If the Broncos enter the bye 2-6, is it Tebow time?

[Tned]

Tomorrow's a really big game for the Broncos. The AFC West is so bad, that even sitting with only two wins, they are still in the hunt to win the West.

Will we see a 3-5 or 2-6 team after the game tomorrow?

If it's 2-6, does Tebow become the QB following the bye week?

I think it's hard for even the biggest Orton critics to hang the record on Orton? That's not to say he is without blame (failed comebacks, etc.), but he's hardly the glaring problem.

However, if we move to 2-6, and potentially 3 or 3.5 games out of first place in the West, with no realistic shot at a wild card spot, is the smart thing to get Tebow on the field to both get him experience and to see if he's the guy for next year?

What do you guys think?

[claymore]

I think its Tebow time if we lose.

I also think if it turns into Tebow time the decision came from Bowlen. If I was the owner I would want to know whether or not I forced the next HC to work with Tebow or let him bring in his own guys.

[BroncoWave]

Absolutely yes. Nothing at all against Orton as he has been great this season but if we lose to the pitiful 49ers to fall to 2-6 this season is over. With a bye week that would be the perfect time to slide Tebow in.

[T.K.O.]

if the broncos had not extended orton's contract i would say yes ,put tebow in.
however the fact that orton will be on the team next year makes me lean more to giving tebow limited time and let him learn the system and ease into a starting role in 2012.
unless there ends up being no season next year....then it's all screwed up no matter what we do.
i also believe that anything can happen in football and orton gives the team the best chance at winning so we need to keep him in down the stretch.....8-8 might win the division !!!:salute:

[Tned]

Absolutely yes. Nothing at all against Orton as he has been great this season but if we lose to the pitiful 49ers to fall to 2-6 this season is over. With a bye week that would be the perfect time to slide Tebow in.

I'm torn. I believe young QBs should hold the clipboard for at least one, and possibly two seasons. Let them play some mop up (big wins or losses) snaps in the second year. However, if there is a loss tomorrow, and possibly with a win, I think a strong case can be made for moving Tebow into the starting role and using the last 8 games to get him experience and see if he is or isn't NFL starter material.

[Northman]

Definitely. I know the Division is wide open but if we are just struggling that bad to win against teams that hypothetically we should beat than i have zero problem getting Tebow playing time and would feel a lot more comfortable giving McD another year.

[spikerman]

I think it would definitely be Tebow time. Like others have said, it's not an idictment of Orton, who has played pretty well this season (though he's had a couple of down weeks). I didn't think the Broncos really had much of a playoff shot at the beginning of the season so I've been all for letting him play from the beginning. Might as well let him get some "live fire" experience. If the Broncos aren't going to win much anyway they might as well do something productive with the losses.

[Lancane]

if the broncos had not extended orton's contract i would say yes ,put tebow in.
however the fact that orton will be on the team next year makes me lean more to giving tebow limited time and let him learn the system and ease into a starting role in 2012.
unless there ends up being no season next year....then it's all screwed up no matter what we do.
i also believe that anything can happen in football and orton gives the team the best chance at winning so we need to keep him in down the stretch.....8-8 might win the division !!!:salute:

Orton was signed as security for next year, so no matter if there was a season or not, the team would still hold his rights and not be without a starter in case Tebow was not yet ready. And it's very possible that Bowlen will tell McDaniels to do it, just so fans have something to cheer about...but who knows.

[dogfish]

nope. . .

[nevcraw]

I think has to be Tebow time too but the decision maybe come from a revenue POV. It will be the only thing to keep an already grouchy fan base from packing it in. the FO still needs attendance and tv viewership.
This excludes the diehards who will watch no matter what, but the more casual fan I think will want to see him get his chance.
The flipside to this is the lockerroom. How can you tell a team with 8 more games in the season we mailing it in? Tough call.

[Tned]

nope. . .

Shortest Dogfish post in the history of Internet message boards.... ;)

[Nomad]

It won't hurt to start him if we lose, but we won't lose!!

[Tned]

It won't hurt to start him if we lose, but we won't lose!!

The Broncos have never lost a game played in a foreign country when I've been in the stands!!!!

[Nomad]

The Broncos have never lost a game played in a foreign country when I've been in the stands!!!!

37-24 BRONCOS

Let the BRONCOS know your there!!:salute:

[frenchfan]

Tomorrow's a really big game for the Broncos. The AFC West is so bad, that even sitting with only two wins, they are still in the hunt to win the West.

Will we see a 3-5 or 2-6 team after the game tomorrow?

If it's 2-6, does Tebow become the QB following the bye week?

I think it's hard for even the biggest Orton critics to hang the record on Orton? That's not to say he is without blame (failed comebacks, etc.), but he's hardly the glaring problem.

