progression of the question is, "can he actually STAY healthy this year?"

he hasn't had much success at it, dating back to college. . . and it wouldn't matter if he DID have sick mobility when healthy, if he can't ever stay healthy. . . he has a LOT to prove this year, and you know he's as aware of it as anyone-- but if it's bothering him, he sure isn't showing it. . .

plummer pretty much cried like a little girl and got ready to take his ball and go home when we drafted cutler-- dude crumbled like a sandcastle in the tide. . . it doesn't look like orton's going to do that. . . by all accounts, he's handled his business like a pro this offseason. . .

i'm actually looking forward to seeing what he can do this year, in a system that's designed to get big production out of the passing game. . . he was a prospect that i liked coming out of purdue, and he's not by any means too old to improve. . . shit, how old was gannon when the light finally went on? it happens sometimes with quarterbacks. . . it's probably the most difficult, complicated position in all of pro sports. . .

looked at in context, orton's numbers from last year weren't terrible, and a moderate bump this year would push them into the pretty damn solid range. . . if he adds a few hundred yards and four-five touchdowns, you're looking at a pretty good season-- i certainly don't think those numbers are impossible, by any means. . . unless his ankles simultaneously burst into flames, as clay says. . . :laugh:

i also understand the realities of the situation. . . in all probability, tebow IS going to be the starting quarterback of this team in the not-too-distant future. . . i'm willing to let that story write itself, though. . .

there are a number of different perfectly good reasons for tebow to take the job from orton-- but hype sure doesn't count as one in my book. . . i want him to get the job because he earned it, and/or because he's the guy that gives us the best chance to win. . . i'm in pretty much complete disagreement with any other scenario that gives him the job, barring something like injury obviously. . . i'm not at all on board with saying "he's the first round pick, so he has to start, simple as that". . . NURRR!!

i'm in no hurry if the guy ahead of him is playing well and we're winning games. . . of course, i do think it's pretty clear that kyle's going to have to be GOOD, not just adequate, if he's going to have any hope of holding tebow off for long. . . IMO, anything short of winning the division at the very least is going to result in him looking at some pretty dim prospects for starting here in 2011-- and even that's assuming that we don't tank as a squad, in which case tebow could potentially end up playing regardless. . .

BUT. . . what happens if orton does improve, the O-line comes together with a healthy clady and kupes, somebody like ayers or moss actually steps up. . . and say we end up winning a playoff game this year. . . i'm not gonna run out and bet on it, but stranger things have MOST certainly happened in football than an 8-8 team getting to 10-6 the next year and winning a game in the wild card round. . .

at that point, do you want or expect the team to bench orton just for the sake of getting the high draft pick on the field to satisfy the hype? not me. . . as far as the media and the tebow bandwaggoners go, **** those people! they're not denver broncos fans, and i would hope bowlen and mcdaniels would be disdainful of their opinions. . . who cares what BSPN says? i'm with josh on this one, i just want to win some mother****ing GAMES for a change!

i really don't care how, or who's under center. . . and although they may not flood the air and internet waves because they don't have an agenda to push, i'm pretty sure there are more than enough broncos fans who agree with me to keep butts in the seat. . . hell, they sell out every game whether we're any good or not. . .

If the you dont think Orton can win a Super Bowl, then the idea that McDaniels future being tied to Tebow starts to carry more weight. If you trace back a lot of this discussion, it ultimately goes back to what people think of Orton.

Everyone agrees McDaniels needs to win but its more about to what degree one believes that can happen with Orton for the most part.

Sconnie Bronco
08-25-2010, 09:18 PM
Ross Tucker has been hanging with Jim Miller too much. (orton homer)I like Orton as much as the next guy, but Tebow's upside is much higher than Orton.


This is dead on. Jim Miller is kind of Orton's personal Joseph Goebbels.

I think when Miller looks at Tebow, he sees Cade McNown.

nevcraw
08-25-2010, 09:28 PM
This is dead on. Jim Miller is kind of Orton's personal Joseph Goebbels.

I think when Miller looks at Tebow, he sees Cade McNown.

when Miller sees Orton he's sees himself with better circunstances.. a back up that has been able to overachieve into starting a lot more games than anybody could inagine.
you got to love Orton's attitude, and smile at some of his luck... He's really not good at one thing but not bad enough either. I hope I'm wrong but i cannot see him taking anyteam to the promsie land unless he somehow becomes dilfer 2.0 with the best defense since the bears is 85..

silkamilkamonico
08-25-2010, 09:30 PM
What happens if Kyle Orton has Pro Bowl seasons this year and next with maybe a playoff win or 2 (even more) and Denver really looks to be on the upswing with a strong offense and continued development on defense (along with the offensive youngsters)?

Does Denver take the chance that Tebow possibly isn't as good as Orton (which isn't all that far fetched considering), and chooses to go with Tebow with the possibility of a step back?

Something tells me Tebow fans everywhere are hoping for Ortan and Denver to dail miserably, and that's really too bad for the ones that are also Bronco fans.

Northman
08-25-2010, 09:42 PM
What happens if Kyle Orton has Pro Bowl seasons this year and next with maybe a playoff win or 2 (even more) and Denver really looks to be on the upswing with a strong offense and continued development on defense (along with the offensive youngsters)?

Does Denver take the chance that Tebow possibly isn't as good as Orton (which isn't all that far fetched considering), and chooses to go with Tebow with the possibility of a step back?

Something tells me Tebow fans everywhere are hoping for Ortan and Denver to dail miserably, and that's really too bad for the ones that are also Bronco fans.

Im sure McD is smart enough to evaluate that if it comes to pass. But thats got to happen first. Since Orton has come in the league he has yet to play in a playoff game and make a pro bowl.

Sconnie Bronco
08-25-2010, 09:45 PM
when Miller sees Orton he's sees himself with better circunstances.. a back up that has been able to overachieve into starting a lot more games than anybody could inagine.
you got to love Orton's attitude, and smile at some of his luck... He's really not good at one thing but not bad enough either. I hope I'm wrong but i cannot see him taking anyteam to the promsie land unless he somehow becomes dilfer 2.0 with the best defense since the bears is 85..

Hopefully, Orton doesnt test positive for steroids like Miller did (at least I think it was him).

I think Orton is better than youre giving him credit for. I dont think it would take the 85 Bears or the 00 Ravens defensively but, so far, Orton has needed a lot of help when playing on winning teams. But that doesnt mean that will always be the case. Players evolve, especially QBs. There have been countless QBs that kind of floundered for a while before eventually becoming good QBs. But theres also a difference between being "good" and being good enough to take you where you want to go.

The Glue Factory
08-25-2010, 09:47 PM
Life is like a box of Chocolates.

Life is NOT like a box of chocolates. It's like a bad hit of acid. You don't know how bad the trip is going to be until it's too late.

nevcraw
08-25-2010, 09:49 PM
What happens if Kyle Orton has Pro Bowl seasons this year and next with maybe a playoff win or 2 (even more) and Denver really looks to be on the upswing with a strong offense and continued development on defense (along with the offensive youngsters)?

Does Denver take the chance that Tebow possibly isn't as good as Orton (which isn't all that far fetched considering), and chooses to go with Tebow with the possibility of a step back?

Something tells me Tebow fans everywhere are hoping for Ortan and Denver to dail miserably, and that's really too bad for the ones that are also Bronco fans.

no true team fan would put a player in front of the team's success. People can wish all they want - their wants needs and desires have zero bearing on the team's record. - even thought I move around the room in hopes that new postion can change the team's fortunes during a game..

Sconnie Bronco
08-25-2010, 10:00 PM
What happens if Kyle Orton has Pro Bowl seasons this year and next with maybe a playoff win or 2 (even more) and Denver really looks to be on the upswing with a strong offense and continued development on defense (along with the offensive youngsters)?

Does Denver take the chance that Tebow possibly isn't as good as Orton (which isn't all that far fetched considering), and chooses to go with Tebow with the possibility of a step back?

Something tells me Tebow fans everywhere are hoping for Ortan and Denver to dail miserably, and that's really too bad for the ones that are also Bronco fans.

Theres no need to constantly trash the Tebow fans. Everyone has their own reasons for liking their teams. There are numerous Bronco fans who like the Broncos because of Elway.

I Eat Staples
08-25-2010, 10:03 PM
Dumb. I like orton as much as the next guy, but tebow only being as good as orton....yea, sure, and guess what Demarious Thomas is only going to be as good as keary kolbert.

Dumb.

I don't think Tebow will even be as good as Orton.

I Eat Staples
08-25-2010, 10:04 PM
Im sure McD is smart enough to evaluate that if it comes to pass.

I'm not so sure, but I hope you're right.

gobroncsnv
08-25-2010, 10:12 PM
I find it interesting to see how much stock the sportswriters put in draft position, yet can't find enough ink to write about Brady. If draft position were that much of a deal that you just "can't" play another guy over this one because he's a first rounder, the league would have never seen Unitas, Kurt Warner, Rod Smith, I mean, how long do I need to make this list.
When it all comes down to it, I want the BEST players out there NOW... don't give a rip about draft position. (can't wait for someone to read this and say I think the draft is not important...) What I'm saying is, who are your producers... GO WITH THEM! Right now, our best chance to win is with Orton... he owns the offense, has looked great so far, and yeah, the Lions played a base defense with us... I'm hoping we don't face a pass rush like THAT again... But Orton played pretty well, ALL things considered.
Wonder what he would look like with a running game?? Elway was a fabulous athlete, great passer, leader, etc, yada... but until TD came along... (yeah, now I'm putting Orton in Elway's class... cue the sarcasm meter.) What I AM saying is Orton is running the offense pretty well right now, SUCH AS IT IS. He will absolutely benefit from a more solid line, and a better run game, just as ANY QB would.
I'm also still saying, short of a Chernobylistic meltdown, I'd rather see Tebow just have spot duty this year. Let the real fight begin next year.

silkamilkamonico
08-25-2010, 10:42 PM
Theres no need to constantly trash the Tebow fans. Everyone has their own reasons for liking their teams. There are numerous Bronco fans who like the Broncos because of Elway.

I'm not trashing any fans. I think it's a very legitimate question. There's been so many people here that have wished for Orton's demise (myself included), and have already praised Tebow as a HoF (without saying that exactly).

What happens if Orton blows up like Drew Brees did? He was a joke of a QB when they drafted Rivers, and although Rivers has definetely proved he's a worthy upper tier QB, I honestly think they would have at least 1 SuperBowl with Brees. I think Brees has turned into that great of a QB.

Drew Brees is also a game manager of sorts.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 10:53 PM
Theres no need to constantly trash the Tebow fans. Everyone has their own reasons for liking their teams. There are numerous Bronco fans who like the Broncos because of Elway.

I'm old enough to have seen Elvis on stage, and the Beatles on stage. I
remember the teenage girls, screaming to the degree someone otherwise would
think they were getting raped, eyes bugged out, fainting, pulling their blouses
over their heads.

This is what some of Tebow's present fans remind me of. Only, many of the wild,
spasmodic adulators aren't teenage girls. Some of them are in the press itself.
Some are named Gruden.

These are the fans to which Silk is referring, I'm sure. And I'm sure you'll never
get them to admit it, but, knowing human nature as I do, I would be willing to
venture a guess that the majority of those fans want Tebow out there, even
if it means Orton's falling flat on his face.

That's not trashing fans. That's facing reality . . .

-----

dogfish
08-25-2010, 11:03 PM
I'm old enough to have seen Elvis on stage, and the Beatles on stage.

hey Old Man Winter! no one cares if you're old enough to have seen the Beatles. . . we want to know if you DID see the Beatles!


:elefant:

silkamilkamonico
08-25-2010, 11:04 PM
These are the fans to which Silk is referring, I'm sure. And I'm sure you'll never
get them to admit it, but, knowing human nature as I do, I would be willing to
venture a guess that the majority of those fans want Tebow out there, even
if it means Orton's falling flat on his face.

That's not trashing fans. That's facing reality . . .

-----

That's exactly what I'm saying. I can respect the fans that are excited, like Tebow for what he has to offer, and for what he is about. I'm not talking about those fans. I'm talking about the ones that make these ridiculous posts, and even threads, that are annointing him as some holier than thou football player. We have one guy that makes threads nitpicking ridiculous and absurd "faults" of Orton just to make his point about Tim "the savior" Tebow should be the guy.

I can say with an honest face, that I think for as humble as Tebow is, he would be quite embarassed for the way some people "cheer" for him. I'm just saying there's a right way and a wrong way to wish for his success, and at the expense of other players is not appropriate, IMHO.

topscribe
08-25-2010, 11:04 PM
hey Old Man Winter! no one cares if you're old enough to have seen the Beatles. . . we want to know if you DID see the Beatles!


:elefant:

Well . . . um . . . not all of them. I mean, they were fully dressed . . .

-----

dogfish
08-25-2010, 11:07 PM
I can say with an honest face, that I think for as humble as Tebow is, he would be quite embarassed for the way people "cheer" for him.

i think that's a pretty damn good point. . .

gobroncsnv
08-25-2010, 11:15 PM
I have to agree, both Silk and Dog. I like Tebow a lot... how he carries himself, puts team first, work ethic, etc, etc, etc. Look forward to what he can do for this team, and for the league. God knows we have plenty in the NFL, and the greater sports world, to represent the opposite lifestyle.
But all that said, I just don't think his starting would be best for the team right now, and I'd bet, although I know he'd love to EARN the spot, he would likely agree that he's not the best guy on the practice field right now, nor in games played so far. (Game, in his case) That, to me, would be his opinion, (IN MY OPINION), not out of some false modesty, but in just basic honesty.

Sconnie Bronco
08-26-2010, 01:58 AM
I'm old enough to have seen Elvis on stage, and the Beatles on stage. I
remember the teenage girls, screaming to the degree someone otherwise would
think they were getting raped, eyes bugged out, fainting, pulling their blouses
over their heads.

This is what some of Tebow's present fans remind me of. Only, many of the wild,
spasmodic adulators aren't teenage girls. Some of them are in the press itself.
Some are named Gruden.

These are the fans to which Silk is referring, I'm sure. And I'm sure you'll never
get them to admit it, but, knowing human nature as I do, I would be willing to
venture a guess that the majority of those fans want Tebow out there, even
if it means Orton's falling flat on his face.

That's not trashing fans. That's facing reality . . .

-----

Thats almost too much information. And I see little relevance to most of it other than to play the "I'm older than you so I'm right" card.

It seems, to a large degree, you and the guy I was actually responding to might actually be mistaking "Orton sucks and I think he will fail" with "I want Orton to fail". And even those who think he is good, may question his upside...so even in that scenario there is a valid reason for wanting to see Tebow to play sooner. It seems you and the other guy are putting all of that into a blender and are coming up with some crusade to confront people who are in favor of Tebow.

Thats just what it seems like.

So when you talk about reality, you're really hiding behind some creation thats so vague, it's fiction. Who says they want Orton to fail because they want Tebow to succeed? Because I see a lot of people who think that he either has a limited upside or is even bad/average and dont expect a lot from him. "I think he will fail" is far from "I hope he fails" and you guys seem to be taking the later, which seems kind of mythical, and running with it...you're creating your own "reality" that suits this crusade.

And regarding Gruden, its interesting that you mock him. The guy was a Super Bowl winning NFL coach who worked with QBs and played QB in college. Yet, you dismiss him for his praise of Tebow. Meanwhile, when an ex NFL linemen writes a piece on Orton, its perfectly valid.

And then you even maintain that you like Tebow when everything you do points to the contrary. It even seems like you might be doing what you're accusing the "Tebow lovers" of doing.

Thats just what it seems like to me but then, what do I know...I'm not old enough to remember the Beatles.

red98
08-26-2010, 07:10 AM
No other player has ever gotten the media attention, both good and bad, that Tebow has. No single player has ever had the fan base just coming out of college.


Not true. Elway was twice as popular and twice as scrutinized when he came to Denver.

claymore
08-26-2010, 07:32 AM
Not true. Elway was twice as popular and twice as scrutinized when he came to Denver.

Tebow is a fart in the wind in comparison. Broncos fans that loved the Broncos before Tebow was drafted are almost indifferent to the kid. Im sure some love him but most know the chances of him being great are slim.

red98
08-26-2010, 07:42 AM
Tebow is a fart in the wind in comparison. Broncos fans that loved the Broncos before Tebow was drafted are almost indifferent to the kid. Im sure some love him but most know the chances of him being great are slim.

