PDA

View Full Version : Orton on Vikings Radar



LTC Pain
05-20-2011, 09:41 AM
According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, the Vikings have Orton on there radar to bring along Chris Ponder.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/kyle_orton_is_on_the_vikings_radar/4763305

MileHighCrew
05-20-2011, 09:47 AM
Because he is such a strong mentor!!!!

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 10:05 AM
i think kyle would do very well with the vikes,they have a helluva run game and he might be just what the doctor ordered for a team that needs a qb that takes care of the ball (see favre's int's at critical points in games)
also he may be more apt to be a mentor if a team actually pursued him rather than being thrown in as a garnish in a trade:D

underrated29
05-20-2011, 10:07 AM
The vikes have a legitimate shot at a superbowl run with Orton. Without they do not.


Ponder is fine but he is not ready polished to win the big dance. It just wont happen.

BORDERLINE
05-20-2011, 10:08 AM
Kyle needs a superb running game and the vikes can provide that. There defense just isn't the same as it was 2 yrs ago.

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 10:11 AM
The vikes have a legitimate shot at a superbowl run with Orton. Without they do not.


Ponder is fine but he is not ready polished to win the big dance. It just wont happen.

would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

SOCALORADO.
05-20-2011, 10:18 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

NO. MIN is ready to win now. They have all the pieces in place.....except at QB, and they just need a caretaker, who can throw it up for grabs and let the WRs go get it. They are literally overloaded on offense, and now have yet another security blanket in Rudolph at TE, if he is healthy.
But, no i dont think anyone would attibute their success to Orton. It would be to the rest of the star-studded line up they already have.

I made mention of this a while ago, and i think Orton might just end up there.
What would really be great is watching Orton on a legit team, with superstars everywhere beating up on lil baby jay twice a year.
I dont believe in karma, but man....

Also, Ponder is no where near ready to play for that team.
Orton would give them a year or 2 to get him ready.
And if MIN thinks they could just plug and play Orton, DEN could get a 2nd for him. Theres other teams looking at Orton, and it might be worth it to MIN if they think there wouldnt be any major hurdles for Orton as a game manager.

claymore
05-20-2011, 10:21 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

It would be more like watching Dilfer win a SB. No one thought they were there because of him.

underrated29
05-20-2011, 10:25 AM
I agree with socal. I do not think anyone would think that...ehrm, let me rephraze I do not think any sane person would think that. I know hard core ortonites would and other ill informed fans.

But as he said, our two teams are completely different. They need 1 piece. A QB to have a shot at the SB....we need a ton of pieces to even make the playoffs. Plus when it is all said and done I am still willing to bet that TT wins a trophy before Orton does...

What I mean by that is even with Orton I dont think the vikes are the best in the league, and after a year or two Kyle will be a backup there or traded to another team that needs a QB- probably not as talented as the vikings. All the while the broncos and TT continue to get better and better.

MileHighCrew
05-20-2011, 10:28 AM
I agree with socal. I do not think anyone would think that...ehrm, let me rephraze I do not think any sane person would think that. I know hard core ortonites would and other ill informed fans.

But as he said, our two teams are completely different. They need 1 piece. A QB to have a shot at the SB....we need a ton of pieces to even make the playoffs. Plus when it is all said and done I am still willing to bet that TT wins a trophy before Orton does...

What I mean by that is even with Orton I dont think the vikes are the best in the league, and after a year or two Kyle will be a backup there or traded to another team that needs a QB- probably not as talented as the vikings. All the while the broncos and TT continue to get better and better.

The Broncos would be better by just getting rid of Orton, addition by subtraction.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 10:33 AM
Kyle needs EVERYTHING in place to have great success, and Vikings fit that bill. They don't need Kyle to be a playmaker, they don't need Kyle to be exciting and carry the team. They just need him to not turn over the ball. Thats what he's good at.. safe passes and not turning over the ball.

He, is like Johnson was in Tampa. Don't ask him to win you a game, just ask him not to lose it and let the team around you do the hard stuff. Thats perfect for Kyle.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 10:33 AM
i think kyle would do very well with the vikes,they have a helluva run game and he might be just what the doctor ordered for a team that needs a qb that takes care of the ball (see favre's int's at critical points in games)
also he may be more apt to be a mentor if a team actually pursued him rather than being thrown in as a garnish in a trade:D


The vikes have a legitimate shot at a superbowl run with Orton. Without they do not.