However, if we move to 2-6, and potentially 3 or 3.5 games out of first place in the West, with no realistic shot at a wild card spot, is the smart thing to get Tebow on the field to both get him experience and to see if he's the guy for next year?

What do you guys think?I think he could play the last 2/3 games of the season... After all, with how bad the AFCW is, we could still have a chance with a 2-6 record :pound:

But I don't understand why McD didn't play him in the last quarter of the Raiders' game... It could have given him a real taste of what is NFL regular season...

IMO, if we have no chance to make the playoffs, then I think we should play Tebow... ready or not... If McD thinks he's our future... then...
McD could really evaluate TT.
Tebow could make his rookie mistakes he's supposed to make.
It'd give experience.

I don't blame Orton for this season... he's may be the best thing of this Broncos' season... My opinion is that if TT can have some experience, it could be good for our team... I don't care about the name of my QB... Just play the better one ;) ... and may be we'll have a very solid backup...

Just my 2 cents...

[dogfish]

IMO, it would be borderline criminal to install tebow as the fulltime starter after the break. . .

what's a rookie quarterback's best friend? the running game. . . with almost every rookie QB you have to be able to lean on the running game, especially with a guy as raw as tim. . . our supposed running game has to be one of the worst in the history of the sport. . .

right now our passing game has accounted for 80-- 80!-- ****ing percent of our total offense! you guys honestly think it's a good idea to throw in a kid that most analysts considered a long term project, and expect him to throw the ball forty or fifty times a game? behind a porous offensive line, against defenses that will know we can't run at all, and just pin back their ears and come after him?

look, tim's a tough dude-- i'm not trying to put a skirt on him, or particularly worried that he'll get hurt or shatter his confidence. . . those things have happened to young quarterbacks, they're all possible, but i wouldn't even sweat that so much. . . but i have to question how you can effectively evaluate him under those conditions. . . and while there's zero question that game experience is invaluable to his development, i am completely convinced there are better ways this year, both for tebow and for the team as a whole. . .

we need to put some kind of functional offensive line in front of him-- announce him as the starter right now, and DC's will be digging so deep in their blitz playbooks they might dislocate a shoulder. . . if learning to get ****in' unloaded on is good experience for tim, then by all means. . . otherwise, i'd say not so much. . . i suspect he would end up spending a lot more time inspecting the turf than getting to read defenses. . . as poorly as walton is playing, put a rookie behind him who's really never taken snaps under center before, we'll probably be fumbling the C-QB exchange all over the field. . .

seriously, we put tebow in right now as the official starter, we ain't gonna move the ball at ALL. . . like, ever. . . and when you have 20 minutes or less TOP per game, not only do you cripple your ability to develop/evaluate your other young players, you vastly increase the chance of guys on your defense getting hurt. . .

particularly the AARP unit we run out there. . .

IMO, getting our line play figured out has to be a priority, and putting them under the added pressure of working with a greener than grass QB is just gonna make it that much tougher. . . can we figure out how to run for more than two yards per carry and consistently pick up blitzes and stunts before trying to work in tebow as well? it's been more than difficult enough with a vet QB out there. . .

also, the whole "fan pressure" thing means nothing to me. . . and you damn well know it means nothing to mcdaniels, that's been proven conclusively. . . history assures us that 95% of the fans who yell "put tebow in!" the loudest will be the ones crying the loudest when the offense is terrible with him in there. . . you can't base any type of decision on what 'tard fans want (not directed at people in this thread)-- that's not a professional approach, or one that has any hope of succeeding. . . you have to make smart football decisions, not placate fans. . . if we're 2-6 and make tebow the starter, we WILL probably lose 14 games this year, and that sure as shit don't put more butts in the seats. . .

it could also get mcdaniels fired, which i do understand some of you would be thrilled by, but i'm pretty sure it's not an outcome josh is hoping for. . . :D

furthermore, i'm not at all convinced it would be in the best long term interests of the team. . . i think it kind of undermines orton as your starting QB going forward, which i actually think is a bad mistake. . . people can and will argue this point endlessly and without resolution-- i understand that. . . it's JMO-- although i believe it does reflect a lot of the opinions i've heard experssed by pro athletes over the years. . .

orton's the most productive player on the team right now-- i don't see how benching a guy under those circumstances can be received very well by the rest of the vets (on either side of the ball). . . and it's pretty much a vote of no confidence in kyle-- it says we've seen what we need to of you, move over for the future. . . kyle's enough of a pro to handle it, but i do think it undermines his authority and ability to lead the team if you need him again. . . and as well as he's played, and as raw as tim is, i just don't think it's a good move to push orton aside ATM. . . tim hasn't done anything to take kyle's job, and this is a far cry from '06, when plummer was replaced because he was playing like utter garbage. . .

nope. . . far as i'm concerned, let tebow work out of the wild ass formation (and maybe actually throw a pass one of these days), play in mop-up situations (he should have played some of the second half against the fade), or possibly get a start or two at the very end of the year if we can make any progress on the OL. . .

if i thought quarterback play was one of our problems i might feel differently, but not now. . . i'd like to fix some of the things that are WRONG before downgrading one of the few positions that's actually playing well. . . it's not tebow time yet-- we may not be able to wait until we can give him the keys to a ferrari, but i'd at least like to give the guy a reliable honda or something, rather than just expecting him to put the cape on and be the savior before he's even thrown his first NFL pass. . .