I admire your way with words Clay, pure poetry. :D

Here's a link to a story from 1983 that demonstrates how very popular Elway was back then:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fNYeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qGEEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3145,1265611&dq=elway+popular&hl=en

Tned
08-26-2010, 07:55 AM
i was fully and vocally in favor of bencing plummer for cutler when shanahan did, because i thought plummer had thrown in the towel and couldn't possibly play much worse-- he was butt out there, plain and simple. . . i don't care what our record was-- i'm utterly convinced that the defense and running game dragged him to that point, and i doubt we could have sustained it any longer. . . it's what shanahan thought, and he knows a hell of a lot more than i do. . .

but i trust orton more than i ever would have trusted plummer. . . think what you will about KO's ability, but he's not a bum. . . he works hard, and approaches his job with a professional attitude that plummer never had. . . his pysical skills aren't elite, but they're not as poor as some people make them out to be, either-- at the very least, he has adequate talent to play competitively at this level. . . plus, he has cool initials and a sick neckbeard. . .
...

plummer pretty much cried like a little girl and got ready to take his ball and go home when we drafted cutler-- dude crumbled like a sandcastle in the tide. . . it doesn't look like orton's going to do that. . . by all accounts, he's handled his business like a pro this offseason. . .


You and I see eye-to-eye on some things and are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum on others. This is one of those "opposite sides" things.

I have never gotten the opinion some hold about Plummer folding, wanting to throw his toys out of the pram or not caring if he won or lost. Even before Cutler was drafted, many used to say that Plummer didn't care about winning, which is why they didn't like/respect him. Anyone that watched him running for his life and trying to extend plays, even with the game over, in the AFCCG, when the line wsn't even slowing down the pass rush -- not to mention taking oxygen on the sideline because he was playing with the flu or something like that -- knows that clearly the guy wanted to win, regardless of what you think about his skill.

On to 2006, I am also surprised that people don't consider the changes to the offensive scheme, which was such a dismal failure that Shanahan had to fire one of his best friends, Mike Heimerdinger, due to the dismal failure of his offensive scheme that he brought to Denver.

When Kubiak left, and Heimerdinger came in, Heimerdinger attempted to change the Broncos to a straight, drop back passing offense, which their offensive line was completely incapable of executing. Would Plummer still have struggled in a scheme that fit the talent? Maybe, but I just don't understand how people so quickly discount what is the most obvious culprit for the 2006 offensive struggles and instead put it all on Plummer.

claymore
08-26-2010, 08:02 AM
I admire your way with words Clay, pure poetry. :D

Here's a link to a story from 1983 that demonstrates how very popular Elway was back then:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fNYeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qGEEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3145,1265611&dq=elway+popular&hl=en

Hahaha, that was a Pittsburgh paper too!

Elevation inc
08-26-2010, 08:11 AM
You and I see eye-to-eye on some things and are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum on others. This is one of those "opposite sides" things.

I have never gotten the opinion some hold about Plummer folding, wanting to throw his toys out of the pram or not caring if he won or lost. Even before Cutler was drafted, many used to say that Plummer didn't care about winning, which is why they didn't like/respect him. Anyone that watched him running for his life and trying to extend plays, even with the game over, in the AFCCG, when the line wsn't even slowing down the pass rush -- not to mention taking oxygen on the sideline because he was playing with the flu or something like that -- knows that clearly the guy wanted to win, regardless of what you think about his skill.

On to 2006, I am also surprised that people don't consider the changes to the offensive scheme, which was such a dismal failure that Shanahan had to fire one of his best friends, Mike Heimerdinger, due to the dismal failure of his offensive scheme that he brought to Denver.

When Kubiak left, and Heimerdinger came in, Heimerdinger attempted to change the Broncos to a straight, drop back passing offense, which their offensive line was completely incapable of executing. Would Plummer still have struggled in a scheme that fit the talent? Maybe, but I just don't understand how people so quickly discount what is the most obvious culprit for the 2006 offensive struggles and instead put it all on Plummer.



I agree i hated that scheme that year and felt the whole year was a joke, the minute they took blame off heim... and put it on plummer hence allowing cutler to come in was the first big mistake of the regimes eventual downfall.....cutler should not have been allowed to come that early he wasnt ready, and having to run a piss poor scheme...well it set his development back and was a big reason why we lost to close the season......

topscribe
08-26-2010, 09:16 AM
Thats almost too much information. And I see little relevance to most of it other than to play the "I'm older than you so I'm right" card.

Is that what you got out of what I said? Really? Wow.



It seems, to a large degree, you and the guy I was actually responding to might actually be mistaking "Orton sucks and I think he will fail" with "I want Orton to fail". And even those who think he is good, may question his upside...so even in that scenario there is a valid reason for wanting to see Tebow to play sooner. It seems you and the other guy are putting all of that into a blender and are coming up with some crusade to confront people who are in favor of Tebow.

Thats just what it seems like.

So when you talk about reality, you're really hiding behind some creation thats so vague, it's fiction. Who says they want Orton to fail because they want Tebow to succeed? Because I see a lot of people who think that he either has a limited upside or is even bad/average and dont expect a lot from him. "I think he will fail" is far from "I hope he fails" and you guys seem to be taking the later, which seems kind of mythical, and running with it...you're creating your own "reality" that suits this crusade.

This is a case in point. "Why do you feel this way?" is a much more appropriate
response than "This is why you feel this way." Leave the latter to trained
psychologists.



And regarding Gruden, its interesting that you mock him. The guy was a Super Bowl winning NFL coach who worked with QBs and played QB in college. Yet, you dismiss him for his praise of Tebow. Meanwhile, when an ex NFL linemen writes a piece on Orton, its perfectly valid.

I like Gruden. Always have. I also recognize gushing and superfluity when I
hear it. See what I mean? Refer to my response immediately above.



And then you even maintain that you like Tebow when everything you do points to the contrary. It even seems like you might be doing what you're accusing the "Tebow lovers" of doing.

I have never said anything against Tebow himself, IIRC, only that he has yet
to prove himself, which is the same thing I have said about Orton all along,
despite what those who want to hammer me believe. I don't know . . . do a
search on my posts and see if you can dig up something derogatory. You may
find something. But I doubt it since that would go against what I believe.



Thats just what it seems like to me but then, what do I know...I'm not old enough to remember the Beatles.

That this is even relevant to you shows the point flew on over your head.
You are going to encounter examples and analogies all your life. They help
to enhance the understanding of what the speaker/writer saying. As one very
wise Man once said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."




That's exactly what I'm saying. I can respect the fans that are excited, like Tebow for what he has to offer, and for what he is about. I'm not talking about those fans. I'm talking about the ones that make these ridiculous posts, and even threads, that are annointing him as some holier than thou football player. We have one guy that makes threads nitpicking ridiculous and absurd "faults" of Orton just to make his point about Tim "the savior" Tebow should be the guy.

I can say with an honest face, that I think for as humble as Tebow is, he would be quite embarassed for the way some people "cheer" for him. I'm just saying there's a right way and a wrong way to wish for his success, and at the expense of other players is not appropriate, IMHO.

Tebow seems such a gracious young man that he would respond the way he
does toward his adorers. But I just wonder how tired of it he has grown.

And you are absolutely right about the attitudes his adorers seem to take on
toward him and toward anyone standing in his way (e.g., Orton), IMO.

-----

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 10:25 AM
Hafta disagree, HP. McDaniels' fate is tied up in wins - in playoffs and SBs. If
he achieves them, it won't make a difference who is QB, whether Tebow is
All-Pro or busts, whether Orton becomes Franchise or gets shipped. If McD
wins, he stays with Mr. Bowlen's blessing. If he doesn't, he's gone. That is the
only criterion.

-----
Shanny didnt get fired after his failed 'elway replacements'. Coaches are graded on more than 1st rd busts...otherwise there'd be 10+ new HC's each year.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 10:31 AM
If/when we don't make the playoffs this year... Tebow is the QB next season. McD's career is tied to that player. Just as Ditka's career was tied to Williams. McD's first two seasons have been surrounded with "QB controversy" whether that be for trading one away, or moving up and taking a chance on another. That doesn't go unnoticed, no matter how much we feel that we know what Bowlen is looking for and what he'll do.

lol....way to take both sides. :lol:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

ok....I coulda SWORE I saw a post of yours saying McD's employment wasn't riding on TT.......but now........hmmmmm

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 10:56 AM
I agree i hated that scheme that year and felt the whole year was a joke, the minute they took blame off heim... and put it on plummer hence allowing cutler to come in was the first big mistake of the regimes eventual downfall.....cutler should not have been allowed to come that early he wasnt ready, and having to run a piss poor scheme...well it set his development back and was a big reason why we lost to close the season......
I Agree with both of you. I WOULD have agreed on Tned's post as well, but this new-fangled mobile site has word limits, not allowing any reply.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

LoyalSoldier
08-26-2010, 12:19 PM
Well, the article was 3 hours old when I posted it (as opposed to the one Jags
posted above, which is 4 months old), and a conversation piece. I just thought
that is what takes place on a discussion board: conversation.

-----

I thought the purpose was to make as many jokes at our oldest member's expense. :D

topscribe
08-26-2010, 12:22 PM
I thought the purpose was to make as many jokes at our oldest member's expense. :D

Haven't seen you in a while, LS. Where you been? Now leave.

-----

Lonestar
08-26-2010, 12:54 PM
I agree i hated that scheme that year and felt the whole year was a joke, the minute they took blame off heim... and put it on plummer hence allowing cutler to come in was the first big mistake of the regimes eventual downfall.....cutler should not have been allowed to come that early he wasnt ready, and having to run a piss poor scheme...well it set his development back and was a big reason why we lost to close the season......

Jake was a hell of a gamer. Prior to the offseason of 04 he did not take the jib as seriuosly as some thought he should.

Jake had always commented that he was surprised ti be drafted, or played so long in the NFL.

He did not take off season studying ti herat until 04 when he set down with Kubes and watched every game film on himslef that they could find. It worked out in 05 with his best ever TD-pick ratio ever. He had the best year of his career and the TEAM had the best W-L record ever. But alas PIT had us figured out and nuked us in the AFCCG by runing all over our OLINE. Many times there was a LB in the backfield to meet Jake when he got there.

I never saw him give up on his TEAM prior to the change in scheme in 06. And frankly not all that sure he did then.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
08-26-2010, 12:59 PM
Meant to add that I'm not sure that TE broncos gave up on Jake instead of the other way around.

As for now NOT sure how it will pan out.

But believe that Tebow will be our starter in 2011 or at he latest 2012.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

claymore
08-26-2010, 01:07 PM
Plummer had a worse criminal record than Clarett did.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 01:08 PM
Meant to add that I'm not sure that TE broncos gave up on Jake instead of the other way around.

As for now NOT sure how it will pan out.

But believe that Tebow will be our starter in 2011 or at he latest 2012.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I don't think the FO is so sure about 2011. That's the big money year for Kyle.

-----

WARHORSE
08-26-2010, 01:15 PM
Tim Tebow will play in games this year.

He will have his goaline opportunities.


He will succeed.


Cause he just doesnt accept losing.


But Orton is the starter, and deservedly so, and if he earns a spot in Denver in the future this year, that can only be a good thing.

But that also wont stop Tebow from being who he is nor accomplishing what he will.


Really, Tebow is like Vince Young without the mental breakdowns.

And that my friend, will end up under center sooner than later.


One aspect that Cassell brought to NE that McDaniels loved, was his ability to run.

Easy to fall in love with that when youve had Bradys immobile self back there for decades.

It just adds another problem for the defense to defense.


I cant wait for Tebow to hit the field.

Ravage!!!
08-26-2010, 01:19 PM
How many mobile QBs have succeeded as of late in the NFL?

You have to be a passer in the NFL to be successful. I truly hope TT is better than Vince Young. Thats exactly what I'm worried about, is that he's another Vince Young.

Northman
08-26-2010, 01:26 PM
How many mobile QBs have succeeded as of late in the NFL?

You have to be a passer in the NFL to be successful. I truly hope TT is better than Vince Young. Thats exactly what I'm worried about, is that he's another Vince Young.

Yea, i was going to say that Brady has 3 rings as a pocket passer while Cassell has none as a starter. Even when McNabb made it too the SB he was outdone by a pocket passer. Vick? Nothing. They do bring a added dimension which is fine but the most important area is precision passing. I think Tebow will have that and hopefully that is what Mcd saw more than the running skills when he drafted him.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 01:26 PM
How many mobile QBs have succeeded as of late in the NFL?

You have to be a passer in the NFL to be successful. I truly hope TT is better than Vince Young. Thats exactly what I'm worried about, is that he's another Vince Young.

And all Vince Young does is win football games. I've been a harsh critic of his since the day he entered the league and he may not be the most polished QB but he leads the Titans to victories. They were 0-6 last year without him and 8-2 with him, only losing to the Colts and Chargers. If that doesn't tell you all you need to know about him, I don't know what would.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 01:44 PM
And all Vince Young does is win football games. I've been a harsh critic of his since the day he entered the league and he may not be the most polished QB but he leads the Titans to victories. They were 0-6 last year without him and 8-2 with him, only losing to the Colts and Chargers. If that doesn't tell you all you need to know about him, I don't know what would.

It tells me he had a HB that ran for over 2,000 yards. Just because he wins games, doesn't mean he wins games.

And Vince Young has yet to lead a team to the playoffs.

Sconnie Bronco
08-26-2010, 02:02 PM
Jake was a hell of a gamer. Prior to the offseason of 04 he did not take the jib as seriuosly as some thought he should.

Jake had always commented that he was surprised ti be drafted, or played so long in the NFL.

He did not take off season studying ti herat until 04 when he set down with Kubes and watched every game film on himslef that they could find. It worked out in 05 with his best ever TD-pick ratio ever. He had the best year of his career and the TEAM had the best W-L record ever. But alas PIT had us figured out and nuked us in the AFCCG by runing all over our OLINE. Many times there was a LB in the backfield to meet Jake when he got there.

I never saw him give up on his TEAM prior to the change in scheme in 06. And frankly not all that sure he did then.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Yeah, Plummer really left it all out on the field. Remember that time when they found his middle finger on the 30 yard line?

Lonestar
08-26-2010, 02:07 PM
Yeah, Plummer really left it all out on the field. Remember that time when they found his middle finger on the 30 yard line?

Actually it was seen on the bench.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

but I want my guy to come to play on game day, Jake did that. His team mates saw that and did their best for him.

Now he was not remotely designed to play form the pocket everyone knew that but yet they put in the game plan and designed it around jay.

Anyone really wonder why 06 was not a banner year for him.

tomjonesrocks
08-26-2010, 02:25 PM
Ross Tucker, you are an idiot.

JaxBroncoGirl
08-26-2010, 02:31 PM
Meant to add that I'm not sure that TE broncos gave up on Jake instead of the other way around.

As for now NOT sure how it will pan out.

But believe that Tebow will be our starter in 2011 or at he latest 2012.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Or sooner:cool:

Rex
08-26-2010, 02:33 PM
Or sooner:cool:

Hey girl. How you doin?

slim
08-26-2010, 02:34 PM
:epooningkills:

Rex
08-26-2010, 02:35 PM
:epooningkills:

Shhhh.

You cant get in the gang if you dont have an e-chick. Right?

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 02:35 PM
as excited as i am to see what tebow can do, i'm kinda with top on this one. . . if (and my expectations of the team as a whole are moderately low right now, but i'm never going to write off a season before it's played), IF orton can play better and more consistently than last year, AND lead us to a playoff win. . . there doesn't need to be any rush to get tim out there full time. . .
Dang, Dog!

Couldn't you have just stopped here? :lol:

Have to start calling you ~G, and reading only the 1st/last paragraphs.

slim
08-26-2010, 02:36 PM
Shhhh.

You cant get in the gang if you dont have an e-chick. Right?

I don't know.

I love my wife.

claymore
08-26-2010, 02:36 PM
Actually it was seen on the bench.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

but I want my guy to come to play on game day, Jake did that. His team mates saw that and did their best for him.

Now he was not remotely designed to play form the pocket everyone knew that but yet they put in the game plan and designed it around jay.

Anyone really wonder why 06 was not a banner year for him.

He was a quitter and wasnt used to competition.

Rex
08-26-2010, 02:38 PM
I don't know.

I love my wife.

Just dont give them your cell phone number.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 02:41 PM
Or sooner:cool:

And then once you see that he'll never be a superstar in the NFL you'll stop making ridiculous posts?

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 02:45 PM
Yeah, Plummer really left it all out on the field. Remember that time when they found his middle finger on the 30 yard line?

How's that reflect his "giving up on the team"?

Thought not. :coffee:

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 02:49 PM
How's that reflect his "giving up on the team"?

Thought not. :coffee:

Well when you give your fans the finger, it's only natural for coaches and teammates to wonder how much you care for the team.

claymore
08-26-2010, 02:51 PM
Well when you give your fans the finger, it's only natural for coaches and teammates to wonder how much you care for the team.

That was a loser move.

slim
08-26-2010, 02:53 PM
That was a loser move.

:middlefinger:

Rex
08-26-2010, 03:00 PM
That was a loser move.

http://marcialis.eu/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/flip.jpg

BigDaddyBronco
08-26-2010, 03:03 PM
He was a quitter and wasnt used to competition.
He was stabbed in the back and his job was given to a douchebag who nobody liked.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:04 PM
And then once you see that he'll never be a superstar in the NFL you'll stop making ridiculous posts?

No, you never get personal, do you?