Ponder is fine but he is not ready polished to win the big dance. It just wont happen.

I don't believe Kyle is interested in being a "mentor," a replacement piece for a
rookie to develop and take over for him. Why would he be? That would seem
to me a loser's attitude. Kyle isn't a 37-year-old Mark Bulger who is wondering
whether he would be better as a coach or in the announcer's booth. He is in
the prime of his career. He has proven himself one of the better passers in the
league, and he has produced solid seasons, even in the face of pathetic
supporting casts and severe injuries.

Orton is a franchise QB in the making, IMO. Sure, he needs a decent running
game and a respectable defense. As I showed in an earlier thread (http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1259876&postcount=155), even the
best who ever played needs a half-way decent running game and defense to
have a chance at a championship.

I can see why the Vikes would want an Orton at the controls. With Rodgers,
Cutler, and Stafford in the same Division, they are at a distinct disadvantage
at QB. Orton would solve their problem there, IMO.

Would they go to the playoffs? Well, again, Chicago and Green Bay are in
there with them, and Detroit is making a lot of noise. It may be shaping up as
the strongest Division in the league. (Pity the poor AFC Division who has to
play them this year.) But one thing is clear: The Vikes need a very good QB if
they are going to compete. So, whether the Broncos would or would not be
willing to give Orton up, I expect the Vikes to make a run at him - probably
crossing swords with the Cardinals.

We'll see . . .

-----

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 10:33 AM
It would be more like watching Dilfer win a SB. No one thought they were there because of him.

i dont know about that min has a "high octane" offense and i think Orton would probably have over 4000 yds passing and a good TD/int ratio.
if he moved the chains effectively and let AD punch it in when he got in trouble (red zone)
if they get to and win a SB , after trying for 2 years with Favre.....
he would have to get a fair share of the credit:salute:

claymore
05-20-2011, 10:35 AM
At this point we should just realease Orton and be happy he's gone.

claymore
05-20-2011, 10:36 AM
i dont know about that min has a "high octane" offense and i think Orton would probably have over 4000 yds passing and a good TD/int ratio.
if he moved the chains effectively and let AD punch it in when he got in trouble (red zone)
if they get to and win a SB , after trying for 2 years with Favre.....
he would have to get a fair share of the credit:salute:

The second Orton is inserted as the starter in Min the Opposing Defense can stack the box against Peterson.

Whoever signs Norton, will see their run game suffer.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 10:37 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

No they wouldn't. No one thinks teams were dumb for getting rid of Dilfer, or Brad Johnson, or Mark Rypien, or Doug Williams. All QBs that won Super Bowls and none were very good. Kyle would be just another in that list.

The: "They Won Despite the QB" .. list

turftoad
05-20-2011, 10:38 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

Um.... there is only ONE McDumbass. :listen:

topscribe
05-20-2011, 10:41 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

Especially while leaving behind a QB who reputedly has issues playing under
center and with accuracy in passing.

All I can say is, the Broncos had better make damn sure before they pull the plug . . .

-----

topscribe
05-20-2011, 10:42 AM
The second Orton is inserted as the starter in Min the Opposing Defense can stack the box against Peterson.

Whoever signs Norton, will see their run game suffer.

For Minnesota's sake, I hope they do. I would like for them to stack the box
against the QB who was on pace for 4,500 yards passing and a 96.0 passer
rating before he was injured.

Yup, I'd surely like to see that . . . :coffee:

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 10:43 AM
:lol:

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 10:50 AM
would'nt that just BLOW !:laugh:
to watch Orton hoist a lombardi for MN.....everyone would be saying what a mcdumbass Fox was for trading him:lol:

I wouldn't be mad at Fox if that happened.

Nomad
05-20-2011, 10:56 AM
The second Orton is inserted as the starter in Min the Opposing Defense can stack the box against Peterson.

Whoever signs Norton, will see their run game suffer.