[BroncoBJ]

Part of me says yes and Part of me says no. I would think that if we start Tebow, it would mean that the season is over. And Josh already said last week vs Oakland that he doesn't want Tebow to play in that kind of game when the game is out of reach. So would he start him with the season out of reach and just give up? Or would he just let Orton play out the season and then Tebow take over fully next year? Or get him expierence this year?

I would say that if we had to start Tebow this year, it would be smart to start him after the bye so he could get 2 weeks to prepare for KC. If we go 2-6, that may be the case. But at the same time, Orton is playing well and benching him in favor of Tebow might not be the best thing to do. Would like to see what Ortons stats are at the end of the year.

But I'm hoping for 3-5 at the bye. I don't want to see Tebow this year. :elefant:

[Lonestar]

NO :tsk:





should have read through this thread but after seeing DOGs post he is on the money.

I do expect later in the season for Tebow to come in for more plays when we have the game way under control to get some snap in real live action.

[Northman]

IMO, it would be borderline criminal to install tebow as the fulltime starter after the break. . .

what's a rookie quarterback's best friend? the running game. . . with almost every rookie QB you have to be able to lean on the running game, especially with a guy as raw as tim. . . our supposed running game has to be one of the worst in the history of the sport. . .

right now our passing game has accounted for 80-- 80!-- ****ing percent of our total offense! you guys honestly think it's a good idea to throw in a kid that most analysts considered a long term project, and expect him to throw the ball forty or fifty times a game? behind a porous offensive line, against defenses that will know we can't run at all, and just pin back their ears and come after him?

look, tim's a tough dude-- i'm not trying to put a skirt on him, or particularly worried that he'll get hurt or shatter his confidence. . . those things have happened to young quarterbacks, they're all possible, but i wouldn't even sweat that so much. . . but i have to question how you can effectively evaluate him under those conditions. . . and while there's zero question that game experience is invaluable to his development, i am completely convinced there are better ways this year, both for tebow and for the team as a whole. . .

we need to put some kind of functional offensive line in front of him-- announce him as the starter right now, and DC's will be digging so deep in their blitz playbooks they might dislocate a shoulder. . . if learning to get ****in' unloaded on is good experience for tim, then by all means. . . otherwise, i'd say not so much. . . i suspect he would end up spending a lot more time inspecting the turf than getting to read defenses. . . as poorly as walton is playing, put a rookie behind him who's really never taken snaps under center before, we'll probably be fumbling the C-QB exchange all over the field. . .

seriously, we put tebow in right now as the official starter, we ain't gonna move the ball at ALL. . . like, ever. . . and when you have 20 minutes or less TOP per game, not only do you cripple your ability to develop/evaluate your other young players, you vastly increase the chances of guys on your defense getting hurt. . .

particularly the AARP unit we run out there. . .

IMO, getting our line play figured out has to be a priority, and putting them under the added pressure of working with a greener than grass QB is just gonna make it that much tougher. . . can we figure out how to run for more than two yards per carry and consistently pick up blitzes and stunts before trying to work in tebow as well? it's been more than difficult enough with a vet QB out there. . .

also, the whole "fan pressure" thing means nothing to me. . . and you damn well know it means nothing to mcdaniels, that's been proven conclusively. . . history assures us that 95% of the fans who yell "put tebow in!" the loudest will be the ones crying the loudest when the offense is terrible with him in there. . . you can't base any type of decision on what 'tard fans want (not directed at people in this thread)-- that's not a professional approach, or one that has any hope of succeeding. . . you have to make smart football decisions, not placate fans. . . if we're 2-6 and make tebow the starter, we WILL probably lose 14 games this year, and that sure as shit don't put more butts in the seats. . .

it could also get mcdaniels fired, which i do understand some of you would be thrilled by, but i'm pretty sure it's not an outcome josh is hoping for. . . :D

furthermore, i'm not at all convinced it would be in the best long term interests of the team. . . i think it kind of undermines orton as your starting QB going forward, which i actually think is a bad mistake. . . people can and will argue this point endlessly and without resolution-- i understand that. . . it's JMO-- although i believe it does reflect a lot of the opinions i've heard experssed by pro athletes over the years. . .