Two points:

1. You don't know how well Tebow will or will not do.

2. Jaxgatorgirl has a right to make her posts without being attacked over it.

Now, stop derailing threads with your flaming.

-----

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 03:12 PM
No, you never get personal, do you?

Two points:

1. You don't know how well Tebow will or will not do.

2. She has a right to make her posts without being attacked over it.

Now, stop derailing threads with your flaming.

-----

No, I didn't get personal. I implied she was making ridiculous posts. I showed disapproval of her posting, I said nothing of her person.

As for your points:

1. No I don't, but I'm entitled to my opinion, and it's one I feel pretty strongly on.

2. Absolutely true. And I have every right to agree or disagree with her posts, as well as express approval or disapproval. I never attacked her.

You're clearly the one derailing the thread. The thread is about Orton and Tebow. She made a post about Tebow, I replied to it talking about Tebow. If you want to discuss our QBs, let me know. Otherwise, I've wasted enough time on you.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:17 PM
No, I didn't get personal. I implied she was making ridiculous posts. I showed disapproval of her posting, I said nothing of her person.

As for your points:

1. No I don't, but I'm entitled to my opinion, and it's one I feel pretty strongly on.

2. Absolutely true. And I have every right to agree or disagree with her posts, as well as express approval or disapproval. I never attacked her.

You're clearly the one derailing the thread. The thread is about Orton and Tebow. She made a post about Tebow, I replied to it talking about Tebow. If you want to discuss our QBs, let me know. Otherwise, I've wasted enough time on you.

I certainly hope you have. That way, maybe you can start posting on topic,
rather than commenting on how other people post.

I know what the topic is since it is my thread. So now that we've cleared that
up, let's get back to it and stay there.

:focus:

-----

Rex
08-26-2010, 03:18 PM
Topscribe....for goodness sakes stop arguing with this guy. Nobody wants to read that.

I am about ready to post a nice big juicy poop picture if you dont stop

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:21 PM
Topscribe....for goodness sakes stop arguing with this guy. Nobody wants to read that.

I am about ready to post a nice big juicy poop picture if you dont stop

Rex, I'm not sure you have yet posted anything anybody wants to read . . .

-----

Rex
08-26-2010, 03:26 PM
Rex, I'm not sure you have yet posted anything anybody wants to read . . .

-----

Oh but I have Wilford Brimley.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 03:26 PM
I certainly hope you have. That way, maybe you can start posting on topic,
rather than commenting on how other people post.

I know what the topic is since it is my thread. So now that we've cleared that
up, let's get back to it and stay there.

:focus:

-----

You hope I have what? :confused:

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:27 PM
:focus:

-----

Rex
08-26-2010, 03:28 PM
:focus:

-----

Good man Top. See I knew you could do it.

I am tired of watching you rip this kid a new one.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 03:32 PM
:focus:

-----

I figured it was a typo or reading comprehension issue.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:36 PM
:focus:

-----

slim
08-26-2010, 03:38 PM
You guys make me miss lex.

Rex
08-26-2010, 03:38 PM
You guys make me miss lex.

Oh man.

BTW, Slim, I think Staples avatar is Ghey as AIDS

slim
08-26-2010, 03:41 PM
Oh man.

BTW, Slim, I think Staples avatar is Ghey as AIDS

Yeah, I am thinking about turning avys off.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 03:49 PM
It tells me he had a HB that ran for over 2,000 yards. Just because he wins games, doesn't mean he wins games.

And Vince Young has yet to lead a team to the playoffs.

When that same HB was piling up yards with Kerry Collins at QB, they were 0-6. With VY, they were 8-2. That was the only notable change in the team. How would you care to explain it?

He was also 18-11 in seasons without CJ rushing for 2k.

Like I said, all VY does is win games. He did it at Texas and is doing it for the Titans. It may not always be pretty, but he is a flat out winner. If Tebow wins games at the rate VY has, the Broncos will be in very good shape.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 03:55 PM
When that same HB was piling up yards with Kerry Collins at QB, they were 0-6. With VY, they were 8-2. That was the only notable change in the team. How would you care to explain it?

He was also 18-11 in seasons without CJ rushing for 2k.

Like I said, all VY does is win games. He did it at Texas and is doing it for the Titans. It may not always be pretty, but he is a flat out winner. If Tebow wins games at the rate VY has, the Broncos will be in very good shape.

Vince Young helped turn the season around, he didn't do it singlehandedly. The defense also played a lot better. And the Titans were better than 0-6 but worse than 8-2. It evened out in the end.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 03:57 PM
Vince Young helped turn the season around, he didn't do it singlehandedly. The defense also played a lot better. And the Titans were better than 0-6 but worse than 8-2. It evened out in the end.

I didn't say he did it singlehandedly, but his presence was CLEARLY a huge difference. They were a completely different team when he came in.

VY doesn't have the prettiest style and he does make mistakes but he is the leader of that team and he leads them to wins. Can't ask for much more in a QB.

And you have to know, this is coming from someone who was convinced for a few years that VY was going to be a huge bust. He has really changed my opinion of him.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 03:59 PM
I didn't say he did it singlehandedly, but his presence was CLEARLY a huge difference. They were a completely different team when he came in.

VY doesn't have the prettiest style and he does make mistakes but he is the leader of that team and he leads them to wins. Can't ask for much more in a QB.

And you have to know, this is coming from someone who was convinced for a few years that VY was going to be a huge bust. He has really changed my opinion of him.

I think he just needs experience. He doesn't actually have all that many games under his belt, does he?

-----

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 04:15 PM
I think he just needs experience. He doesn't actually have all that many games under his belt, does he?

-----

He's 26-13 as a starter so that's equates to about 2 and a half seasons of starting. He's kinda come in and out of the lineup since he's been in the league so it's been hard to build some consistency. They had that really good season with Kerry Collins 2 years ago so they put him in last year too and it just started out horribly. I have to think they'd have won at least another game or 2 had VY been in there. They were just putrid those first 6 games with Collins.

Ravage!!!
08-26-2010, 04:29 PM
Yea, i was going to say that Brady has 3 rings as a pocket passer while Cassell has none as a starter. Even when McNabb made it too the SB he was outdone by a pocket passer. Vick? Nothing. They do bring a added dimension which is fine but the most important area is precision passing. I think Tebow will have that and hopefully that is what Mcd saw more than the running skills when he drafted him.

Brady, Brees, Manning, RIvers....

Now... I have to say that Ben Rothesburger is a good scrambler, and he's certainly had success. But the reality is, if you want to be successful in the NFL, you must be a good pocket passer. McNabb found this out, and Vick tried to learn that.

I guess it depends on what someone is calling a mobile QB. Im referring to a mobile QB as someone that is more apt to run the ball, and better at running than they are sitting in the pocket. You can be mobile within the pocket, but not be a "mobile" QB. Manning is pretty mobile within the pocket, but we all know that boy ain't running anywhere. Sure seems he threatens the defense without that threat of running. Same with Brees and Brady.

To me.. I don't want a QB that is like Vince Young. I have watched him play a lot, and he's just not good.

Northman
08-26-2010, 04:32 PM
Brady, Brees, Manning, RIvers....

Now... I have to say that Ben Rothesburger is a good scrambler, and he's certainly had success. But the reality is, if you want to be successful in the NFL, you must be a good pocket passer. McNabb found this out, and Vick tried to learn that.

I guess it depends on what someone is calling a mobile QB. Im referring to a mobile QB as someone that is more apt to run the ball, and better at running than they are sitting in the pocket. You can be mobile within the pocket, but not be a "mobile" QB. Manning is pretty mobile within the pocket, but we all know that boy ain't running anywhere. Sure seems he threatens the defense without that threat of running. Same with Brees and Brady.

To me.. I don't want a QB that is like Vince Young. I have watched him play a lot, and he's just not good.

Exactly. I always hear people bring up Steve Young's name in these kind of conversations but the reality is Steve would always look to pass before running out of necessity. Same with John. Generally QB's who think run first dont do that well overall in the NFL in terms of winning championships.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 07:07 PM
Brady, Brees, Manning, RIvers....

Now... I have to say that Ben Rothesburger is a good scrambler, and he's certainly had success. But the reality is, if you want to be successful in the NFL, you must be a good pocket passer. McNabb found this out, and Vick tried to learn that.

I guess it depends on what someone is calling a mobile QB. Im referring to a mobile QB as someone that is more apt to run the ball, and better at running than they are sitting in the pocket. You can be mobile within the pocket, but not be a "mobile" QB. Manning is pretty mobile within the pocket, but we all know that boy ain't running anywhere. Sure seems he threatens the defense without that threat of running. Same with Brees and Brady.

To me.. I don't want a QB that is like Vince Young. I have watched him play a lot, and he's just not good.

100% agreed. A QB can be successful and mobile in the sense of moving and sidestepping the rush within the pocket. A better term for the unsuccessful "mobile" QBs are running QBs, such as Vick. In college, Tebow relied on his ability to run like an H-Back. If he tries to rely on this in the NFL, he'll fall flat on his face.

dogfish
08-26-2010, 07:38 PM
i guess i've really never understood why some people seem to think that running and passing are some sort of mutually exclusive skillsets for QBs-- despite the fact that a number of QBs (fran tarkenton, john elway, steve young, and most recently steve mcnair and donovan mcnabb) have proven that, in fact, being capable of running doesn't make you incapable of throwing. . .

it's like an urban legend or something. . .

come on, there are plenty of non-running quarterbacks who come into the league and can't pass it all that well their first few seasons. . . it always amazes me how far out of their way people will go to hack on vince young just because he's a little unconventional. . . he's surely night and day more succcessful than traditional pocket passer matt leinart, who was drafted about half-a-dozen picks later. . . regardless of his passer rating or mechanics, young is a starter with a winning record and a playoff appearance under his belt, while leinart is reportedly in danger of being cut. . . vince has already had more success in his career than recent highly-drafted quarterbacks like david carr, joey harrington, jamarcus russell and alex smith. . .

JaxBroncoGirl
08-26-2010, 08:02 PM
And then once you see that he'll never be a superstar in the NFL you'll stop making ridiculous posts?

I am posting because I am a new Broncos fan that Knows that Tebow will be an asset to the team. We have seen Orton in 2 preseason games, impressive yet, we do not know how the OL will help him. Do not mean to step on any toes here, Tebow did not have a great OL last year, he will adapt to the NFL and you will be surprised. Will you be the first to admit it once it happens? No, you will continue to pick Timmy apart, anytime and anywhere. It is a shame that Tim has adopted Denver as his new home and yet fans cannot adopt him.

How do we know for sure that Orton can carry the load? We are talking 2 preseason games. I hope he does. But keep an open mind here. We have not started the season and you some of you are hailing Orton (deserving). Let us remember my boats name is "Will Sea". Can we just get along?:cool:

Dreadnought
08-26-2010, 08:16 PM
i guess i've really never understood why some people seem to think that running and passing are some sort of mutually exclusive skillsets for QBs-- despite the fact that a number of QBs (fran tarkenton, john elway, steve young, and most recently steve mcnair and donovan mcnabb) have proven that, in fact, being capable of running doesn't make you incapable of throwing. . .

it's like an urban legend or something. . .

come on, there are plenty of non-running quarterbacks who come into the league and can't pass it all that well their first few seasons. . . it always amazes me how far out of their way people will go to hack on vince young just because he's a little unconventional. . . he's surely night and day more succcessful than traditional pocket passer matt leinart, who was drafted about half-a-dozen picks later. . . regardless of his passer rating or mechanics, young is a starter with a winning record and a playoff appearance under his belt, while leinart is reportedly in danger of being cut. . . vince has already had more success in his career than recent highly-drafted quarterbacks like david carr, joey harrington, jamarcus russell and alex smith. . .

Dog, I think its a pretty overwhelming body of evidence. I think for most QB's it is a function of how they are coached and the lessons they absorb. An athletic marvel like V. Young or Vick will - unless well coached - slip into the terrible habit of trying to win with his legs. McNabb turned into a top tire QB when his running attempts and yards drastically reduced. i would argue the same for Elway, honestly. The guy was far better late in his career than early. there are lots of reasns for that; Wade Phillips/Mike Shanahan v. Dan Reeves, age, experience, what have you. Like Tarkenton, he had his best years after he had stopped being the loose cannon runnin' fool he was as a young QB. Was he exciting? Did he win games ? Absolutely. And he won championships once he matured and learned how to play the position properly.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 08:17 PM
i guess i've really never understood why some people seem to think that running and passing are some sort of mutually exclusive skillsets for QBs-- despite the fact that a number of QBs (fran tarkenton, john elway, steve young, and most recently steve mcnair and donovan mcnabb) have proven that, in fact, being capable of running doesn't make you incapable of throwing. . .

it's like an urban legend or something. . .

come on, there are plenty of non-running quarterbacks who come into the league and can't pass it all that well their first few seasons. . . it always amazes me how far out of their way people will go to hack on vince young just because he's a little unconventional. . . he's surely night and day more succcessful than traditional pocket passer matt leinart, who was drafted about half-a-dozen picks later. . . regardless of his passer rating or mechanics, young is a starter with a winning record and a playoff appearance under his belt, while leinart is reportedly in danger of being cut. . . vince has already had more success in his career than recent highly-drafted quarterbacks like david carr, joey harrington, jamarcus russell and alex smith. . .

Agreed. People keep saying VY sucks and his style will never work but he just keeps on leading the Titans to wins. 26-13 is a damn good record. Not to mention a playoff appearance, pro bowl, and ROY award.

It's such a myth that running QB's can't succeed it's not even funny. When Vick was his prime if he'd had a better team around him, he could have easily taken the Falcons to the Super Bowl. Has everyone forgotten him taking them in to Lambeau and giving the Packers their first home playoff loss their in decades?

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 08:18 PM
i guess i've really never understood why some people seem to think that running and passing are some sort of mutually exclusive skillsets for QBs-- despite the fact that a number of QBs (fran tarkenton, john elway, steve young, and most recently steve mcnair and donovan mcnabb) have proven that, in fact, being capable of running doesn't make you incapable of throwing. . .

it's like an urban legend or something. . .

come on, there are plenty of non-running quarterbacks who come into the league and can't pass it all that well their first few seasons. . . it always amazes me how far out of their way people will go to hack on vince young just because he's a little unconventional. . . he's surely night and day more succcessful than traditional pocket passer matt leinart, who was drafted about half-a-dozen picks later. . . regardless of his passer rating or mechanics, young is a starter with a winning record and a playoff appearance under his belt, while leinart is reportedly in danger of being cut. . . vince has already had more success in his career than recent highly-drafted quarterbacks like david carr, joey harrington, jamarcus russell and alex smith. . .

In my opinion, it comes down to keeping your head up and progressing through your reads. Take McNab for example. He looks at all of his options with his head downfield, and will not run unless it is absolutely necessary. The ability to run can be an asset for a QB, but it should be a last resort. QBs like Vick and Young have bad habits of looking to their primary target, and if it's not there they take off and run. That is how not to be successful.


I am posting because I am a new Broncos fan that Knows that Tebow will be an asset to the team.

You think he will be, and you're entitled to your opinion. I disagree. His presence as a 1st round backup will only serve to chase Orton out prematurely even if he plays well. Bringing Tebow in for wild horses and goal line sets will only harm our rhythm.


We have seen Orton in 2 preseason games, impressive yet, we do not know how the OL will help him.

We have arguably the best LT in the NFL, and a very good RT and RG. Now, health is an issue. But when healthy, we have one of the best O-Lines in the NFL. The rookies will have ups and downs, and we don't know how they will perform, but I'd take our O-Line over most.


Do not mean to step on any toes here, Tebow did not have a great OL last year, he will adapt to the NFL and you will be surprised. Will you be the first to admit it once it happens? No, you will continue to pick Timmy apart, anytime and anywhere. It is a shame that Tim has adopted Denver as his new home and yet fans cannot adopt him.

You shouldn't make assumptions about me. I like Tebow a lot, and if he proves me wrong I'll be the first to gladly admit it. I just hope he doesn't get in the game for us for a long time. I like Orton and I think he can win a superbowl with talent around him, and I hate "wildcat" plays.


How do we know for sure that Orton can carry the load? We are talking 2 preseason games. I hope he does. But keep an open mind here. We have not started the season and you some of you are hailing Orton (deserving). Let us remember my boats name is "Will Sea".

We don't know for sure, but he's our starter, and there's a much better chance that Orton can carry the load than there is that Tebow could play well as a rookie. And I'm not basing any assumptions about Orton on 2 preseason games. I'm basing them off of everything I've seen and heard about Orton since he's been in the league, mostly last year when I watched him play every game.


Can we just get along?:cool:

Of course!

Ravage!!!
08-26-2010, 08:25 PM
Agreed. People keep saying VY sucks and his style will never work but he just keeps on leading the Titans to wins. 26-13 is a damn good record. Not to mention a playoff appearance, pro bowl, and ROY award.