I'm sure the Bears, Lions, and Packers defenses would look forward to adding to their sack totals......Orton better find some get-a-way speed.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 10:59 AM
I'm sure the Bears, Lions, and Packers defenses would look forward to adding to their sack totals......Orton better find some get-a-way speed.

I think the chances of that happening are very slim.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:01 AM
I think the chances of that happening are very slim.

especially on his glass ankles.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:03 AM
especially on his glass ankles.

And sore ribs.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:06 AM
And sore ribs.

at least we know there will always be an excuse available.

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 11:06 AM
32nd ranked :defense:
:shocked:

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:07 AM
32nd ranked :defense:
:shocked:

The Vikings?

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:11 AM
I'm sure the Bears, Lions, and Packers defenses would look forward to adding to their sack totals......Orton better find some get-a-way speed.

It should not be hard to recall that the Broncos' O-line just flat blew, especially
earlier in the season, and it is with that line Orton put up his numbers. Yes, the
NFC North teams do possess better pass rushes, but the Vikings have a better
O-line than the Broncos did, too.

So the point is that Orton has been there, done that, and he knows how to do
it against strong pass rushes. I don't think that will escape the teams who might
want him, at least as much as it escapes some of us . . .

-----

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:18 AM
Kyle Orton is on the Vikings’ radar
May20
2011 Leave a Comment Written by Paul Jackiewicz


He is a good starting quarterback that can buy a team some time before they either obtain a franchise quarterback or are looking to mold one.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/kyle_orton_is_on_the_vikings_radar/4763305

This sums up pretty well how I view Orton.

claymore
05-20-2011, 11:25 AM
For Minnesota's sake, I hope they do. I would like for them to stack the box
against the QB who was on pace for 4,500 yards passing and a 96.0 passer
rating before he was injured.

Yup, I'd surely like to see that . . . :coffee:

-----

He was also benched. For a rookie.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:28 AM
32nd ranked :defense:
:shocked:

Having the 32nd ranked defense doesn't have anything to do with Orton staying healthy.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:40 AM
He was also benched. For a rookie.

So what does that have to do with how defenses will play him? Wasn't that the
issue to which I responded?

He also was on on pace for 4,500 yards passing and a 96.0 passer rating before
he was injured.

I think defenses will be more concerned about that when they line up against
Orton than whether he was able to play toward the end of the season because
of injury . . .

-----

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:40 AM
Having the 32nd ranked defense doesn't have anything to do with Orton staying healthy.

Actually, I'm having trouble with the relevance of any of your responses in this
thread, much less their substance . . .

-----

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 11:43 AM
I had a dream that I was playing the SAM for the Denver Broncos. Isn't that weird? What do you guys think of all of that?

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:43 AM
Actually, I'm having trouble with the relevance of any of your responses in this
thread, much less their substance . . .

-----

Your flaming is unnecessary.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:44 AM
I had a dream that I was playing the SAM for the Denver Broncos. Isn't that weird? What do you guys think of all of that?

Well, Denver just this year drafted a guy who will be replacing you . . .

-----

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 11:44 AM
Actually, I'm having trouble with the relevance of any of your responses in this
thread, much less their substance . . .

-----

actually, I'm having trouble accepting the fact that someone like you exists

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:48 AM
Your flaming is unnecessary.

Call it flaming if you want. I was only observing. Sore ribs? How you view Orton?
Who cares? Tell us WHY that's how you view Orton.

The way I figure, no one is interested in HOW I view Orton. WHY I feel that
way is more substantive. And I have tried to document it.

I did not intend it as an insult. As I said, it was just an observation . . .

-----

LTC Pain
05-20-2011, 11:48 AM
I hope the Broncos can get a 2nd round pick or Toby Gerhart from the Vikes for Orton!

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:49 AM
actually, I'm having trouble accepting the fact that someone like you exists

It turns me on when you say things like that, Nut . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:51 AM
Actually, I'm having trouble with the relevance of any of your responses in this
thread, much less their substance . . .

-----

Someone is getting overly defensive and combative

TKO's comment had nothing to do with the thread, nor the topic. The thread is about Orton. His name is actually in the thread title.