orton's the most productive player on the team right now-- i don't see how benching a guy under those circumstances can be received very well by the rest of the vets (on either side of the ball). . . and it's pretty much a vote of no confidence in kyle-- it says we've seen what we need to of you, move over for the future. . . kyle's enough of a pro to handle it, but i do think it undermines his authority and ability to lead the team if you need him again. . . and as well as he's played, and as raw as tim is, i just don't think it's a good move to push orton aside ATM. . . tim hasn't done anything to take kyle's job, and this is a far cry from '06, when plummer was replaced because he was playing like utter garbage. . .

nope. . . far as i'm concerned, let tebow work out of the wild ass formation (and maybe actually throw a pass one of these days), play in mop-up situations (he should have played some of the second half against the fade), or possibly get a start or two at the very end of the year if we can make any progress on the OL. . .

if i thought quarterback play was one of our problems i might feel differently, but not now. . . i'd like to fix some of the things that are WRONG before downgrading one of the few positions that's actually playing well. . . it's not tebow time yet-- we may not be able to wait until we can give him the keys to a ferrari, but i'd at least like to give the guy a reliable honda or something, rather than just expecting him to put the cape on and be the savior before he's even thrown his first NFL pass. . .


People have pointed out that Orton isnt the problem Doggy. Its just a matter of taking a young team and allowing them to take their lumps if the season is pretty much out of reach. Im sorry, the whole "let him sit for a year" is vastly overstated as we've seen Qb's do just fine after starting their first years. (Peyton Manning comes to mind). Either we believe Tebow is the future or we dont. If we are out of the playoff race leaving Orton in is POINTLESS.

[Lonestar]

Absolutely yes. Nothing at all against Orton as he has been great this season but if we lose to the pitiful 49ers to fall to 2-6 this season is over. With a bye week that would be the perfect time to slide Tebow in.

2-6 the season is over wow..

Nothing can say that after the bye they can't win out and finish 10-6 is there other than your defeatist attitude

[dogfish]

People have pointed out that Orton isnt the problem Doggy. Its just a matter of taking a young team and allowing them to take their lumps if the season is pretty much out of reach. Im sorry, the whole "let him sit for a year" is vastly overstated as we've seen Qb's do just fine after starting their first years. (Peyton Manning comes to mind). Either we believe Tebow is the future or we dont. If we are out of the playoff race leaving Orton in is POINTLESS.

are you cool with losing 14 games this year?

[Northman]

2-6 the season is over wow..

Nothing can say that after the bye they can't win out and finish 10-6 is there other than your defeatist attitude

This thread isnt about BTB.

[Northman]

are you cool with losing 14 games this year?

Its not about being cool with it. At this point im not cool with losing 5. Even if Orton is in we may lose 14 games mate. The overall point here is that if the possibility of us being out of the playoffs is there it actually means nothing to have Tebow go in and get some reps. I would rather see what we have in the kid now rather than next year. If Tebow isnt the future, leave Orton in, sign him long term and trade Tebow.

[spikerman]

2-6 the season is over wow..

Nothing can say that after the bye they can't win out and finish 10-6 is there other than your defeatist attitude

Unfortunately, absolutely nothing the Broncos have done this year suggests that scenario is possible.

[dogfish]

People have pointed out that Orton isnt the problem Doggy. Its just a matter of taking a young team and allowing them to take their lumps if the season is pretty much out of reach. Im sorry, the whole "let him sit for a year" is vastly overstated as we've seen Qb's do just fine after starting their first years. (Peyton Manning comes to mind). Either we believe Tebow is the future or we dont. If we are out of the playoff race leaving Orton in is POINTLESS.

also-- by this logic, it's just as pointless to leave champ and dawkins in when we have talented young players sitting behind them as well. . . so do they get benched so we can find out what we have with perrish, syd, cassius, and darcel mcbath? do we bench dan graham for quinn or gronkowski? bench kuper or hochstein for eric olsen?



Its not about being cool with it. At this point im not cool with losing 5. Even if Orton is in we may lose 14 games mate. The overall point here is that if the possibility of us being out of the playoffs is there it actually means nothing to have Tebow go in and get some reps. I would rather see what we have in the kid now rather than next year. If Tebow isnt the future, leave Orton in, sign him long term and trade Tebow.

we aren't under any pressure to sign orton long term, at all, and we most certainly aren't under a bit of pressure to trade tebow if we aren't going to play him immediately. . . his contract's not unreasonable, and there hasn't been a bit of tension between him and orton. . .

[spikerman]

also-- by this logic, it's just as pointless to leave champ and dawkins in when we have talented young players sitting behind them as well. . . so do they get benched so we can find out what we have with perrish, syd, cassius, and darcel mcbath? do we bench dan graham for quinn or gronkowski? bench kuper or hochstein for eric olsen?
Speaking just for me, I would have no problem with that.