It's such a myth that running QB's can't succeed it's not even funny. When Vick was his prime if he'd had a better team around him, he could have easily taken the Falcons to the Super Bowl. Has everyone forgotten him taking them in to Lambeau and giving the Packers their first home playoff loss their in decades?

Then teams caught onto him and found the best way to defend him, was stay back..c ontain, and make him throw the ball.

Again. We aren't saying that the Elways and Youngs (steve) weren't passing QBs. They used their legs to give time to throw. Vick ran to run. Vince runs to run. Its not his "style" or that he's unconventional, Vince is just a terrible passer. That will NOT make you a top QB in this league, and that has been proved time and time again.

There are all kind of QBs. But I think its pretty safe to say, that through the large body of players we've seen, the pocket passers have had the largest success in the NFL. Can a guy "run" to give him time... absolutely. But if he's relying on his legs to make plays downfield and to RUN for yardage and first downs on a regular basis... that will not work in the NFL. Even Randall Cunningham had to come to that conclusion.

A QBs success will only go as far as his ARM will take him in the NFL.

red98
08-26-2010, 08:26 PM
I am posting because I am a new Broncos fan that Knows that Tebow will be an asset to the team. We have seen Orton in 2 preseason games, impressive yet, we do not know how the OL will help him. Do not mean to step on any toes here, Tebow did not have a great OL last year, he will adapt to the NFL and you will be surprised. Will you be the first to admit it once it happens? No, you will continue to pick Timmy apart, anytime and anywhere. It is a shame that Tim has adopted Denver as his new home and yet fans cannot adopt him.

How do we know for sure that Orton can carry the load? We are talking 2 preseason games. I hope he does. But keep an open mind here. We have not started the season and you some of you are hailing Orton (deserving). Let us remember my boats name is "Will Sea". Can we just get along?:cool:

I wouldn't say the guy with the best selling jersey in the NFL has fans who will not adopt him. I like Tebow, think he's a great guy with a great attitude. He knows and studies football like Peyton Manning does.

But he's unconventional. It's going to take awhile to see if he can be a QB in the NFL. He's got very good upside but needs to do a lot to convince the world he can get it done.

"will sea" if he can get it done when given a shot, but I don't think he'll be getting that shot this season.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 08:29 PM
Then teams caught onto him and found the best way to defend him, was stay back..c ontain, and make him throw the ball.

Again. We aren't saying that the Elways and Youngs (steve) weren't passing QBs. They used their legs to give time to throw. Vick ran to run. Vince runs to run. Its not his "style" or that he's unconventional, Vince is just a terrible passer. That will NOT make you a top QB in this league, and that has been proved time and time again.

There are all kind of QBs. But I think its pretty safe to say, that through the large body of players we've seen, the pocket passers have had the largest success in the NFL. Can a guy "run" to give him time... absolutely. But if he's relying on his legs to make plays downfield and to RUN for yardage and first downs on a regular basis... that will not work in the NFL. Even Randall Cunningham had to come to that conclusion.

A QBs success will only go as far as his ARM will take him in the NFL.

It's not at all uncommon for a scrambling QB like Vick or Young to take his team to the playoffs. It's only a matter of time before one breaks through and wins a SB.

NFL coaches aren't stupid. If it was impossible to win with a primarily scrambling QB, no one would use them.

red98
08-26-2010, 08:29 PM
Dog, I think its a pretty overwhelming body of evidence. I think for most QB's it is a function of how they are coached and the lessons they absorb. An athletic marvel like V. Young or Vick will - unless well coached - slip into the terrible habit of trying to win with his legs. McNabb turned into a top tire QB when his running attempts and yards drastically reduced. i would argue the same for Elway, honestly. The guy was far better late in his career than early. there are lots of reasns for that; Wade Phillips/Mike Shanahan v. Dan Reeves, age, experience, what have you. Like Tarkenton, he had his best years after he had stopped being the loose cannon runnin' fool he was as a young QB. Was he exciting? Did he win games ? Absolutely. And he won championships once he matured and learned how to play the position properly.


I think you're right dread. That bodes well for VY too.

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 08:35 PM
NFL coaches aren't stupid.

When it comes to scouting talent, that's highly debatable.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 08:39 PM
When it comes to scouting talent, that's highly debatable.

Yes, I'm sure you're talent evaluations are always spot on! :lol:

Ravage!!!
08-26-2010, 08:40 PM
It's not at all uncommon for a scrambling QB like Vick or Young to take his team to the playoffs. It's only a matter of time before one breaks through and wins a SB.

NFL coaches aren't stupid. If it was impossible to win with a primarily scrambling QB, no one would use them.

we aren't talking impossible. There are always exceptions to the rule. But as of right now, your chances of winning a SB with a running QB like Vick and Young are slim. Its way below average chance. Would you rather your team take a chance with a palyer that has a better than average chance of succeeding or lower than average chance? The best QBs in the NFL are not runners. There is a reason for that. The defenders are just too fast.

There are teams that refuse to draft guys like Vick and Young because they know that passing is the way to succeed in the NFL. Others get enamored with the physical attributes and believe they can "teach" them to be something they have never been before.

yes... I'm sure someday we'll see a 'running' QB win the Super Bowl. Just as from time to time we'll see a guy like Brad Johnson, Dilfer, or "Kyle Orton" type of QB win one. But they are far and few between. But is that a guy that will continue to win in the NFL year in and year out? Are they the kind of QBs that make you a "contender" purely because they are on the roster like the Mannings, Brees', Brady's, and Rivers do?

I Eat Staples
08-26-2010, 08:48 PM
Yes, I'm sure you're talent evaluations are always spot on! :lol:

We weren't discussing mine. But with the amount of draft busts, I bet the psychic octopus in Germany could do as good a job as the coaches.

red98
08-26-2010, 08:49 PM
we aren't talking impossible. There are always exceptions to the rule. But as of right now, your chances of winning a SB with a running QB like Vick and Young are slim. Its way below average chance. Would you rather your team take a chance with a palyer that has a better than average chance of succeeding or lower than average chance? The best QBs in the NFL are not runners. There is a reason for that. The defenders are just too fast.

There are teams that refuse to draft guys like Vick and Young because they know that passing is the way to succeed in the NFL. Others get enamored with the physical attributes and believe they can "teach" them to be something they have never been before.

yes... I'm sure someday we'll see a 'running' QB win the Super Bowl. Just as from time to time we'll see a guy like Brad Johnson, Dilfer, or "Kyle Orton" type of QB win one. But they are far and few between. But is that a guy that will continue to win in the NFL year in and year out? Are they the kind of QBs that make you a "contender" purely because they are on the roster like the Mannings, Brees', Brady's, and Rivers do?

I agree. I think scouts and coaches like these running QBs not because that's they way they want to go, but because they think they can train them to be pass first and then still take advantage of their skills when the play breaks down.

BroncoWave
08-26-2010, 10:17 PM
We weren't discussing mine. But with the amount of draft busts, I bet the psychic octopus in Germany could do as good a job as the coaches.

I would still take their opinions over the average fan, since they are the ones getting paid millions of bucks to make those decisions instead of sitting on their ass a computer bitching about them.

rcsodak
08-26-2010, 10:50 PM
Well when you give your fans the finger, it's only natural for coaches and teammates to wonder how much you care for the team.

WTH?

How about where/WHOM he's aiming it at?

Good grief, if I flip you off, I'm not aiming it at the cop across the street.

topscribe
08-26-2010, 11:04 PM
WTH?

How about where/WHOM he's aiming it at?

Good grief, if I flip you off, I'm not aiming it at the cop across the street.

Well, that is the point I have made many times, both on this board and the
previous one.

Jake wasn't flipping off fans (plural). He flipped off a fan (singular). I know this
because I know the fan he flipped off. And, even though I was well known as
a fan of Jake's, I'm not just defending him on this because the fan he flipped off
is a personal friend of mine (but he deserved it :lol: ).

But this whole "flipping off" issue has been blown immensely out of proportion,
and this thread is a quintessential example of how it was . . .

P.S. Don't anybody ask for names because you're not getting them.

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
08-26-2010, 11:17 PM
P.S. Don't anybody ask for names because you're not getting them.

It was mtnman, wasn't it...:D;)

Lonestar
08-26-2010, 11:17 PM
It was mtnman, wasn't it...:D;)

If I had to guess that be the correct one.

JDL
08-27-2010, 12:30 AM
After the first preseason game i think its pretty much established his throwing motion isnt going to be a major problem.


?????


Let's be serious... it nearly caused a Fumble TD Return and almost led to 2 INTs while playing against 3rd and 4th stringers... how anyone could suggest that 1 game showed anything other than what we already knew about Tebow would be a major stretch imo... it was very apparent to everyone outside Broncos land (apparently, since objectivity doesn't seem to run as rampant as Tebow fever), but that isn't to say he didn't also show all the positives we know about him as well. That 1st game didn't establish much at all.

JDL
08-27-2010, 12:35 AM
As to Orton... he really isn't much different that Brian Griese and in fact I think he is less accurate imo. Griese was able to lead Denver's offense to a very high ranking, but in the end against good D's the inability to push the ball downfield and inability to avoid the pass rush, were issues that simply prevented him from being anything more than he was and ultimately got him run out of Denver. No doubt the same will happen to Orton, but neither he nor Griese are bad guys, they are adequate QB-types that unfortunately aren't really enough in a passing league.

JaxBroncoGirl
08-27-2010, 01:26 AM
I wouldn't say the guy with the best selling jersey in the NFL has fans who will not adopt him. I like Tebow, think he's a great guy with a great attitude. He knows and studies football like Peyton Manning does.

But he's unconventional. It's going to take awhile to see if he can be a QB in the NFL. He's got very good upside but needs to do a lot to convince the world he can get it done.

"will sea" if he can get it done when given a shot, but I don't think he'll be getting that shot this season.

He will get his shot, he will be as good as our OL, if not Orton and Tebow will go down in flames look at Manning, no one can get to him. Tebow is unconventional that is the good side. :listen:

Elevation inc
08-27-2010, 01:50 AM
?????


Let's be serious... it nearly caused a Fumble TD Return and almost led to 2 INTs while playing against 3rd and 4th stringers... how anyone could suggest that 1 game showed anything other than what we already knew about Tebow would be a major stretch imo... it was very apparent to everyone outside Broncos land (apparently, since objectivity doesn't seem to run as rampant as Tebow fever), but that isn't to say he didn't also show all the positives we know about him as well. That 1st game didn't establish much at all.

no actually the lack of ability to diagnose quickly and read the defense quick enough when the pocket closes is what led to that, he held the ball to long, his throwing motion had nothing to do with that play

Nomad
08-27-2010, 05:08 AM
Well, that is the point I have made many times, both on this board and the
previous one.

Jake wasn't flipping off fans (plural). He flipped off a fan (singular). I know this
because I know the fan he flipped off. And, even though I was well known as
a fan of Jake's, I'm not just defending him on this because the fan he flipped off
is a personal friend of mine (but he deserved it :lol: ).

But this whole "flipping off" issue has been blown immensely out of proportion,
and this thread is a quintessential example of how it was . . .

P.S. Don't anybody ask for names because you're not getting them.

-----


It was mtnman, wasn't it...:D;)


If I had to guess that be the correct one.

mtnman was my first guess as well!:lol: Him and Jake were like peas and carrots!!:D

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 07:02 AM
As to Orton... he really isn't much different that Brian Griese and in fact I think he is less accurate imo. Griese was able to lead Denver's offense to a very high ranking, but in the end against good D's the inability to push the ball downfield and inability to avoid the pass rush, were issues that simply prevented him from being anything more than he was and ultimately got him run out of Denver. No doubt the same will happen to Orton, but neither he nor Griese are bad guys, they are adequate QB-types that unfortunately aren't really enough in a passing league.

The difference between greasy and Orton is the players lke KO but hated BG. Plus LO has a better long ball.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 07:05 AM
no actually the lack of ability to diagnose quickly and read the defense quick enough when the pocket closes is what led to that, he held the ball to long, his throwing motion had nothing to do with that play

The game will slow down for him after playing a while. He will have the luxury of being able to set, watch films and learn.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

topscribe
08-27-2010, 09:35 AM
Okay, after all the discussion as a result of this article, here is my take:

Orton is showing better leadership, decisions, pocket presence, and mobility,
and a stronger arm than he ever has before. He is taking better command of
the team. When he has been in, the offense has been nearly unstoppable,
despite the absence of a decent running game.

However, more real game action is needed to make a final judgment. But all
the good signs are there, so far.

Nonetheless, there was no way the Broncos could have known just what they
had in Orton at the time of the draft. They had not seen him under normal
conditions, and they knew it. So drafting what appeared potentially a very
good QB was the logical thing to do at the time, in their minds - and who am I
to say they were wrong?

If Orton turns out the kind of QB that proves them wrong, good! It's better to
have two QBs who are too good to sit on the bench than to have two backups
masquerading as starters, isn't it?

-----

Northman
08-27-2010, 10:08 AM
It's such a myth that running QB's can't succeed it's not even funny. When Vick was his prime if he'd had a better team around him, he could have easily taken the Falcons to the Super Bowl. Has everyone forgotten him taking them in to Lambeau and giving the Packers their first home playoff loss their in decades?

Anyone remember Eli Manning going into Lambeau and beating the favored Packers on their way to an actual SB title?

BroncoWave
08-27-2010, 10:10 AM
Anyone remember Eli Manning going into Lambeau and beating the favored Packers on their way to an actual SB title?

Ok?

Northman
08-27-2010, 10:16 AM
no actually the lack of ability to diagnose quickly and read the defense quick enough when the pocket closes is what led to that, he held the ball to long, his throwing motion had nothing to do with that play

You would think that would be obvious but.....

Northman
08-27-2010, 10:18 AM
Ok?

Exactly. :D

TXBRONC
08-27-2010, 11:37 AM
no actually the lack of ability to diagnose quickly and read the defense quick enough when the pocket closes is what led to that, he held the ball to long, his throwing motion had nothing to do with that play


You would think that would be obvious but.....

Yep it was a rookie quarterback being a rookie quarterback playing in his first professional game. :nod:

CoachChaz
08-27-2010, 11:41 AM
Yep it was rookie quarterback being a rookie quarterback playing in his first professional game. :nod:

If you've been paying attention...that excuse is NOT allowed in Denver and especially not with Tim Tebow.

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 11:50 AM
Only a few rookie QB's got a pass in DEN. Tebow is not loved by one and all. Even Champ is having issues with the Gator. :laugh:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I Eat Staples
08-27-2010, 11:56 AM
Well, that is the point I have made many times, both on this board and the
previous one.

Jake wasn't flipping off fans (plural). He flipped off a fan (singular). I know this
because I know the fan he flipped off. And, even though I was well known as
a fan of Jake's, I'm not just defending him on this because the fan he flipped off
is a personal friend of mine (but he deserved it :lol: ).

But this whole "flipping off" issue has been blown immensely out of proportion,
and this thread is a quintessential example of how it was . . .

P.S. Don't anybody ask for names because you're not getting them.

-----

How does that friend of yours know Jake was specifically flipping him off?


no actually the lack of ability to diagnose quickly and read the defense quick enough when the pocket closes is what led to that, he held the ball to long, his throwing motion had nothing to do with that play

What you said, as well as his throwing motion, were factors. He held the ball too long, but the way he holds the ball low and winds up makes it much easier to strip.


Okay, after all the discussion as a result of this article, here is my take:

Orton is showing better leadership, decisions, pocket presence, and mobility,
and a stronger arm than he ever has before. He is taking better command of
the team. When he has been in, the offense has been nearly unstoppable,
despite the absence of a decent running game.

However, more real game action is needed to make a final judgment. But all
the good signs are there, so far.

Nonetheless, there was no way the Broncos could have known just what they
had in Orton at the time of the draft. They had not seen him under normal
conditions, and they knew it. So drafting what appeared potentially a very
good QB was the logical thing to do at the time, in their minds - and who am I
to say they were wrong?

If Orton turns out the kind of QB that proves them wrong, good! It's better to
have two QBs who are too good to sit on the bench than to have two backups
masquerading as starters, isn't it?

-----

I agree with everything you said except defending the Tebow pick. You're right, we didn't know exactly what Orton could do, and we just brought in Quinn and didn't know what he could do in a Broncos uniform either. That's exactly why you wait until next year to draft a QB. QB was not one of our needs going into the draft.

Sconnie Bronco
08-27-2010, 12:04 PM
I agree with everything you said except defending the Tebow pick. You're right, we didn't know exactly what Orton could do, and we just brought in Quinn and didn't know what he could do in a Broncos uniform either. That's exactly why you wait until next year to draft a QB. QB was not one of our needs going into the draft.

Does that mean youre agreeing with this part then?


Orton is showing better leadership, decisions, pocket presence, and mobility,
and a stronger arm than he ever has before.

Notice how he slipped that in there. I guess that means we can expect to see Orton throwing it 75+ yards then...at least according to him.