TX is right, TKO's post had nothing to do with the thread nor the topic on hand. The 32nd ranked defense has NOTHING to do with Orton in Minn, and certainly has nothing to do with Orton's in ability to move in the pocket, make first downs, score TDs, or generally make plays in important moments.

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 11:51 AM
Having the 32nd ranked defense doesn't have anything to do with Orton staying healthy.

maybe not unless the coaches realize....with a crap D ,you might as well see what you have in a rook...since the season was OVER at that point:confused:

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:55 AM
Call it flaming if you want. I was only observing. Sore ribs? How you view Orton?
Who cares? Tell us WHY that's how you view Orton. The way I figure, no one
is interested in HOW I view Orton. WHY I feel that way is more substantive. And
I have tried to document it.

I did not intend it as an insult. As I said, it was just an observation . . .

-----

Right. I don't tell you what to post or how to post. If you don't like say take it up with the moderators ok?

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:56 AM
maybe not unless the coaches realize....with a crap D ,you might as well see what you have in a rook...since the season was OVER at that point:confused:

Especially in that second KC game. As I mentioned before, my friends and I all
were noting how the ball wasn't coming off Kyle's hand like before. Something
was wrong.

What amazes me is why the coaches did not see that. At that point, Denver did
not have a chance with Kyle at the controls. Plus, they were taking a chance
of injuring him further. They needed to get him out of there.

No wonder Studesville wasn't invited back . . . :tsk:

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:56 AM
Hell yeah it was over. Kyle led us to 3 whopping wins.

Minnesota is a perfect place for Kyle. He won't be asked to win games, just not lose them. Thats what he needs.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 11:57 AM
Right. I don't tell you what to post or how to post. If you don't like say take it up with the moderators ok?

I apologize. I should have remembered you don't seem to take advice well.

I should not have said anything. You won't hear anything more from me about it . . .

-----

jhns
05-20-2011, 11:57 AM
maybe not unless the coaches realize....with a crap D ,you might as well see what you have in a rook...since the season was OVER at that point:confused:

That rationale would make sense if it wasn't for Ortons performance the week before getting benched. Stud made it clear that Orton was the starter before that horrible performance and then suddenly changed his mind.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:58 AM
I apologize. I should have remembered you don't take advice well.

You won't hear anything more from me about it . . .

-----

:lol: YOu think you were giving advice?

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:58 AM
maybe not unless the coaches realize....with a crap D ,you might as well see what you have in a rook...since the season was OVER at that point:confused:

All I'm saying is Denver having the 32nd ranked defense isn't what caused Orton to have sore ribs.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 11:59 AM
I apologize. I should have remembered you don't seem to take advice well.

I should not have said anything. You won't hear anything more from me about it . . .

-----

Pot meet kettle.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:01 PM
All I'm saying is Denver having the 32nd ranked defense isn't what caused Orton to have sore ribs.

No, it was a linebacker piling into him at full speed as Orton had his arms raised,
which quarterbacks often do because they pass the ball. I don't think anyone,
who considers it rationally, would hold that against Orton. That would bruise
anyone's ribs . . .

But having the 32nd ranked defense has a lot to do with the W-L record, which
many on this board are holding over Orton's head . . .

-----

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:02 PM
Pot meet kettle.

Fair enough.

Can we go on now, or are our bladders not yet empty?

-----

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 12:03 PM
All I'm saying is Denver having the 32nd ranked defense isn't what caused Orton to have sore ribs.

i agree ,but i would bet if we had been 8-5 with a shot at the playoffs.....tebow would have seen about 6-8 plays in the final 3 games.
the decision was easy....your out of the hunt,lets see what we have (and get some game film) in tebow.
it was as much a reflection of record and the team as a whole as it was on Orton alone.

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 12:03 PM
I'm with TXBRONC on this argument simply because Top Sucks

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 12:03 PM
but always has to get the last word in :lol:

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 12:04 PM
Fair enough.

Can we go on now, or are our bladders not yet empty?

-----


Please feel free to leave. :wave:

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:04 PM
I'm with TXBRONC on this argument simply because Top Sucks

Nut, shut up and go make me a sandwich . . .

-----

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:05 PM
Please feel free to leave. :wave:

Wow, TX, you're on a roll today, aren't you?