[TXBRONC]

IHDK but if it were me I would probably wait until I knew for sure that Denver was eliminated from the playoffs.

[Lonestar]

Unfortunately, absolutely nothing the Broncos have done this year suggests that scenario is possible.

most likey not but last year no one thought SAN would go on a 10 run either.

I can see winning all but the KC away game (only because it is in DEC) IF the OLINE heals up and we get some decent running going.

The defense will keep us from losing games. We have two starters coming back to the Back field and Ayers could be ready almost anytime IIRC that will help a lot.

[Northman]

also-- by this logic, it's just as pointless to leave champ and dawkins in when we have talented young players sitting behind them as well. . . so do they get benched so we can find out what we have with perrish, syd, cassius, and darcel mcbath? do we bench dan graham for quinn or gronkowski? bench kuper or hochstein for eric olsen?

No. And the reason for this is because those guys get far more playing time throughout the year at their respective positions as well as ST's.


we aren't under any pressure to sign orton long term, at all, and we most certainly aren't under a bit of pressure to trade tebow if we aren't going to play him immediately. . . his contract's not unreasonable, and there hasn't been a bit of tension between him and orton. . .

Im not saying their is tension there. My point is that if Orton is playing well there is no reason to even have a 1st rd QB sitting on the bench. Orton is never going to generate the type of trade value that Tebow will and if Orton is playing well i would say we are settled at the QB postion and would rather continue to fix other areas on the team. If your one to believe that Tebow is the future than its imperative to get him some reps and ready for next year. I have no problem with signing Orton longterm if McD believes that is his guy.

[Lonestar]

No. And the reason for this is because those guys get far more playing time throughout the year at their respective positions as well as ST's.



Im not saying their is tension there. My point is that if Orton is playing well there is no reason to even have a 1st rd QB sitting on the bench. Orton is never going to generate the type of trade value that Tebow will and if Orton is playing well i would say we are settled at the QB postion and would rather continue to fix other areas on the team. If your one to believe that Tebow is the future than its imperative to get him some reps and ready for next year. I have no problem with signing Orton longterm if McD believes that is his guy.

Unless Tebow does not develop and there is always a chance of that with any Draft choice he is the future here I do not think anyone will debate that except for Orton. Orton will be happy to play one more year and then become a FA to get a HUGE contract some where else. By then Tebow should be ready to step in and play pattycake with our receivers.

[TXBRONC]

if the broncos had not extended orton's contract i would say yes ,put tebow in.
however the fact that orton will be on the team next year makes me lean more to giving tebow limited time and let him learn the system and ease into a starting role in 2012.
unless there ends up being no season next year....then it's all screwed up no matter what we do.
i also believe that anything can happen in football and orton gives the team the best chance at winning so we need to keep him in down the stretch.....8-8 might win the division !!!:salute:

First of all if you are serious that 8-8 will win the division honestly I doubt it if the Chiefs were not so far ahead you would have could good case.

Also at 2-5 and possibly 2-6 by games end tomorrow it will get awfully hard to make the case that Orton gives us the best chance to win regardless of how well he's been playing.

[BroncoWave]

2-6 the season is over wow..

Nothing can say that after the bye they can't win out and finish 10-6 is there other than your defeatist attitude

No need to get personal bro. We all have our opinions. Until this team actually shows that they are capable of stringing together even 2 victories then I might have a bit more hope for the rest of the season.

[TXBRONC]

No need to get personal bro. We all have our opinions. Until this team actually shows that they are capable of stringing together even 2 victories then I might have a bit more hope for the rest of the season.

Agreed. It would also make feel better about the team if we could beat our division rivals at home.

[BroncoWave]

Agreed. It would also make feel better about the team if we could beat our division rivals at home.

For real. While I haven't given up on McD, he is 0-4 in division home games, with an average margin of defeat of 24 points. That is not even close to acceptable.

[Ravage!!!]

if we go 2-6, I think its absolutely time to consider it. Probably won't, because that would mean that the coach would accept that Orton isn't the guy.

Orton isn't playing "bad" football. But at the same time, he's not winning. That IS what the primary criteria is, right? We've established this before with prior QBs.

But if McD expects to be here next year, he has to either prove to himself that Tebow is the guy, or prove to Bowlen that Tebow is the guy. You don't make a reach for a guy in teh first round like that, and simply sit him on the bench for 2 years. LOTS of rookies start their first year. If he's as good as McD made him out to be by trading so many people to get him, then we have to accept that we have to actually SEE him on the field. Doesn't matter what Orton was signed too. If Tebow can actually play in the NFL, then we might actually get a pick back that we used on Tebow. Either way, we have to admit that Orton is not the guy for the future of this team.

2-6 would mean you would have to win 6 of the next 8 games just to finish 8-8.