Ravage!!!
08-27-2010, 12:09 PM
I disagree. I knew as soon as we got Orton that we would be needing a QB. Getting a QB wasn't the mistake. Just as taking a QB when we already had Plummer. If your team isn't looking to get BETTER than Plummer and Orton, than your team is accepting lesser talent at the most important position in sports. Even if things don't work out, I would much rather see our team TRYING to find thta guy than simply accepting lesser talent and not trying to improve.

Ravage!!!
08-27-2010, 12:10 PM
Does that mean youre agreeing with this part then?



Notice how he slipped that in there. I guess that means we can expect to see Orton throwing it 75+ yards then...at least according to him.

I've watched all the deep throws thrown by Orton that continue to be brought up from last season.

If he has time, and he's able to take a good 2 steps forward into the throw and HEAVE it down field, he can throw it 60 yrds.

Sconnie Bronco
08-27-2010, 12:13 PM
I've watched all the deep throws thrown by Orton that continue to be brought up from last season.

If he has time, and he's able to take a good 2 steps forward into the throw and HEAVE it down field, he can throw it 60 yrds.

I was saying previously, that it looks like he maxes out at around 55. In the Cincy game, he heaved it twice and both times, it looked like he was around 55 yards. So, 60 is believable...but not 74...at least not based on how he throws in the NFL.

I Eat Staples
08-27-2010, 12:23 PM
Does that mean youre agreeing with this part then?



Notice how he slipped that in there. I guess that means we can expect to see Orton throwing it 75+ yards then...at least according to him.

He didn't mention 75 yards in that post. I agreed that Orton is showing a stronger arm, because when a QB's ankles are healthy after an injury plagued season/career, he's going to throw a bit harder.


I disagree. I knew as soon as we got Orton that we would be needing a QB. Getting a QB wasn't the mistake. Just as taking a QB when we already had Plummer. If your team isn't looking to get BETTER than Plummer and Orton, than your team is accepting lesser talent at the most important position in sports. Even if things don't work out, I would much rather see our team TRYING to find thta guy than simply accepting lesser talent and not trying to improve.

You have a point, I just can't come to terms with the fact we traded a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round pick for a QB who should have went in the 3rd round and may never be an NFL-caliber QB.

Ravage!!!
08-27-2010, 12:41 PM
He didn't mention 75 yards in that post. I agreed that Orton is showing a stronger arm, because when a QB's ankles are healthy after an injury plagued season/career, he's going to throw a bit harder.



You have a point, I just can't come to terms with the fact we traded a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round pick for a QB who should have went in the 3rd round and may never be an NFL-caliber QB.

Yeah. Thats the big concern for me as well. He's a tough athlete and one that had success in college. A big strong kid. I just hope that he develops into the kind of passer we need to be successful. I don't really buy into the "he wont' accept defeat" and "he will work hard" stuff. We've seen that from hundreds of athletes. I don't believe he works harder, and even if he does that doesn't necessarily equal success.

As of right now, I have "limited" hopes of him becoming that kind of dude. I REALLY hope he meets the extremely HIGH expectations, because they are really HIGH. If he is able to reach those, then that would be fantastic for our Broncos. I just don't see it happening. THats why I have extreme reservations on spending a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round pick to acquire a 1st round pick and then spend the 1st round pick on a QB that wasn't even considered to be the best in the draft.

Maybe you would use that kind of picks on a Peyton Manning.... but......

As far as Orton's arm goes.... I don't really care how far he can throw the deep ball. That isn't what shows me a strong arm. In college I could throw as far as our starting QB (maybe further on some tries)....but it was the deep outs and the deep balls across the middle that really put that guy over me. His arm was so much stronger on those kinds of throws. So with Orton, who cares if he can throw the ball 100 yards in the air? That doesn't really come into play, and its the other throws that bring home the bacon (or convert third and longs). As of right now, we see choosing to throw a LOT of short passes, and his arm is adequate.

The strength of the arm REALLY comes into play when trying to make a deeper throw to a WR when you can NOT step up into the pocket and get your body momentum behind it. ITs making the throw when you are about to take a hit, and can't use the full strength of your hips or shoulders. THAT is where Orton is weak. He doesn't have the arm strength to make those kind of throws under duress or when your feet aren't completely set. To me, thats important in the NFL.

rcsodak
08-27-2010, 02:39 PM
I would still take their opinions over the average fan, since they are the ones getting paid millions of bucks to make those decisions instead of sitting on their ass a computer bitching about them.
yes....cuz you NEVER criticize picks. lmao
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

topscribe
08-27-2010, 03:12 PM
How does that friend of yours know Jake was specifically flipping him off?

I'm not going to go over that with every newbie who comes along. The others
understand. You're just going to have to go with the flow, I guess.



I agree with everything you said except defending the Tebow pick. You're right, we didn't know exactly what Orton could do, and we just brought in Quinn and didn't know what he could do in a Broncos uniform either. That's exactly why you wait until next year to draft a QB. QB was not one of our needs going into the draft.

That is what I initially thought. I was not happy at all with the pick. But I
came to understand that they saw a QB with Tebow's potential, so they felt
they had to take him. (About the same thing happened when Cutler was
selected, even after Plummer's sterling season the year before.) Eventually, I
was able to see the logic in it. So, even were Orton to make All-Pro, I don't
believe Tebow's selection to be a bad choice.


He didn't mention 75 yards in that post. I agreed that Orton is showing a stronger arm, because when a QB's ankles are healthy after an injury plagued season/career, he's going to throw a bit harder.

I have never mentioned 75 yards in any post. Ever. I don't know where you
got that. I did mention the event where Orton threw 74 yards in a QB contest.
And even though you got a big kick out of it and just the same as called me a
liar, that happens to be a recorded event. Now, I know nothing of the wind,
surface, weather conditions, or Orton's state of dress or undress. All I know
is that it took place. I even documented it with a link. So, it is what it is.
Arguing with me will not change history.

But before that pissing match emerged, I was responding to another implication
that Orton does not have a strong enough arm to make all the throws. I was
only affirming that he does indeed have a strong enough arm. Regardless of
the conditions, if he can get it 74, 72, or even 68 yards down the field, that
is certainly strong enough.

So the only issue now is accuracy (specifically in the 11-20 yard range). And I
fully agree, 100%, that how accurate he is going to be remains to be seen
this season.

I hope I have made it clear enough. I don't know how I can break it down any
further . . .

-----

topscribe
08-27-2010, 03:13 PM
I've watched all the deep throws thrown by Orton that continue to be brought up from last season.

If he has time, and he's able to take a good 2 steps forward into the throw and HEAVE it down field, he can throw it 60 yrds.

And that was on two bum ankles. Not bad. Not bad at all . . . :coffee:

-----

claymore
08-27-2010, 03:18 PM
And that was on two bum ankles. Not bad. Not bad at all . . . :coffee:

-----

I swear to you his ankles arent the problem. This is the wedge in our relationship. Ortons gosh dang ankles.

topscribe
08-27-2010, 03:23 PM
I swear to you his ankles arent the problem. This is the wedge in our relationship. Ortons gosh dang ankles.

You're right: the ankles are no longer the problem. That's what Kyle said. The
ankles did hurt Kyle's performance significantly. That's what Kyle said. Take it
to Kyle.

I like what pubkeeper over on MHR (http://www.milehighreport.com/2010/8/25/1651317/brothers-in-arms-mcdaniels-boys#45299160) said about it:


I think most people don't realize that strength in throwing is less about arm and more about torso and legs.

You read so much about how Orton’s throws this preseason have more zip and the writers/commentators are amazed at it. But, if the guy has 2 bad wheels, he’s not going to be able to get power into his throws where it really begins, the legs. IF he can keep his ankles healthy (big question) he should be able to make all the throws he needs to in order to succeed in this offense this year.


-----

TXBRONC
08-27-2010, 03:57 PM
I was saying previously, that it looks like he maxes out at around 55. In the Cincy game, he heaved it twice and both times, it looked like he was around 55 yards. So, 60 is believable...but not 74...at least not based on how he throws in the NFL.

Imo Orton could probably throw the ball a little further if he could learn to get a little more air under the ball. I don't know if that would help his accuracy on deep throws but at least he could get down the field a little further.

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 04:16 PM
You're right: the ankles are no longer the problem. That's what Kyle said. The
ankles did hurt Kyle's performance significantly. That's what Kyle said. Take it
to Kyle.

I like what pubkeeper over on MHR (http://www.milehighreport.com/2010/8/25/1651317/brothers-in-arms-mcdaniels-boys#45299160) said about it:



-----

Your preaching to the choir of anyone that has had a high ankle sprain.

To those who have not, they will never understand the lack of mobility. The lack of strength to get power off of them and just how long it takes to feel better.

My daugther sprain (high) mid VB season one year it affected her all th way through BB and Track.

She did not get the strength back till the next VB season during which she wore the best ankle protectors on the market and she wears them today 7 years later. Prior to that sprain her belief that being a ballarina on TOE for 5 years was all she needed. While she had extemely strong legs to toes coming down after blocked shot toand on her teamates foot nuked her for a year. Instead of first TEAM all state in VB, BB and track she was only 4th in high jump.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 04:19 PM
Let me add he is a firm beleiver now in wearing ankle supports now just like believing in seat belts after being in a car that rolled 3 times. She now knows why I always harped wearing seat belts.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

topscribe
08-27-2010, 04:21 PM
Your preaching to the choir of anyone that has had a high ankle sprain.

To those who have not, they will never understand the lack of mobility. The lack of strength to get power off of them and just how long it takes to feel better.

My daugther sprain (high) mid VB season one year it affected her all th way through BB and Track.

She did not get the strength back till the next VB season during which she wore the best ankle protectors on the market and she wears them today 7 years later. Prior to that sprain her belief that being a ballarina on TOE for 5 years was all she needed. While she had extemely strong legs to toes coming down after blocked shot toand on her teamates foot nuked her for a year. Instead of first TEAM all state in VB, BB and track she was only 4th in high jump.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

In fact, in the video Clay (ironically) provided of Drew Brees, Brees explained
how throwing a good pass begins in the feet and goes up through the legs
and body, and finally to the arms and fingers. So if a QB has one or two bum
ankles, that is hitting him where his passing mechanics begin . . .

-----

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 04:48 PM
Yep.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

broncofanatic1987
08-27-2010, 05:36 PM
If Orton were the future, he would have been signed to a long term contract and not a one year extension.

This signing says more about the team's lack of trust in Quinn than it does about their faith in Orton.

The article itself is more about tearing down Tebow than truly illustrating why anyone should believe Orton is the future.

BroncoWave
08-27-2010, 06:06 PM
yes....cuz you NEVER criticize picks. lmao
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I never said that, I only said that I (as well as 99% of fans) am not as qualified to judge talent as those who are paid to.

And to be quite honest, I rarely criticize Broncos draft picks. I actually try to wait and see how a player will pan out before bashing the Broncos for picking them.

Ravage!!!
08-27-2010, 06:21 PM
And that was on two bum ankles. Not bad. Not bad at all . . . :coffee:

-----

yeah... thats just what I was thinking, how IMPRESSED I was ... :coffee:

topscribe
08-27-2010, 06:25 PM
If Orton were the future, he would have been signed to a long term contract and not a one year extension.

This signing says more about the team's lack of trust in Quinn than it does about their faith in Orton.

The article itself is more about tearing down Tebow than truly illustrating why anyone should believe Orton is the future.

You are apparently implying that the Broncos are still considering Orton as a
backup for the future. The only problem is, $9 million is hardly backup money.
You might receive comfort in believing your supposition, but that is not what it
says to me. What it says to me is that the Broncos at this point don't know for
sure what they have for the future.

Yes, I believe they originally drafted Tebow to improve on Orton. However,
Orton has since surprised them with a precipitous improvement in just about
every area of his play. So we have one QB who is better than they thought
he was and another who has never played a down in the regular season.
Therefore, they gave Orton a pretty fat contract to keep him around for one
more year until they do know what they have going into the future.

IMHO.

-----

broncofanatic1987
08-27-2010, 06:50 PM
You are apparently implying that the Broncos are still considering Orton as a
backup for the future. The only problem is, $9 million is hardly backup money.
You might receive comfort in believing your supposition, but that is not what it
says to me. What it says to me is that the Broncos at this point don't know for
sure what they have for the future.

Yes, I believe they originally drafted Tebow to improve on Orton. However,
Orton has since surprised them with a precipitous improvement in just about
every area of his play. So we have one QB who is better than they thought
he was and another who has never played a down in the regular season.
Therefore, they gave Orton a pretty fat contract to keep him around for one
more year until they do know what they have going into the future.

IMHO.

-----

When exactly did I suppose that Orton is a back up for the future?

The general consensus seems to be that it will take Tebow until at least his third year to be ready to start if he ever is. Orton's contract is up before then. They would have to re-sign him to a new contract in order to keep him around long enough to be the back up of the future.

If Tebow proves his critics wrong and is ready sooner, they can cut or trade Orton because they will still have Quinn as a back up next year.

JaxBroncoGirl
08-27-2010, 06:58 PM
If Orton were the future, he would have been signed to a long term contract and not a one year extension.

This signing says more about the team's lack of trust in Quinn than it does about their faith in Orton.

The article itself is more about tearing down Tebow than truly illustrating why anyone should believe Orton is the future.

You may just have something there. Look, Orton maybe good yet we have only seen 2 preseason games. It also takes a strong OL for any QB to be impressive. We continue to break down Orton and Tebow until it makes no sense. Tebow is ready, Orton is the QB now if something happens then Tebow will be the QB. I have only seen Orton in 2 games. I cannot give a comprehensive statement on his development. It seems to me after reading all the comments 2 things stand out. Cannot hit the long ball to the receiver and he is a bit of a stiff when it comes to the pocket. Both of those problems is Tebow's assets. So why don't we look at the positive and have both QB playing the entire season. Why not? Everyone says OH it is the NFL, please it is about time a team steps out of the box and make the game more exciting. I am hoping to see both QB develop to bring much needed success to the Broncos. So I guess, again the name of my boat, "Will Sea".

topscribe
08-27-2010, 07:00 PM
When exactly did I suppose that Orton is a back up for the future?

The general consensus seems to be that it will take Tebow until at least his third year to be ready to start if he ever is. Orton's contract is up before then. They would have to re-sign him to a new contract in order to keep around long enough to be the back up of the future.

If Tebow proves his critics wrong and is ready sooner, they can cut or trade Orton because they will still have Quinn as a back up next year.

Okay. That is why I added "apparently" to my statement, if you will go back and
notice. I could only feed it back to you as I inferred it, but that is the reason
I did feed it back to you.

What you said in this post seems largely a summary of what I actually said in
my post. Except for your last point: The Broncos are not going to cut Orton
"sooner." Are you aware of how much of that salary is guaranteed? That much
money ($8.8 million, $5 million guaranteed) implies to me that the Broncos will
not be surprised if Tebow stays on the bench for at least a couple years.

-----

claymore
08-27-2010, 07:04 PM
Im naming my next kid "Ankle Sprain More" If orton wins us more than 8 games this year.

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 07:04 PM
When exactly did I suppose that Orton is a back up for the future?

The general consensus seems to be that it will take Tebow until at least his third year to be ready to start if he ever is. Orton's contract is up before then. They would have to re-sign him to a new contract in order to keep around long enough to be the back up of the future.

If Tebow proves his critics wrong and is ready sooner, they can cut or trade Orton because they will still have Quinn as a back up next year.

As I understand it Orton was signed for one more year because it was feared after the first games. For BQ and TEBOW that they were lost. And would need more time to be ready.

Maybe I got it all wrong but that was the way I got it.

If Tebow is the answer. Next year Orton gets lots of money to back him up.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

topscribe
08-27-2010, 07:09 PM
Im naming my next kid "Ankle Sprain More" If orton wins us more than 8 games this year.

Make it "Neckbeard Anklesprain More," and you have a deal . . .

-----

claymore
08-27-2010, 07:10 PM
Make it "Neckbeard Anklesprain More," and you have a deal . . .

-----

Ive reconsdidered. Its going to be "Top Ankle More" Youve been like a Great, Great, Great Grandfather to me. :)

topscribe
08-27-2010, 07:12 PM
Ive reconsdidered. Its going to be "Top Ankle More" Youve been like a Great, Great, Great Grandfather to me. :)

Just shut up and go out and fetch the newspaper for me . . .

-----

broncofanatic1987
08-27-2010, 07:20 PM
As I understand it Orton was signed for one more year because it was feared after the first games. For BQ and TEBOW that they were lost. And would need more time to be ready.

Maybe I got it all wrong but that was the way I got it.

If Tebow is the answer. Next year Orton gets lots of money to back him up.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Not necessarily, it depends on how much of Orton's salary counts against the cap, assuming that there is one. If it's just the 5.5 million and the Broncos have enough cap space, they could decide it's acceptable to get rid of Orton one way or the other if Tebow wins the starting job next year.