Well, have a nice day. :)

-----

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 12:07 PM
Wow, TX, you're on a roll today, aren't you?

Well, have a nice day. :)

-----

The same to you have a great day. :beer:

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 12:08 PM
last word^

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:09 PM
i agree ,but i would bet if we had been 8-5 with a shot at the playoffs.....tebow would have seen about 6-8 plays in the final 3 games.
the decision was easy....your out of the hunt,lets see what we have (and get some game film) in tebow.
it was as much a reflection of record and the team as a whole as it was on Orton alone.

Nah, TKO, Orton was done. In succeeding pressers, the media kept asking
Studesville about Orton, and Studesville kept telling them Orton wasn't ready to
go, and he didn't know when Orton would be. The injury was a lot more serious
than what they let on, obviously.

No, even if the record was 8-5, Orton was through for the season, as it
appeared to me . . .

-----

SOCALORADO.
05-20-2011, 12:13 PM
Nah, TKO, Orton was done. In succeeding pressers, the media kept asking
Studesville about Orton, and Studesville kept telling them Orton wasn't ready to
go, and he didn't know when Orton would be. The injury was a lot more serious
than what they let on, obviously.

No, even if the record was 8-5, Orton was through for the season, as it
appeared to me . . .

-----

http://hockeytownusa.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/brick-loud-noises-b-1.jpg?w=550&h=289

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 12:13 PM
last word^

Agreed. Go Broncos!

LawDog
05-20-2011, 12:29 PM
Top, I've often been baffled by your support for Orton. At first, I assumed you were wearing the devil's advocate hat and defending the guy against attacks because he wears the orange and blue and we should always back our guy. But then you make some weird assertions that really make me scratch my head. For instance, your comment up thread that you see Orton on his way to being a "franchise" QB. Granted, Kyle has skills. He is, as you state, one of the better passers (but that can mean anywhere in the top 50 percent of the QBs in the league). However, I don't see him ever being the face of a franchise, the locker room leader, the guy who inspires the troops to give that extra effort in a close game, etc., that are the attributes of someone who is a franchise quarterback. The term, to me, means a QB around whom you build your offense. That's just not Kyle Orton. He's a good quarterback. He's not now nor ever will be a "franchise" QB.

That's why a team like Minn is interested in him. They have a complete offense (except for QB) that is built to operate a certain way. They've drafted a kid who has the potential to be pretty good - at least in their minds - down the road. They need a guy to come in and drive the car without crashing it for the next couple of years so the existing talent isn't wasted while Ponder is developing. They don't need a franchise QB to come in and they are not looking for one in Orton, if in fact they are actually looking at him.

That's all I've got for today - gotta get back to breaking off the bad guys... Great weekend everyone.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 12:49 PM
Top, I've often been baffled by your support for Orton. At first, I assumed you were wearing the devil's advocate hat and defending the guy against attacks because he wears the orange and blue and we should always back our guy. But then you make some weird assertions that really make me scratch my head. For instance, your comment up thread that you see Orton on his way to being a "franchise" QB. Granted, Kyle has skills. He is, as you state, one of the better passers (but that can mean anywhere in the top 50 percent of the QBs in the league). However, I don't see him ever being the face of a franchise, the locker room leader, the guy who inspires the troops to give that extra effort in a close game, etc., that are the attributes of someone who is a franchise quarterback. The term, to me, means a QB around whom you build your offense. That's just not Kyle Orton. He's a good quarterback. He's not now nor ever will be a "franchise" QB.

That's why a team like Minn is interested in him. They have a complete offense (except for QB) that is built to operate a certain way. They've drafted a kid who has the potential to be pretty good - at least in their minds - down the road. They need a guy to come in and drive the car without crashing it for the next couple of years so the existing talent isn't wasted while Ponder is developing. They don't need a franchise QB to come in and they are not looking for one in Orton, if in fact they are actually looking at him.

That's all I've got for today - gotta get back to breaking off the bad guys... Great weekend everyone.

You may be right. I may be wrong. It's only opinion. You don't view him as a
Franchise QB, and I see that potential in him.