I feel confident that we are going to be the lousy Niners... but if we do lose to the LOUSY Niners... then it might be time we just start looking at what we used all the picks to get.

[CHIEFSfanMURDERER]

No, it's not Tebow time. At 2-6, the team can still technically finish at 10-6 or 9-7, which could win the AFC West. Until you get to the 8 loss threshold, there is still incentive to play Orton.

[TXBRONC]

if we go 2-6, I think its absolutely time to consider it. Probably won't, because that would mean that the coach would accept that Orton isn't the guy.

Orton isn't playing "bad" football. But at the same time, he's not winning. That IS what the primary criteria is, right? We've established this before with prior QBs.

But if McD expects to be here next year, he has to either prove to himself that Tebow is the guy, or prove to Bowlen that Tebow is the guy. You don't make a reach for a guy in teh first round like that, and simply sit him on the bench for 2 years. LOTS of rookies start their first year. If he's as good as McD made him out to be by trading so many people to get him, then we have to accept that we have to actually SEE him on the field. Doesn't matter what Orton was signed too. If Tebow can actually play in the NFL, then we might actually get a pick back that we used on Tebow. Either way, we have to admit that Orton is not the guy for the future of this team.

2-6 would mean you would have to win 6 of the next 8 games just to finish 8-8.

I feel confident that we are going to be the lousy Niners... but if we do lose to the LOUSY Niners... then it might be time we just start looking at what we used all the picks to get.

I don't like being pessimistic about the Broncos but I would be lying if I said that I've confident that we'll beat them. Gore is a better running back than McFadden and look what McFadden did to us. If we can't contain Gore and get pressure on whomever is quarterbacking the 49ers tomorrow it could end up being another long day.

[NorCalBronco7]

With Orton playing a near elite level this year and the fact that Tebow is still developing, NO.

[BroncoWave]

With Orton playing a near elite level this year and the fact that Tebow is still developing, NO.

I don't care how elite our QB has been playing, if we lose that would make us 2-6 and when you're 2-6 there's obviously something your QB could be doing better to help the team win. Not to say that Tebow could do those things better right now, but it's not like Orton is currently piling up the victories.

[Shazam!]

I think it's time for TT to go only when it's certain Denver cant make the playoffs. Then it is important we see what he can do and get as much tape on him as we can after the season, lockout or not.

[NorCalBronco7]

IMO, it would be borderline criminal to install tebow as the fulltime starter after the break. . .

what's a rookie quarterback's best friend? the running game. . . with almost every rookie QB you have to be able to lean on the running game, especially with a guy as raw as tim. . . our supposed running game has to be one of the worst in the history of the sport. . .

right now our passing game has accounted for 80-- 80!-- ****ing percent of our total offense! you guys honestly think it's a good idea to throw in a kid that most analysts considered a long term project, and expect him to throw the ball forty or fifty times a game? behind a porous offensive line, against defenses that will know we can't run at all, and just pin back their ears and come after him?

look, tim's a tough dude-- i'm not trying to put a skirt on him, or particularly worried that he'll get hurt or shatter his confidence. . . those things have happened to young quarterbacks, they're all possible, but i wouldn't even sweat that so much. . . but i have to question how you can effectively evaluate him under those conditions. . . and while there's zero question that game experience is invaluable to his development, i am completely convinced there are better ways this year, both for tebow and for the team as a whole. . .

we need to put some kind of functional offensive line in front of him-- announce him as the starter right now, and DC's will be digging so deep in their blitz playbooks they might dislocate a shoulder. . . if learning to get ****in' unloaded on is good experience for tim, then by all means. . . otherwise, i'd say not so much. . . i suspect he would end up spending a lot more time inspecting the turf than getting to read defenses. . . as poorly as walton is playing, put a rookie behind him who's really never taken snaps under center before, we'll probably be fumbling the C-QB exchange all over the field. . .

seriously, we put tebow in right now as the official starter, we ain't gonna move the ball at ALL. . . like, ever. . . and when you have 20 minutes or less TOP per game, not only do you cripple your ability to develop/evaluate your other young players, you vastly increase the chance of guys on your defense getting hurt. . .

particularly the AARP unit we run out there. . .