It's hard to imagine that Orton would want to stay as a back up if that's what happens next year. Fortunately for him, that won't likely be the case. It's pretty clear that the Broncos expect to get one more starting season out of Orton before they turn things over to the true expected future of the franchise.

topscribe
08-27-2010, 07:23 PM
Not necessarily, it depends on how much of Orton's salary counts against the cap, assuming that there is one. If it's just the 5.5 million and the Broncos have enough cap space, they could decide it's acceptable to get rid of Orton one way or the other if Tebow wins the starting job next year.

It's hard to imagine that Orton would want to stay as a back up if that's what happens next year. Fortunately for him, that won't likely be the case. It's pretty clear that the Broncos expect to get one more starting season out of Orton before they turn things over to the true expected future of the franchise.

Except that the Broncos don't know Tebow is the future of the franchise, as
you seem to imply. And that's the rub. If he doesn't turn out to be the future,
then maybe they have a future in Orton. That is what $8.8 million says to me,
anyway . . .

-----

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 08:10 PM
Not necessarily, it depends on how much of Orton's salary counts against the cap, assuming that there is one. If it's just the 5.5 million and the Broncos have enough cap space, they could decide it's acceptable to get rid of Orton one way or the other if Tebow wins the starting job next year.

It's hard to imagine that Orton would want to stay as a back up if that's what happens next year. Fortunately for him, that won't likely be the case. It's pretty clear that the Broncos expect to get one more starting season out of Orton before they turn things over to the true expected future of the franchise.

Regardless of the cap value he will be here unless they are able to trade him for choices.

That would mean that TEBOW is ready to rock and roll as well as BQ is getting the scheme and can be his backup.
There is NO way Josh will not have a veteran backup for Tebow for his second year.

They may draft a QB but they will not have him as backup to Tebow he would be way to raw Y'all saw Orton last year and he was an exprienced winnig veteran.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I Eat Staples
08-27-2010, 08:15 PM
That is what I initially thought. I was not happy at all with the pick. But I came to understand that they saw a QB with Tebow's potential, so they felt
they had to take him. (About the same thing happened when Cutler was
selected, even after Plummer's sterling season the year before.) Eventually, I
was able to see the logic in it. So, even were Orton to make All-Pro, I don't
believe Tebow's selection to be a bad choice.

Well I'm hoping they don't chase Orton out the way they did to Plummer.


I have never mentioned 75 yards in any post. Ever. I don't know where you
got that. I did mention the event where Orton threw 74 yards in a QB contest.
And even though you got a big kick out of it and just the same as called me a
liar, that happens to be a recorded event. Now, I know nothing of the wind,
surface, weather conditions, or Orton's state of dress or undress. All I know
is that it took place. I even documented it with a link. So, it is what it is.
Arguing with me will not change history.

I said 75 yards because I was responding to someone who thought you mentioned 75 yards in your post about Orton's arm. And I never said you were lying or anything. That was someone else.


But before that pissing match emerged, I was responding to another implication
that Orton does not have a strong enough arm to make all the throws. I was
only affirming that he does indeed have a strong enough arm. Regardless of
the conditions, if he can get it 74, 72, or even 68 yards down the field, that
is certainly strong enough.

Never argued it.


So the only issue now is accuracy (specifically in the 11-20 yard range). And I
fully agree, 100%, that how accurate he is going to be remains to be seen
this season.

I hope I have made it clear enough. I don't know how I can break it down any
further . . .

-----

Again, I agree.


I never said that, I only said that I (as well as 99% of fans) am not as qualified to judge talent as those who are paid to.

And to be quite honest, I rarely criticize Broncos draft picks. I actually try to wait and see how a player will pan out before bashing the Broncos for picking them.

I wouldn't bash a pick after I see the results, that's too easy. It's easy to say it was a bad pick after it doesn't work out. And if you're not going to criticize or praise our draft picks, it takes half the fun out of the draft. :coffee:

JDL
08-27-2010, 10:53 PM
Regardless of how far you can throw it in practice, it matters how far you can throw it in a game (under pressure) and whether you can do so with timing and accuracy. Orton is clearly inaccurate, he struggles hitting the deep ball and really doesn't hit crossing routes well which has really hurt Royal who isn't a possession type WR... that is why Marshall and Gaffney are good for Orton, Marshall had the size to present a big area target and Gaffney finds the holes in the zone and sits down very well (also runs nice curl routes where he is coming back to Orton - i.e. Orton just throws it straight versus having to lead a WR.) Those are the reasons he isn't a great starting QB, he is solid though and has a lot of nice intangibles... just aren't going to be winning Super Bowls with him most likely.

Lonestar
08-27-2010, 11:38 PM
How abiut we see what he can do and can't do. Josh is a better judge of talent and will design a game plan accordingly.

Last yearwe did not throw long for many reasons one being the oline could not hold a block long enough to set the longer ball.

Last year our WR's did not run the crossing routes properly therefore when KO tried to hit them the timing or routes were off and we did not do well there.

I do not think they would have given Orton an extension albeit just one year if they did not see improvement.

I think I will wait and see whom is correct Josh or others

Last year he did not try to throw long so far this year in very limited time he seems to have attmpted and completed more than last year.

My money is on Orton.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
08-28-2010, 02:01 AM
wow.. last year it was the WRs fault. Seems I heard that excuse used when Plummer threw INTs as well.

We'll know by the end of this season what next year holds. If we find Tebow is the starter by the end of the year (which I expect) then we have a pretty good idea that Orton will not be here. We won't keep Orton as a back-up if we are planning on Tebow starting next season. Quinn won't have a single thing to do with that decision. They will get rid of Orton because of Tebow, not because Quinn is "ready." It would be stupid to make any decisions based on the back-up QB. A team can always find a QB to put in the back-up role. Thats the last of the worries.

But keeping Orton around as the back-up would cause wayyy too much controversy. If we are expecting Tebow to be the starter (meaning if we know next season).... I wouldn't want him looking over his shoulder every time he makes a mistake.

As we've seen time and time and time before.... and heard from the very QBs that have sat.... they learn MUCH more from actually playing than sitting and watching. If we use 4 picks on a QB that has to sit for 2 years......

spikerman
08-28-2010, 08:42 AM
Josh is a better judge of talent and will design a game plan accordingly.


As I've said before, I think the jury is still out on McDaniels' talent evaluation skills.

gobroncsnv
08-28-2010, 09:24 AM
As we've seen time and time and time before.... and heard from the very QBs that have sat.... they learn MUCH more from actually playing than sitting and watching. If we use 4 picks on a QB that has to sit for 2 years......

Only problem with this is that it costs the team much more when a QB learns something the hard way...
You can lose a lot of games, sometimes receivers when the throw leads into too much contact. Holding on to the ball too long can lead to some pretty horrific sacks if indecision comes calling. You're also telling your vets, "sorry, but we're just gonna kinda suck until this guy gets it"...
So there are several ways to look at the scenario, but I know you were just dying to know what my thoughts were. ;)

Ravage!!!
08-28-2010, 09:52 AM
Only problem with this is that it costs the team much more when a QB learns something the hard way...
You can lose a lot of games, sometimes receivers when the throw leads into too much contact. Holding on to the ball too long can lead to some pretty horrific sacks if indecision comes calling. You're also telling your vets, "sorry, but we're just gonna kinda suck until this guy gets it"...
So there are several ways to look at the scenario, but I know you were just dying to know what my thoughts were. ;)

Not really buying some of those. We see rookie QBs starting every year, and we don't see their WRs being hurt any more than we do on any other team. Also, of course they hold onto the ball too long, and make mistakes. Thats the learning process. But if you think a guy is going to sit, and then get on the field and simply play like a vet because he's "watched" for 2 years.... you are sadly mistaken. He's still going to have to go through that first year on the field and actually make the mistakes anyway. Every team goes through that with a first-year starting QB.

As far as telling the team they are going to suck... seems that Atlanta, Baltimore, and the Jets just all recently went to, and won, playoff games with a rookie QB. If the vets around the new kid can't step it up and play, then they aren't the kind of player you want on the team anyway. So I'm not buying that one, either.

Kyle is "ok"... he is what he is. He's not going to come out of some cocoon and morph into the beautiful butterfly simply because of McD's system. I just feel that since we spent so much to get TT, then its a waste to have him sit behind Orton for 2 years. Maybe most of this season, until we are eliminated from Playoffs (or Orton get hurt, which will probably come sooner). Start TT and see what happens. Orton's contract for next year shouldn't have any bearing as to the plan to move TT behind center. If its already apparent that TT won't be ready for another TWO friggin years and has to sit behind the VERY guy you drafted to replace.... then thats very poor management, and I'm hoping this isn't the case either.

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 12:15 PM
As I've said before, I think the jury is still out on McDaniels' talent evaluation skills.

Not in my case I very pleased with all of our acquistions and how they have been used save hillis last year and I do not think that was as much Josh as it was bobby turner.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
08-28-2010, 12:24 PM
Not in my case I very pleased with all of our acquistions and how they have been used save hillis last year and I do not think that was as much Josh as it was bobby turner.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forumsThis is the first I've heard that Bobby Turner was the reason Hillis couldn't get on the field last year. Have there been allusions to that somewhere? I may have missed it and it would really surprise me. I'm not doubting you, I just haven't seen that before.

Northman
08-28-2010, 12:27 PM
This is the first I've heard that Bobby Turner was the reason Hillis couldn't get on the field last year. Have there been allusions to that somewhere? I may have missed it and it would really surprise me. I'm not doubting you, I just haven't seen that before.

Its a garbage statement. Anything to deflect any negativity off of McD. :rolleyes:

honz
08-28-2010, 01:30 PM
No need to deflect negativity when there is nothing negative about him.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
08-28-2010, 01:40 PM
Obviously.

rcsodak
08-28-2010, 03:17 PM
Regardless of how far you can throw it in practice, it matters how far you can throw it in a game (under pressure) and whether you can do so with timing and accuracy. Orton is clearly inaccurate, he struggles hitting the deep ball and really doesn't hit crossing routes well which has really hurt Royal who isn't a possession type WR... that is why Marshall and Gaffney are good for Orton, Marshall had the size to present a big area target and Gaffney finds the holes in the zone and sits down very well (also runs nice curl routes where he is coming back to Orton - i.e. Orton just throws it straight versus having to lead a WR.) Those are the reasons he isn't a great starting QB, he is solid though and has a lot of nice intangibles... just aren't going to be winning Super Bowls with him most likely.

Guess you missed BOTH sideline throws last week to Gaffney.....while heavily guarded...and running.....for completions.

But when one's only looking for the bad in someone, well...that's to be expected. :coffee:

rcsodak
08-28-2010, 03:28 PM
wow.. last year it was the WRs fault. Seems I heard that excuse used when Plummer threw INTs as well.

We'll know by the end of this season what next year holds. If we find Tebow is the starter by the end of the year (which I expect) then we have a pretty good idea that Orton will not be here. We won't keep Orton as a back-up if we are planning on Tebow starting next season. Quinn won't have a single thing to do with that decision. They will get rid of Orton because of Tebow, not because Quinn is "ready." It would be stupid to make any decisions based on the back-up QB. A team can always find a QB to put in the back-up role. Thats the last of the worries.

But keeping Orton around as the back-up would cause wayyy too much controversy. If we are expecting Tebow to be the starter (meaning if we know next season).... I wouldn't want him looking over his shoulder every time he makes a mistake.

As we've seen time and time and time before.... and heard from the very QBs that have sat.... they learn MUCH more from actually playing than sitting and watching. If we use 4 picks on a QB that has to sit for 2 years......

LOVE how you're sticking with "Tebow WILL be the starter next year". Even moreso, your '4picks' for TT.
Guess it doesn't matter that those "4picks" were EXPLICITLY acquired byMcD, who had every intention of moving down in the draft, FOR Tebow.

I'm just happy McD DID move down....

...I'd hate to see the tripe coming out of posters mouths if he'd taken him instead of DT! :lol:

rcsodak
08-28-2010, 03:32 PM
This is the first I've heard that Bobby Turner was the reason Hillis couldn't get on the field last year. Have there been allusions to that somewhere? I may have missed it and it would really surprise me. I'm not doubting you, I just haven't seen that before.




Not in my case I very pleased with all of our acquistions and how they have been used save hillis last year and I do not think that was as much Josh as it was bobby turner.

Just my observation

rcsodak
08-28-2010, 03:36 PM
well when you give your fans the finger, it's only natural for coaches and teammates to wonder how much you care for the team.

fan

ignorant fan

1fingered salute deserving fan

BroncoWave
08-28-2010, 03:37 PM
LOVE how you're sticking with "Tebow WILL be the starter next year". Even moreso, your '4picks' for TT.
Guess it doesn't matter that those "4picks" were EXPLICITLY acquired byMcD, who had every intention of moving down in the draft, FOR Tebow.

I'm just happy McD DID move down....

...I'd hate to see the tripe coming out of posters mouths if he'd taken him instead of DT! :lol:

Yeah, all that "4 picks" crap is such a load of horse shit. It's perfectly clear what his draft strategy was and trading down and stockpiling picks was the only way he was going be able to move back up for a second first round pick.

It's a fun criticism for the McD/Tebow haters to use though, regardless of how ridiculously misguided they are about it.

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 03:40 PM
This is the first I've heard that Bobby Turner was the reason Hillis couldn't get on the field last year. Have there been allusions to that somewhere? I may have missed it and it would really surprise me. I'm not doubting you, I just haven't seen that before.

BT controled who got the touches in practice therefore no touch no play.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I Eat Staples
08-28-2010, 04:07 PM
As I've said before, I think the jury is still out on McDaniels' talent evaluation skills.

Agreed. And he hasn't done anything to make me believe he knows what the hell he is doing.


fan

ignorant fan

1fingered salute deserving fan

I never said he didn't deserve it. I just said the impression it gives of Plummer to other fans and even his teammates.


Yeah, all that "4 picks" crap is such a load of horse shit. It's perfectly clear what his draft strategy was and trading down and stockpiling picks was the only way he was going be able to move back up for a second first round pick.

It's a fun criticism for the McD/Tebow haters to use though, regardless of how ridiculously misguided they are about it.

I realize full well that McD traded down with the intent of trading back up. But our draft could have been excellent if we would have traded down and kept those picks instead. I know what McD's intentions were, and I feel they were horribly wasted.

rcsodak
08-28-2010, 04:24 PM
Agreed. And he hasn't done anything to make me believe he knows what the hell he is doing.



I never said he didn't deserve it. I just said the impression it gives of Plummer to other fans and even his teammates.



I realize full well that McD traded down with the intent of trading back up. But our draft could have been excellent if we would have traded down and kept those picks instead. I know what McD's intentions were, and I feel they were horribly wasted.
How do you know the opinions of the players?
And I'm a fan, and it only made me respect him that much more. Jake was his own man. He didn't need this game, and yet he played it as hard, if not harder, as everybody else.

If I had some ***** standing behind me, yelling shit just because he was feeling like he couldn't be touched, I'd have done more than just flip him off. I think that "fan" is the epitome of a *****.

And honestly, if you feel McD can't judge talent, then you're stepping all over yourself when you say you wish they'd have gotten multiple players instead of just the one.

Ravage!!!
08-28-2010, 04:26 PM
Yeah, all that "4 picks" crap is such a load of horse shit. It's perfectly clear what his draft strategy was and trading down and stockpiling picks was the only way he was going be able to move back up for a second first round pick.

It's a fun criticism for the McD/Tebow haters to use though, regardless of how ridiculously misguided they are about it.

Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter if that was the intended strategy or not. The FACT of thematter is... 4 picks were used, PERIOD. When all said and done, we used 4 picks to take Tebow. In the end, the judgement will come down to that. In the end, Tebow will either live up to be better than the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4 round players used to get him.

Call it a "fun criticism" or not... it still remains to be true. It doesn't matter if that was the intended strategy, because McD will still be judged on whether or not that was the RIGHT strategy. Whether or not using all those picks to move back UP into the 1st round was the best thing to do for this team. Call it hating :lol: alll you want. :lol:

Ravage!!!
08-28-2010, 04:29 PM
LOVE how you're sticking with "Tebow WILL be the starter next year". Even moreso, your '4picks' for TT.
Guess it doesn't matter that those "4picks" were EXPLICITLY acquired byMcD, who had every intention of moving down in the draft, FOR Tebow.

I'm just happy McD DID move down....

...I'd hate to see the tripe coming out of posters mouths if he'd taken him instead of DT! :lol:

As I stated in the post above, it doesn't matter if the picks were acquired with the intentions of getting Tebow. Because in the end, all the 4 picks were used to get him.

And yes.. I'm "sticking" with Tebow WILL be the starter next year. As I've stated again and agian... if you use 4 picks to take a QB, and he isn't ready to start by the 2nd year..... one absolutely has to question that kind of strategy to acquire picks in one of the DEEPEST drafts in a decade, only to spend them on a guy that can't even start.