But I don't believe the Vikings are so sure as you are about Ponder. They
have high hopes, yes, but Ponder has not played a down in the NFL. So,
reportedly, they would like to bring Kyle in. What would they bring him in for?
To play at the QB position. Period. Do you think it would bother them if Kyle
ended up as the Franchise?

The Vikings have a hot young candidate at QB. That's all they have right now,
and they know it, whether we all-knowing fans know it or not.

But all I know is that Orton played lights out last year when he was healthy,
and that was with a porous O-line and without a running game or a good
pass-catching TE, and with one exceptional receiver (and a pretty good
pedestrian one in Gaffney).

So can he play even better with a respectable running game and a halfway
decent O-line? Why couldn't he? Could any of us do better at our jobs if we
are given advantages and improvements to make them easier?

Orton is the object of a whole lot of shallow thinking. As lay fans, many of us
have just viewed him and what he has (and hasn't) done. Any mention of
relevant surrounding factors are viewed as "excuses." I don't view them that
way. I look at cause and effect. I try to look beyond the surface and ask
WHY did this or that happen, or not?

That is why I see more in Orton than many here do. Because I try to take all
the factors into consideration.

I have always viewed you as one of the better analysts among us. For that
reason, I am quite surprised you cannot seem to see the basis of my
reasoning . . .

-----

underrated29
05-20-2011, 01:22 PM
Top- I cant agree with anything you just said there. I can respect your opinion, but I also try to look at all the facts.

And no where in any of it do I see hope for Kyle being a franchise QB.


The vikings have the same thing in ponder that they would in Kyle. Kyle has nothing, imo on any of our past QBs. Jay is better than him in all aspects, but jay is a franchise QB. Jake plummer while not as good at protecting the ball..I.E....interceptions- is also better in almost everyway over Kyle.

The common aspect that both Jay and Jake had over Kyle- is the ability to win games. The ability to close them out and the ability to come from behind in a consistent basis. All of them throw the ball fine. All of them can play within their system fine. All of them had to deal with a bad line or bad RBs or bad defense or bad WRs or anything else.

And as much as what Kyle was on pace for and as bad as the OL was last year--and defense-No one would rather have him over the other guys.

Jay went for 1sts
Jake (even though retired) was sold for his rights with a 7th rdr
Kyle-after his best season and hottest he has ever been- is going to be lucky to bring us a 2nd and more than likely a 3rd and 5th. And that is in a market that is STARVED for QBs right now.

Kyle and Kolb are the only young guns available that are decent. Mcnabb, is old, VY is nuts, palmer is retiring, Derek Anderson sucks, Matt Leinhardt is even worse and I do not know who else is out there.



Kyle is a good QB and can do well here. But I do not and have not seen anything ever from his play to lead me to believe that he can be a franchise QB..and keep in mind that his best year was in the Most QB friendly system ever developed. Only us and the Pats use it. The rams might now be- as josh went there. But once he hits a scheme that is not QB friendly, his numbers will come back down to slightly above average me thinks. (despite having a real shot at winning a SB in Minny)

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 01:24 PM
I have taken all the factors into account, and Orton is still very very ordinary, and ordinary does not = franchise QB. It = placeholder.

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 01:26 PM
i have to agree with Ravage there. Not because I've been swinging from his nutsack lately (love that terminology), but because I completely agree. Orton IS Ortonary

topscribe
05-20-2011, 01:32 PM
Top- I cant agree with anything you just said there. I can respect your opinion, but I also try to look at all the facts.

And no where in any of it do I see hope for Kyle being a franchise QB.


The vikings have the same thing in ponder that they would in Kyle. Kyle has nothing, imo on any of our past QBs. Jay is better than him in all aspects, but jay is a franchise QB. Jake plummer while not as good at protecting the ball..I.E....interceptions- is also better in almost everyway over Kyle.

The common aspect that both Jay and Jake had over Kyle- is the ability to win games. The ability to close them out and the ability to come from behind in a consistent basis. All of them throw the ball fine. All of them can play within their system fine. All of them had to deal with a bad line or bad RBs or bad defense or bad WRs or anything else.

And as much as what Kyle was on pace for and as bad as the OL was last year--and defense-No one would rather have him over the other guys.