IMO, getting our line play figured out has to be a priority, and putting them under the added pressure of working with a greener than grass QB is just gonna make it that much tougher. . . can we figure out how to run for more than two yards per carry and consistently pick up blitzes and stunts before trying to work in tebow as well? it's been more than difficult enough with a vet QB out there. . .

also, the whole "fan pressure" thing means nothing to me. . . and you damn well know it means nothing to mcdaniels, that's been proven conclusively. . . history assures us that 95% of the fans who yell "put tebow in!" the loudest will be the ones crying the loudest when the offense is terrible with him in there. . . you can't base any type of decision on what 'tard fans want (not directed at people in this thread)-- that's not a professional approach, or one that has any hope of succeeding. . . you have to make smart football decisions, not placate fans. . . if we're 2-6 and make tebow the starter, we WILL probably lose 14 games this year, and that sure as shit don't put more butts in the seats. . .

it could also get mcdaniels fired, which i do understand some of you would be thrilled by, but i'm pretty sure it's not an outcome josh is hoping for. . . :D

furthermore, i'm not at all convinced it would be in the best long term interests of the team. . . i think it kind of undermines orton as your starting QB going forward, which i actually think is a bad mistake. . . people can and will argue this point endlessly and without resolution-- i understand that. . . it's JMO-- although i believe it does reflect a lot of the opinions i've heard experssed by pro athletes over the years. . .

orton's the most productive player on the team right now-- i don't see how benching a guy under those circumstances can be received very well by the rest of the vets (on either side of the ball). . . and it's pretty much a vote of no confidence in kyle-- it says we've seen what we need to of you, move over for the future. . . kyle's enough of a pro to handle it, but i do think it undermines his authority and ability to lead the team if you need him again. . . and as well as he's played, and as raw as tim is, i just don't think it's a good move to push orton aside ATM. . . tim hasn't done anything to take kyle's job, and this is a far cry from '06, when plummer was replaced because he was playing like utter garbage. . .

nope. . . far as i'm concerned, let tebow work out of the wild ass formation (and maybe actually throw a pass one of these days), play in mop-up situations (he should have played some of the second half against the fade), or possibly get a start or two at the very end of the year if we can make any progress on the OL. . .

if i thought quarterback play was one of our problems i might feel differently, but not now. . . i'd like to fix some of the things that are WRONG before downgrading one of the few positions that's actually playing well. . . it's not tebow time yet-- we may not be able to wait until we can give him the keys to a ferrari, but i'd at least like to give the guy a reliable honda or something, rather than just expecting him to put the cape on and be the savior before he's even thrown his first NFL pass. . .

Damn good post. My thoughts exactly.

:salute:

[NorCalBronco7]

I don't care how elite our QB has been playing, if we lose that would make us 2-6 and when you're 2-6 there's obviously something your QB could be doing better to help the team win. Not to say that Tebow could do those things better right now, but it's not like Orton is currently piling up the victories.

Orton cant run the ball and stop the run, so bench him because he cant do more! :lol:

The Broncos losing record is not Ortons fault.

And if Tebow cant do better, then why have him start?

[Northman]

And if Tebow cant do better, then why have him start?

Your clearly missing the point of the entire thread.

[NorCalBronco7]

Your clearly missing the point of the entire thread.

No its that I beleive the reason in favor of Tebow starting are weak.

[Bosco]

Absolutely not.

[Tned]

Orton cant run the ball and stop the run, so bench him because he cant do more! :lol:

The Broncos losing record is not Ortons fault.

And if Tebow cant do better, then why have him start?

I agree the problems aren't Orton's fault and heis playing at the highest level of his NFL career by FAR. He's playing at a near elite level (near, because he still has accuracy problems, but to do what he's done with no running gave is very impressive).

So, I posed the question not as an indictment of Orton, but instead to say that if we are 2-6 and the playoffs are appearing to slip out of the Broncos grasp, should Tebow be started to gain experience and be evaluated.

I'm torn on the subject. For the most part I feel Tebow should stay on the sieline, and maybe be brought in for a few series in mop up work. However, there is part of me that thinks he should be started or at least have his snaps increase, so he can be evaluated and gain experience.

I think a lot of it goes to whether the Broncos plan to resign Orton again, or just let him play out the contract next year and move on. If they don't see resigning Orton beyond next year, there is a case that can be made for getting Tebow ready.

Now, as Dog has pointed out, the conditions for Tebow gaining experience this year might be all wrong. No running game. Shaky Offensive line.

[PAINTERDAVE]

The reason Tebow was not thrown to the wolves in the raider game Q4...
was that it would have served no purpose.
It would simply have allowed the Raiders more glory...
to be the first to sack him.. the first to intercept him...


If he is put in later in this season to be developed...
he will have a game plan designed for him....
and practice with the starters all week.

Those two scenarios are very different.

Once the team is mathematicly out of it...
it is a golden opportunity.

We wont have any choice, though...

it will be decided by Bowlen and McD.

Lord knows what the future will bring.

"It is a privilige to live in interesting times."

Go broncos... beat the 49's!

[Nomad]

Speaking just for me, I would have no problem with that.

I wouldn't either! If the season is shot and dead, then let the youngsters play and position yourself for the draft, if there is a season next year!! I don't have a problem either because obviously the veterans on the team couldn't get it done and you mineaswell give the youth experience!!!