So lets hope thats not the case, and Tebow is actually good enough to justify using so many picks on... and gets on the field (as a starter and not some 3rd down/short yardage specialist).

spikerman
08-28-2010, 04:29 PM
Just my observation I saw that which is why I asked the question. Was that something from someone "in the know" or just an idea that Jr had?

spikerman
08-28-2010, 04:34 PM
BT controled who got the touches in practice therefore no touch no play.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ok, I'm :confused:. Bobby Turner decided what backs played - Fields is on the team and started because Nolan wanted him (from earlier threads). What is McDaniels responsible for again? Not directed at you specifically Jr, I've seen several posters deflect questionable decisions away from McDaniels to other people and it makes me wonder just exactly who the buck stops with.

My guess is that if you asked McDaniels he would say all of those decisions are his. I don't like a lot of the things he does, but he doesn't seem to shy away from taking responsibility and I actually like that about him.

topscribe
08-28-2010, 04:45 PM
Ok, I'm :confused:. Bobby Turner decided what backs played - Fields is on the team and started because Nolan wanted him (from earlier threads). What is McDaniels responsible for again? Not directed at you specifically Jr, I've seen several posters deflect questionable decisions away from McDaniels to other people and it makes me wonder just exactly who the buck stops with.

My guess is that if you asked McDaniels he would say all of those decisions are his. I don't like a lot of the things he does, but he doesn't seem to shy away from taking responsibility and I actually like that about him.

IIRC, I think I read somewhere that Turner made the decisions as to what RB went into the game..

-----

Ravage!!!
08-28-2010, 04:45 PM
Ok, I'm :confused:. Bobby Turner decided what backs played - Fields is on the team and started because Nolan wanted him (from earlier threads). What is McDaniels responsible for again? Not directed at you specifically Jr, I've seen several posters deflect questionable decisions away from McDaniels to other people and it makes me wonder just exactly who the buck stops with.

My guess is that if you asked McDaniels he would say all of those decisions are his. I don't like a lot of the things he does, but he doesn't seem to shy away from taking responsibility and I actually like that about him.

No one knows where JR is getting the idea that it was Turner's doing and wasn't McD.

topscribe
08-28-2010, 04:56 PM
No one knows where JR is getting the idea that it was Turner's doing and wasn't McD.

Despite your personal dig at JR, he might have read it in the same place as I.

-----

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 05:25 PM
Yeah, all that "4 picks" crap is such a load of horse shit. It's perfectly clear what his draft strategy was and trading down and stockpiling picks was the only way he was going be able to move back up for a second first round pick.

It's a fun criticism for the McD/Tebow haters to use though, regardless of how ridiculously misguided they are about it.

There will always be fans that thought the staus quo was ok and beleived that one more players would indeed make THE difference.

They will never be convinced that we were NOT on the verge of LOMBARDIs 3 and 4.

OK but some of us saw the light that changes needed to be made.

I knew that he was stockpiling choices but was pleasantly surprised when he did indeed move back up to get him. Knew it was going to happen and to get him for what really only accounts to our #4 well to me that was a steal. In other words all the other choices were someone elses picks we traded for.

Now could we have upgraded the TEAM with 3 more picks this year maybe. But frankly we are a very young TEAM already not sure how many of them would stick anyway.

Not to mention last year we had 35+ new players already and this year could be another 10 or so of the 53 man roster.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 05:39 PM
Ok, I'm :confused:. Bobby Turner decided what backs played - Fields is on the team and started because Nolan wanted him (from earlier threads). What is McDaniels responsible for again? Not directed at you specifically Jr, I've seen several posters deflect questionable decisions away from McDaniels to other people and it makes me wonder just exactly who the buck stops with.

My guess is that if you asked McDaniels he would say all of those decisions are his. I don't like a lot of the things he does, but he doesn't seem to shy away from taking responsibility and I actually like that about him.

I read an article. Last year or the year before that said Mikey allowed BT to get the reps in practice for the RBs he thiought was perpared and ready menetally. And because of that the ones that got the reps played.

He did that because BT is one of the best rbs coach in the NFL. It was one less thing he had to worry about and mike trusted him after getting a gazillion 1000 yard rushers while here.

When Josh came to town he also defered to BT those responsibilities. I'm sure because of his rep and at the urging of Pat you know if the thing is not broke do not fix it.

It was an article some where that I meantally filed away. Because at the time it was the only logical explaination of why my adoptee was not more in the game plan in 08, untill all the other RBs were on IR.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I Eat Staples
08-28-2010, 05:40 PM
How do you know the opinions of the players?
And I'm a fan, and it only made me respect him that much more. Jake was his own man. He didn't need this game, and yet he played it as hard, if not harder, as everybody else.

If I had some ***** standing behind me, yelling shit just because he was feeling like he couldn't be touched, I'd have done more than just flip him off. I think that "fan" is the epitome of a *****.

And honestly, if you feel McD can't judge talent, then you're stepping all over yourself when you say you wish they'd have gotten multiple players instead of just the one.

I feel the same way you do. I'm just saying how most people seem to react to a player flipping off a fan/fans. I happened to respect Plummer for it. Unfortunately, most people don't feel like us.

As for McD judging talent, more players means a higher chance at least one of them will become a really good player. And either way, it's better than taking one player who I feel won't be a very good player.

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 05:41 PM
Despite your personal dig at JR, he might have read it in the same place as I.

-----

Since we are in lock step on most things I'm sure we both read it.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
08-28-2010, 08:18 PM
Yeah, all that "4 picks" crap is such a load of horse shit. It's perfectly clear what his draft strategy was and trading down and stockpiling picks was the only way he was going be able to move back up for a second first round pick.

It's a fun criticism for the McD/Tebow haters to use though, regardless of how ridiculously misguided they are about it.


There will always be fans that thought the staus quo was ok and beleived that one more players would indeed make THE difference.

They will never be convinced that we were NOT on the verge of LOMBARDIs 3 and 4.

OK but some of us saw the light that changes needed to be made.

I knew that he was stockpiling choices but was pleasantly surprised when he did indeed move back up to get him. Knew it was going to happen and to get him for what really only accounts to our #4 well to me that was a steal. In other words all the other choices were someone elses picks we traded for.

Now could we have upgraded the TEAM with 3 more picks this year maybe. But frankly we are a very young TEAM already not sure how many of them would stick anyway.

Not to mention last year we had 35+ new players already and this year could be another 10 or so of the 53 man roster.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ok, just so I understand, are you guys also trying to make the case that all of those sports journalists, radio personalities, etc. that said McDaniels paid a steep price (in terms of the number of picks) for Tebow are just "McDaniels haters" and upset because Shanahan is gone? :confused: Is that your position, or only when "fans" say it does that apply? Same statement, different label and 'motives' applied?

For the record, and I am already on the record, I don't think the "he gave up too much because he gave up _____ picks for Tebow" argument holds any water, because he moved backwards to stockpile those picks for the SOLE purpose of getting Tebow. Therefore, I think it defies logic to make a case that he got TOO much value moving back and therefore gave up too much for Tebow.

That said, unless you guys are prepared to make the case that the talking head NFL analysts, some being ex players, coaches or GMs, are making the "gave too much" statements purely because they hate McDaniels and are still upset about Shanahan being gone, I don't know how you can turn this into a "Mike love"/"Josh hate" issue with fans that hold a different opinion than you, and in this case me.

Overtime
08-28-2010, 08:20 PM
the QB of the future is neither Tim Tebow nor Kyle Orton.

Orton can't maintain a consistent level of play. Tebow can't (physically) play the game like he does and expect to last.

Orton will be cut in a year or two, and Tebow...well it's doubtful he'll ever be more than a backup for a complete season.

Northman
08-28-2010, 08:28 PM
Ok, so just so I understand, are you guys also trying to make the case that all of those sports journalists, radio personalities, etc. that said McDaniels paid a steep price (in terms of the number of picks) for Tebow are just "McDaniels haters" and upset because Shanahan is gone? :confused: Is that your position, or only when "fans" say it does that apply? Same statement, different label and 'motives' applied?

For the record, and I am already on the record, I don't think the "he gave up too much because he gave up _____ picks for Tebow", because he moved backwards to stockpile those picks for the SOLE purpose of getting Tebow. Therefore, I think it defies logic to make a case that he got TOO much value moving back and therefore gave up too much for Tebow.

That said, unless you guys are prepared to make the case that the talking head NFL analysts, some being ex players and coaches, are making the "paid too much" statements purely because they hate McDaniels and are still upset about Shanahan being gone, I don't know how you can turn this into a "Mike love"/"Josh hate" issue with fans that hold a different opinion than you, and in this case me.

I think i just heard a turtle flush.

Krull
08-28-2010, 08:41 PM
the QB of the future is neither Tim Tebow nor Kyle Orton.

Orton can't maintain a consistent level of play. Tebow can't (physically) play the game like he does and expect to last.

Orton will be cut in a year or two, and Tebow...well it's doubtful he'll ever be more than a backup for a complete season.



Orton has been at Denver for a season and came from a team that doesn't know how to utilize qb's (my opinion)....consistency the first year of a new system totally different from what he knew is a bit much to ask in one year.....
Tebow has played 1.3 quarters with backups and future walmart greeters on both sides of the ball so who knows what he can do.....
By the way....who wins the super bowl this year?? I'm heading to vegas and it sounds like you have the inside track on the future....

Lonestar
08-28-2010, 11:13 PM
After every thing is said and done we have like 8 picks in the draft. 1 2 3 4 6 7. We wound with 1 1 2 3 5 6 7 7. IIRC. Without looking it up. Not sure why it is an issuse. Drafted the same number of players+ one JUST not in the order the mock drafts had them in.

If someone really has to check it out, well be my guest. But I'm pretty sure I'm close.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
08-28-2010, 11:38 PM
Ok, I'm :confused:. Bobby Turner decided what backs played - Fields is on the team and started because Nolan wanted him (from earlier threads). What is McDaniels responsible for again? Not directed at you specifically Jr, I've seen several posters deflect questionable decisions away from McDaniels to other people and it makes me wonder just exactly who the buck stops with.

My guess is that if you asked McDaniels he would say all of those decisions are his. I don't like a lot of the things he does, but he doesn't seem to shy away from taking responsibility and I actually like that about him.

I just cant see how when Shanny was in charge everything fell under him but now that McD is in charge its Nolans, Bobby's, etc's fault.

topscribe
08-28-2010, 11:57 PM
I just cant see how when Shanny was in charge everything fell under him but now that McD is in charge its Nolans, Bobby's, etc's fault.

I believe the team's demise was at Shanny's hand, and it was mostly because
he allowed the defense to deteriorate, IMO. He lost a lot of good talent (Pryce,
Berry), failed to replace them and the the retirees (Mobley, Wilson) with his
castoffs and retreads (Browncos, various CBs and safeties) and sent some
good DCs down the road as scapegoats.

I further believe the jury's out on McDaniels. I'm not going to judge him too
harshly after only one year at the helm. I might have a stronger opinion at the
conclusion of this year.

I don't have a dog in this fight. Just trying to sort it out . . .

-----

Lonestar
08-29-2010, 06:16 AM
I just cant see how when Shanny was in charge everything fell under him but now that McD is in charge its Nolans, Bobby's, etc's fault.

No one is giving Josh a pass other than giving him time to get the ducks lined up. Much like we did when mike came to town.

Although IMO he had a lot more talent when he got here. He added a few players and implemeneted his scheme. We had a winner and it was not his first attempt as a HC.

Mike was great for the first few years and then started to believe the mastermind tag. Started skiding after that having 7+ years of failed day one picks did little other than cause more and more FA picks and then really falied FA attempts.

Glad he is gone and look forward to a fresh start.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
08-29-2010, 06:46 AM
I believe the team's demise was at Shanny's hand, and it was mostly because
he allowed the defense to deteriorate, IMO. He lost a lot of good talent (Pryce,
Berry), failed to replace them and the the retirees (Mobley, Wilson) with his
castoffs and retreads (Browncos, various CBs and safeties) and sent some
good DCs down the road as scapegoats.

I further believe the jury's out on McDaniels. I'm not going to judge him too
harshly after only one year at the helm. I might have a stronger opinion at the
conclusion of this year.

I don't have a dog in this fight. Just trying to sort it out . . .

-----

Mikes inability to replace superbowl players via the draft IMO

I also do not have a dog in the hunt other than what is best for the broncos and what Pat has done lately.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

JaxBroncoGirl
08-29-2010, 06:53 AM
the QB of the future is neither Tim Tebow nor Kyle Orton.

Orton can't maintain a consistent level of play. Tebow can't (physically) play the game like he does and expect to last.

Orton will be cut in a year or two, and Tebow...well it's doubtful he'll ever be more than a backup for a complete season.

Let me guess to QB of the future is David Garrard? Tebow will start sometime this year.

Tned
08-29-2010, 07:05 AM
After every thing is said and done we have like 8 picks in the draft. 1 2 3 4 6 7. We wound with 1 1 2 3 5 6 7 7. IIRC. Without looking it up. Not sure why it is an issuse. Drafted the same number of players+ one JUST not in the order the mock drafts had them in.

If someone really has to check it out, well be my guest. But I'm pretty sure I'm close.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Close, I'm also going by memory, but when you kick out some of the late round draft picks we got from trades on the last day of the draft, I think the prior to draft and then after the first round, it was like this:

Entering Draft:
1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
After First round (after picking Tebow):
1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

In essence, we exchanged two seconds for two firsts.

Now, that is too simplistic an explanation, as we moved back 11 spots in the first roun, and I believe in the third and either the 2nd or 4th, we also moved back during the course of all the first round trades.

So, when you look at where we were at the start of the first round, where we were at the end of the first round, which includes McDaniels getting the two players that he told a reporter pre-draft he wanted, i don't buy that "we gave up too much to get Tebow.

TXBRONC
08-29-2010, 07:21 AM
I think i just heard a turtle flush.

A big one or a little one?

Lonestar
08-29-2010, 10:00 AM
Close, I'm also going by memory, but when you kick out some of the late round draft picks we got from trades on the last day of the draft, I think the prior to draft and then after the first round, it was like this:

Entering Draft:
1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
After First round (after picking Tebow):
1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

In essence, we exchanged two seconds for two firsts.

Now, that is too simplistic an explanation, as we moved back 11 spots in the first roun, and I believe in the third and either the 2nd or 4th, we also moved back during the course of all the first round trades.

So, when you look at where we were at the start of the first round, where we were at the end of the first round, which includes McDaniels getting the two players that he told a reporter pre-draft he wanted, i don't buy that "we gave up too much to get Tebow.

Setting in the apo in ATL and while my blackberry is great nothing like my desktop for looking at details.

As far as I'm concerned the we gave up to much to get who we wanted is crapola also.

Had we reached at our original pick for either then there would have been howling like never seen before because mayock and hair man are the gospel. If someones mock does not agree with our needs and if someone reaches for a player that is below the mock then our coaches are smucks yet before reaches were ok.

The ulitimate being a one handed WR in the second.

So I'm going to give Josh a bye till we see one like that say a double amputee as a NT.

Way to many double. Standards IMHO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

BroncoNut
08-29-2010, 10:12 AM
Well, the article was 3 hours old when I posted it (as opposed to the one Jags
posted above, which is 4 months old), and a conversation piece. I just thought
that is what takes place on a discussion board: conversation.

-----

You're doing fine Top. Don't worry about it :salute:

spikerman
08-29-2010, 11:41 AM
I further believe the jury's out on McDaniels. I'm not going to judge him too
harshly after only one year at the helm. I might have a stronger opinion at the
conclusion of this year.
----- Exactly! This is the same point I have been trying to make about his talent evaluation skill set. People want to talk about how he's brought in such great talent, etc. and I don't think any objective person can say that yet. We know what kind of talent he has shipped off, but we don't really know how the players he's brought in to replace them stack up. They may be better or they may be worse. So far, to me, the early returns are not promising, but early is the key word. I'm not ready to annoint him a genius until I see better results than we have seen so far. If this team starts winning consistently, I'll gladly eat my crow and become a huge McDaniels supporter. Until I see improvement though I'm going to hold off on applying for my Josh McD Fan Club membership. :D

spikerman
08-29-2010, 11:50 AM
Although IMO he had a lot more talent when he got here.
I have to disagree with this because I remember when the Broncos were still looking for a coach the NFL experts talked about how desirable the Broncos' job was because of all of the offensive talent on the team. I would argue that the overall football talent level was better when McDaniels took over than when Shanahan did. I'm concerned that the overall talent level was better when McDaniels took over than it is right now. I'm not saying that those players he got rid of didn't have issues, but from a pure "talent level" I think the big three were ahead of their replacements. IMO, McDaniels appears to value character over talent. He may be right, but I guess we'll have to wait to see which approach is the most successful.

Northman
08-29-2010, 12:26 PM
I believe the team's demise was at Shanny's hand, and it was mostly because
he allowed the defense to deteriorate, IMO. He lost a lot of good talent (Pryce,
Berry), failed to replace them and the the retirees (Mobley, Wilson) with his
castoffs and retreads (Browncos, various CBs and safeties) and sent some
good DCs down the road as scapegoats.