With this said, the season isn't out reach yet!! After the 9th lose, then you can pretty much pack the season in statistically, because I have never seen a 7-9 team make the playoffs (unless the AFC West is that god awful)!

BRONCOS woke up after this Raiders game:tsk: and now they are about to go on a tear!! 9-7 here we come!!!!

[Dzone]

When Bowlen hoists his 3rd Lombardi trophy, does he say "This one's for Tim!!"? ;)

[TXBRONC]

The reason Tebow was not thrown to the wolves in the raider game Q4...
was that it would have served no purpose.
It would simply have allowed the Raiders more glory...
to be the first to sack him.. the first to intercept him...


If he is put in later in this season to be developed...
he will have a game plan designed for him....
and practice with the starters all week.

Those two scenarios are very different.

Once the team is mathematicly out of it...
it is a golden opportunity.

We wont have any choice, though...

it will be decided by Bowlen and McD.

Lord knows what the future will bring.

"It is a privilige to live in interesting times."

Go broncos... beat the 49's!

I disagree that wouldn't have served a purpose. It would have given him valuable game experience. A rookie quarterback getting experience in mop up duty of a game gone wrong isn't really anything for the Raiders to brag about even if the experience go badly. The idea wouldn't be to bring him to try and pull the game out of the fire it would be run the regular offense and see what he could do with it.

[Nomad]

I disagree that wouldn't have served a purpose. It would have given him valuable game experience. A rookie quarterback getting experience in mop up duty of a game gone wrong isn't really anything for the Raiders to brag about even if the experience go badly. The idea wouldn't be to bring him to try and pull the game out of the fire it would be run the regular offense and see what he could do with it.

Yeah, you're spot on! It wouldn't have hurt to throw Tebow in there to see what he could have done against a team on fire unless McDaniels has no faith in him!!:ponder: I don't believe anyone thought he could come in and bring us back and it wasn't like McDaniels would have been naming him the starter for the rest of the season!

Today is going to be a fun game for BRONCOS fans, TX, I'm remaining optimistic for a big win!!! Not like the last Halloween nightmare game the BRONCOS experienced and his name was Michael Vick!!;) Tebow will get some late 4th quarter action!!!

[Mike]

Yes, if Denver loses today, then I think they should start Tebow coming back from the bye.

[nevcraw]

I disagree that wouldn't have served a purpose. It would have given him valuable game experience. A rookie quarterback getting experience in mop up duty of a game gone wrong isn't really anything for the Raiders to brag about even if the experience go badly. The idea wouldn't be to bring him to try and pull the game out of the fire it would be run the regular offense and see what he could do with it.

Exactly --
if he's selected as the back-up on game day he should be ready play.. or that's what conventional wisdom would suggest.

[Ravage!!!]

The problem with the idea of putting him ONLY in mop up games this year, is we don't have any.

I feel if he was drafted to be the QB of the future, then in reality if we lose today, the "future" starts next week. No better time than the present.

[Krugan]

I would say it would be more along the lines of what everyone else in the west does the next 2 weeks.

It is quite possible at 2-6 we would still be only 3 games out of the west with 8 left.

Is it safe to go ahead and toss the white flag with HALF a season left?

That being said there is a part of me that wants to see the kid play, just to know if he looks like he might have it. If not, that top 5 draft pick could go to looking at a real top end QB.

[Northman]

No its that I beleive the reason in favor of Tebow starting are weak.

The reason for starting Tebow has nothing to do with Orton's play which is what you were eluding too.

[LordTrychon]

Not till after we are mathematically eliminated.

We can't have the coaching staff giving up on the season. That's not what they're paid for.

I don't believe Orton is the problem, so starting Tebow is not the solution.

[NorCalBronco7]

The reason for starting Tebow has nothing to do with Orton's play which is what you were eluding too.

Huh?

Then its terrible reason to start Tebow.

McDaniels isnt going to start Tebow if Orton is playing great. Its just not going to happen.

[Northman]

Huh?

Then its terrible reason to start Tebow.

McDaniels isnt going to start Tebow if Orton is playing great. Its just not going to happen.


Wow, if i really have to break it down for you than its just not worth my time. Holy ******* shit. Its not rocket science here. :lol:

[frauschieze]

Welp....it might be Tebow time....

:shocked:

[NorCalBronco7]

Wow, if i really have to break it down for you than its just not worth my time. Holy ******* shit. Its not rocket science here. :lol:

No its weak reasoning.

Experinence is the only somewhat valid reason for making Tebow the starter. But unless Tebow is going to become the future starter, meaning next year as well, then hes not going to start. The Broncos wont throw in Tebow this year and make Orton the opening day starter next year.

But since Orton just got ****** up, Tebow will get his chance now! lol

There. You win.


:lol:

[frauschieze]

Or maybe not!

[NorCalBronco7]

Or maybe not!

Who am I to doubt the mighty neckbeard!