I further believe the jury's out on McDaniels. I'm not going to judge him too
harshly after only one year at the helm. I might have a stronger opinion at the
conclusion of this year.

I don't have a dog in this fight. Just trying to sort it out . . .

-----

I would agree with you but at the same time you didnt really answer my question. How can one coach be continually held accountable for EVERYTHING and another not? Doesnt make sense and comes off contradictary to me. I mean techically speaking, McD sent a very DC down as a scapegoat no? So one could assume that was a bad decision on McD's part no? All im saying is you cant have one and not the other. If Shanny is guilty of the fall during his tenure than so is McD (thus far although his legacy is not finished yet). But its not a crime to point out mistakes he's made so far in his campaign which some have done here. But some people want to continually make excuses and point fingers at other people rather than hold the main man accountable.

silkamilkamonico
08-29-2010, 12:28 PM
I have to disagree with this because I remember when the Broncos were still looking for a coach the NFL experts talked about how desirable the Broncos' job was because of all of the offensive talent on the team. I would argue that the overall football talent level was better when McDaniels took over than when Shanahan did. I'm concerned that the overall talent level was better when McDaniels took over than it is right now. I'm not saying that those players he got rid of didn't have issues, but from a pure "talent level" I think the big three were ahead of their replacements. IMO, McDaniels appears to value character over talent. He may be right, but I guess we'll have to wait to see which approach is the most successful.

I disagree. It's hard to differentiate between "pure talent" and "scheme". We thought Cutler was pure talent but from the way it looks for him in Chicago and the benefit of hindsight I would say he prospered in a system. The only other asset that McDaniels had when he took over was Marshall who isn't here now, but I could replace him with Dumervil, who wasn't aywhere near the level he is now in terms of talent last year at this time.

From a business perspective, Tebow makes this organization significantly more valuable at this point, being consdered an asset and the value he brings to the organization through marketability.

broncofanatic1987
08-29-2010, 12:40 PM
I would agree with you but at the same time you didnt really answer my question. How can one coach be continually held accountable for EVERYTHING and another not? Doesnt make sense and comes off contradictary to me. I mean techically speaking, McD sent a very DC down as a scapegoat no? So one could assume that was a bad decision on McD's part no? All im saying is you cant have one and not the other. If Shanny is guilty of the fall during his tenure than so is McD (thus far although his legacy is not finished yet). But its not a crime to point out mistakes he's made so far in his campaign which some have done here. But some people want to continually make excuses and point fingers at other people rather than hold the main man accountable.

McDaniels didn't send Nolan anywhere. That's just an assumption people make because they, for one reason or another, don't want to accept that Nolan and McDaniels just might have parted ways of mutual accord.

Let's not forget that the defense was horrid last year and Nolan has to take as much, if not more, blame as McDaniels.

McDaniels has certainly made questionable decisions but they can't be truly judged until he's had at least three seasons to develop his vision.

silkamilkamonico
08-29-2010, 12:50 PM
McDaniels didn't send Nolan anywhere. That's just an assumption people make because they, for one reason or another, don't want to accept that Nolan and McDaniels just might have parted ways of mutual accord.

I don't understand this either. It's already been stated that before any decision was made between Nolan/McDaniels, Miami contacted Nolan. Denver chose NOT to pursue tampering charges, and allowed Nolan to leave gracefully. People argue this as "why did he just let him go", but I would argue "why keep someone (a coach noneoftheless) who doesn't want to be here". On the flip side, if McDaniels chose to fight for Nolan, those same people would have said, "let the guy go, he doesn't want to be here".



Let's not forget that the defense was horrid last year and Nolan has to take as much, if not more, blame as McDaniels.


This is about as ironic as it gets. Some people attribute Denver's 6-0 start to Nolan only, and the turnaround of the defense to Nolan only, and then instead of mentioning how terrible NOlan was at defense down the stretch, try to point fingers against Orton, the lack of running game, and the benching of Marshall as why Denver sucked. No word of the garbage defesive play whatsoever.

Northman
08-29-2010, 01:02 PM
McDaniels didn't send Nolan anywhere. That's just an assumption people make because they, for one reason or another, don't want to accept that Nolan and McDaniels just might have parted ways of mutual accord.

Yes and no. In the end it was Nolan who wanted to bolt but only after McDaniels tried to overtake the playcalling of the defense which was Nolan's responsibility. It was a butting of heads something that McD seems to have a real propensity for and it clashes with players and coaches. Is he entitled to run it his way? Absolutely, but the onus will still be on him as its his way or the highway. Fact is, Nolan has been DC for years and knows what he is doing as long as he has the pieces in place to do it. When a young arrogant coach comes in and tries to step on that it can create problems which it did.


Let's not forget that the defense was horrid last year and Nolan has to take as much, if not more, blame as McDaniels.No ones forgotten anything. But lets not forget that we didnt even have a decent DLine to work with either. You are quick to give McD 3 years to show what he can do but Nolan only gets one year? Especially to turn around the worst part of the team? Really? lol


McDaniels has certainly made questionable decisions but they can't be truly judged until he's had at least three seasons to develop his vision.As far as his overall success or failure that may be true. But to say that some cant criticize or question his moves at this juncture is BS. But as Top pointed out he's got his work cut out for him this year as we should see a massive improvement which im sure if he fails we will still see the lame excuses and more scapegoats.

Ravage!!!
08-29-2010, 01:11 PM
Nolan knew he was gone. Even the players themselves said that they saw tension between the two coaches. You aren't around the other guy nearly 24 hours a day, after being in the league as long as Nolan has and not have a VERY good understanding as to your relationship with the HC.

Nolan knew he was either out the door, or would be. Thats been made pretty clear from everything made available. PLus, if McD wanted him here, he would have made it clear and kept him. He didn't.

The reason the defense gets credit, is becasue the defense played WAY over its head and is very clear that it was the defense that kept our inept offense winners. When the defense started to falter and fall more back towards the '08, the offense couldn't pick up the slack.

As far as how one can say how we paid too much for Tebow, is that when you put dollar bills in your pocket, its still not spent. Just because you think you are saving up for a Mustang, doesn't mean you have spent the money on the high dollar car until the money is out of your pocket.

No matter HOW the draft picks were acquired, and no matter what the purpose for getting them was.... we STILL used 4 picks on one player. Thats the bottom line. If you trade a kid at a gumball machine ONE dollar bill for 3 shiny quarters, and then spend that 1 dollar on a sucker... you STILL chose to spend four quarters on the sucker.

spikerman
08-29-2010, 01:44 PM
I disagree. It's hard to differentiate between "pure talent" and "scheme". We thought Cutler was pure talent but from the way it looks for him in Chicago and the benefit of hindsight I would say he prospered in a system. The only other asset that McDaniels had when he took over was Marshall who isn't here now, but I could replace him with Dumervil, who wasn't aywhere near the level he is now in terms of talent last year at this time.

From a business perspective, Tebow makes this organization significantly more valuable at this point, being consdered an asset and the value he brings to the organization through marketability.

Since players will perform differently in different schemes, I think the only way to judge "talent" is on a purely physical level. Despite his penchant for throwing interceptions, Jay Cutler is obviously more physically gifted than Orton. McDaniels himself raved about Cutler's abilities when he first took over. Now, he may not have fit into the system that McDaniels wants to use, but that doesn't take away from his natural ability. Last year Cutler had to learn a new scheme (and he'll have to learn a new one this year). Hey, if the scheme excuse works for the Broncos it should work for Cutler too. Marshall was a headcase, but there is no WR currently on the Broncos who can match his ability. Maybe Thomas in the future, but it's way too early to tell. There is also no receiving threat at TE that comes close to Scheffler.

I equate "talent" with natural ability. Dumervil did not become more "talented" last year. I think he may have been put in a better position to succeed based on using him in a way that took better advantage of his ability.

As for team value, as a fan, I personally don't care much about that. I want the best team on the field. It remains to be seen if the best team comes from talent or character. I suspect it's a mixture of both. I'm just worried that McDaniels leans too much on the latter at the expense of the former.

topscribe
08-29-2010, 01:56 PM
Since players will perform differently in different schemes, I think the only way to judge "talent" is on a purely physical level. Despite his penchant for throwing interceptions, Jay Cutler is obviously more physically gifted than Orton. McDaniels himself raved about Cutler's abilities when he first took over. Now, he may not have fit into the system that McDaniels wants to use, but that doesn't take away from his natural ability. Last year Cutler had to learn a new scheme (and he'll have to learn a new one this year). Hey, if the scheme excuse works for the Broncos it should work for Cutler too. Marshall was a headcase, but there is no WR currently on the Broncos who can match his ability. Maybe Thomas in the future, but it's way too early to tell. There is also no receiving threat at TE that comes close to Scheffler.

I equate "talent" with natural ability. Dumervil did not become more "talented" last year. I think he may have been put in a better position to succeed based on using him in a way that took better advantage of his ability.

As for team value, as a fan, I personally don't care much about that. I want the best team on the field. It remains to be seen if the best team comes from talent or character. I suspect it's a mixture of both. I'm just worried that McDaniels leans too much on the latter at the expense of the former.

Some good thoughts there, Spike. I would add the caveat, however, that
you still need a balance. (I know, you indicated that: I'm just emphasizing it
for the sake of the issue.) For instance, Ryan Leaf was more physically gifted
than Peyton Manning. Where Peyton won it took place between the ears.

Same as when you are considering pure physical talent, exclusive of character.
E.g., there was no character issue with either Joe Montana or John Elway.
Elway was more physically gifted than Montana in nearly ever area. Why, then
was/is there such a raging controversy as to who was the better QB? Who
knows?--That just falls into the "intangible" category, doesn't it?

Both Cutler and Orton were in new systems last year. Orton ended up with
the better stats and record. Yet we know about the disparity between the
physical gifts. The answer, again, took place between the ears. It wasn't a
"character" issue: It was simply a decision issue, IMO. Orton made better
decisions on the field, where Cutler trusted his arm too much and took chances.

I'm not stating this as fact - only suggesting a possible scenario . . .

-----

Northman
08-29-2010, 02:02 PM
Both Cutler and Orton were in new systems last year. Orton ended up with
the better stats and record. Yet we know about the disparity between the
physical gifts. The answer, again, took place between the ears. It wasn't a
"character" issue: It was simply a decision issue, IMO. Orton made better
decisions on the field, where Cutler trusted his arm too much and took chances.

I'm not stating this as fact - only suggesting a possible scenario . . .

-----

It has to do with it as with all gunslinger mentality your going to have those INT's. But the other part of that is the system in which the guys were in. Chicago wanted a more open/downfield attack while Orton was in a contained/controlled attack. His mistakes were cut down because the pass percentages favored him more than they did Cutler.

silkamilkamonico
08-29-2010, 03:07 PM
Since players will perform differently in different schemes, I think the only way to judge "talent" is on a purely physical level. Despite his penchant for throwing interceptions, Jay Cutler is obviously more physically gifted than Orton. McDaniels himself raved about Cutler's abilities when he first took over. Now, he may not have fit into the system that McDaniels wants to use, but that doesn't take away from his natural ability. Last year Cutler had to learn a new scheme (and he'll have to learn a new one this year). Hey, if the scheme excuse works for the Broncos it should work for Cutler too. Marshall was a headcase, but there is no WR currently on the Broncos who can match his ability. Maybe Thomas in the future, but it's way too early to tell. There is also no receiving threat at TE that comes close to Scheffler.

I equate "talent" with natural ability. Dumervil did not become more "talented" last year. I think he may have been put in a better position to succeed based on using him in a way that took better advantage of his ability.

As for team value, as a fan, I personally don't care much about that. I want the best team on the field. It remains to be seen if the best team comes from talent or character. I suspect it's a mixture of both. I'm just worried that McDaniels leans too much on the latter at the expense of the former.

I don't think you can equate talent with just natural ability, otherwise guys like Joe Montana and Drew Brees wouldn't be elite QB's because they don't have natural ability. IMHO, you HAVE to consider decision making a part of natural ability. If you don't, you also ave guys like JaMarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, and countless other "prototypical" looking QB's coveted by everyone.

If someone wants to argue the new scheme, that they have to look at the fact that Orton was a better QB than Cutler in their first year in a new scheme.

Scheffler is a one trick pony. He's a terrible blocker, and should probably be used as a slot WR in some schemes.

It's all a matter of how someone percieves the situation. Nobody knows what would have happened with Cutler and company in McDaniels scheme. Almost every analyst new that the once dominating oline under Shanahan's scheme would not work in a power scheme, and had to have been changed. Cutler IMHO woul dhave put up good numbers in McDaniels system, would have made some great throws, but he also would have made some terrible decisions that resulted in turnovers because that's what he does. That's just not asked in McDaniels offense.

spikerman
08-29-2010, 04:42 PM
I don't think you can equate talent with just natural ability, otherwise guys like Joe Montana and Drew Brees wouldn't be elite QB's because they don't have natural ability. IMHO, you HAVE to consider decision making a part of natural ability. If you don't, you also ave guys like JaMarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, and countless other "prototypical" looking QB's coveted by everyone.

If someone wants to argue the new scheme, that they have to look at the fact that Orton was a better QB than Cutler in their first year in a new scheme.

Scheffler is a one trick pony. He's a terrible blocker, and should probably be used as a slot WR in some schemes.

It's all a matter of how someone percieves the situation. Nobody knows what would have happened with Cutler and company in McDaniels scheme. Almost every analyst new that the once dominating oline under Shanahan's scheme would not work in a power scheme, and had to have been changed. Cutler IMHO woul dhave put up good numbers in McDaniels system, would have made some great throws, but he also would have made some terrible decisions that resulted in turnovers because that's what he does. That's just not asked in McDaniels offense. I believe that Joe Montana and Drew Brees both have a lot of natural ability, but it may be in different areas than players such as Cutler. A player can't make it to the NFL without some ability. The thing that Montana and Brees (among others) did that players like Cutler haven't figured out is that natural ability or "talent" is not enough. The players that work the hardest are the ones who are the most successful (ie. Jerry Rice).

I know I'll get flamed for it, but to me Joe Montana is a bit overrated. Yes, he won all of those championships, but he had GREAT supporting casts. Montana was a great leader and exceptionally accurate, which I believe were the areas where he was most talented. He didn't have the greatest arm and he wasn't the most mobile, but he worked hard enough to maximize the abilities God gave him. So what's the point I'm trying to make? Hell I don't know, I've gotten myself lost now. :D Seriously, I think that if you take a player like Cutler who, to me, is as physically gifted as anyone playing, and get him work hard to become a complete QB, he'll be much farther ahead than someone who is not as physically gifted who works hard.

Orton did have a better year than Cutler, but a lot of that is because of interceptions. Cutler is a gunslinger while Orton's play was conservative. I am no fan of Cutler, but I suspect he puts more fear in people (including his own fans) than Orton does. That's not a knock or Orton it's just a fact of Cutler's monster arm. I suspect that Cutler will almost always throw more picks than Orton. It just depends on what the coaching staffs are willing to live with.

Scheffler was not a great blocker, but I think one thing this team is missing now is a pass catching TE.

gobroncsnv
08-29-2010, 05:33 PM
If Scheff is only a pass catcher, then he's not much of a TE... That's a position that is at least as much blocking as is receiving. Sharpe wasn't the best blocker either, but he could block somewhat. Scheff was a better fit as a toreador. Ole! The mention of Scheff as a slot type receiver is more of how he should be viewed. That he lines up as a TE is relevant only to how close to the tackle he plays, not as a technician of that position.

I've said it before... Graham can catch rather well... we just need to get him in the game sooner. Everybody remembers his drop against Jax a few years ago. Not as many remember that it was late in the 4th qtr, and the first time in the game they threw AT ALL to him. Let him get started earlier, and the man has the hands for catching. And he SURE has the skills for blocking.

But back to the QB thing, I think Cutler is no more accurate at the long ball than Orton. Until I SEE him do better, I'm keeping that opinion. Jay was no great shakes with us on plus 30 yard throws. Decision-wise, Orton is a definite upgrade, team-mate wise, leader-wise, also no contest. Jay definitely takes it in the pouting department, though.

Ravage!!!
08-29-2010, 05:40 PM
If Scheff is only a pass catcher, then he's not much of a TE... That's a position that is at least as much blocking as is receiving. Sharpe wasn't the best blocker either, but he could block somewhat. Scheff was a better fit as a toreador. Ole!

Tony Gonzlez wasn't much of a blocker either....especially in his early years. Scheff wasnt that bad of a blocker. His biggest problem... he didn't do enough butt kissing... imo.

Its just now that the Patriots are actually looking to use a pass catching TE in their offense. They drafted a good one. But McD's system doesn't use a TE for much outside of being an additional blocker for the spread offense.

silkamilkamonico
08-29-2010, 05:47 PM
Sceffler's problem was crying about his own selfish "un"oppurtunities regardless of how well the team was doing. He didn't care about winning. He cared about getting his. JMHO.