Jay went for 1sts
Jake (even though retired) was sold for his rights with a 7th rdr
Kyle-after his best season and hottest he has ever been- is going to be lucky to bring us a 2nd and more than likely a 3rd and 5th. And that is in a market that is STARVED for QBs right now.

Kyle and Kolb are the only young guns available that are decent. Mcnabb, is old, VY is nuts, palmer is retiring, Derek Anderson sucks, Matt Leinhardt is even worse and I do not know who else is out there.



Kyle is a good QB and can do well here. But I do not and have not seen anything ever from his play to lead me to believe that he can be a franchise QB..and keep in mind that his best year was in the Most QB friendly system ever developed. Only us and the Pats use it. The rams might now be- as josh went there. But once he hits a scheme that is not QB friendly, his numbers will come back down to slightly above average me thinks. (despite having a real shot at winning a SB in Minny)

Well, I may be wrong. After all, it's only an opinion.

But when you talk about a QB friendly system, that would be assuming a
decent supporting cast was in place. When you consider, as I mentioned, a
porous O-line, a last-place running game and a last-place defense, and subpar
receiving TEs, I would hardly call that QB friendly. Kyle was the offense.

As I also mentioned, we have never seen him play without injuries and/or a
supporting cast that blows on both sides of the ball. I would just like to see
how he performs under more "normal" circumstances. I don't mean an all-world
RB and/or defense. Just playing healthy and even just a middle of the pack
supporting cast, at least in one place or another on the team.

Then I will make a final judgment on what I think of Kyle Orton . . .

P.S. I was a fan of Plummer's and remain a fan of Cutler's. But I'm not a big
fan of comparing QBs who played under different systems with different teams.

-----

topscribe
05-20-2011, 01:35 PM
i have to agree with Ravage there. Not because I've been swinging from his nutsack lately (love that terminology), but because I completely agree. Orton IS Ortonary

I can't read Ravage's comments, but I believe that, while that monicker is
clever, I guess, it hardly constitutes a very deep analysis . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 01:36 PM
i have to agree with Ravage there. Not because I've been swinging from his nutsack lately (love that terminology), but because I completely agree. Orton IS Ortonary

I think ANY QB can "win" if they have a great running game, an outstanding receiving corp, a fantastic OL, and a dominating defense! With everything in place then they can win. Franchise, or stud QBs, don't need to have EVERYTHING in place. Thats the point and why some QBs are always contenders and why others have only had 1-2 good seasons. They need things be perfectly in line to give them EVERY advantage possible to have success.

Hard to call a guy a "franchise QB in the making" after 7 years in the NFL and still no one thinks of him as anything other than a guy to hold the reigns while "the young kid learns." That doesn't spell someone that is thought of as a top QB.

slim
05-20-2011, 01:37 PM
I am going to need someone to define "franchise QB".

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 01:37 PM
I can't read Ravage's comments, but I believe that, while that monicker is
clever, I guess, it hardly constitutes a very deep analysis . . .

-----

well Top, the skillset of Orton doesn't really require a deep analysis. For some reason you keep diggin away on this, and koodos to you, but I think you are wasting your time.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 01:37 PM
I am going to need someone to define "franchise QB".

I'm still waiting for the definition of "average" . . . :coffee:

-----

chazoe60
05-20-2011, 01:38 PM
The Problem is Orton's biggest struggles are all the times when real franchise QBs excel RZ, 3rd down, end of close games. He sucks in those areas, the stats and the eyeball test show it, IMHO.

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 01:38 PM
I am going to need someone to define "franchise QB".

no shit. I've asked that before to no avail.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 01:38 PM
well Top, the skillset of Orton doesn't really require a deep analysis. For some reason you keep diggin away on this, and koodos to you, but I think you are wasting your time.

Okay, so what skills within Orton's skillset underwhelm you?

Be specific . . .

-----

BroncoNut
05-20-2011, 01:45 PM
Okay, so what skills within Orton's skillset underwhelm you?

Be specific . . .

-----

overall a very mediocre athlete in the arena of the NFL, He is mediocre in almost all areas. i don't see anywhere where he is particularly strong; again, in this arena. he just does not stand out Top. Believe me, I like my dark horses, but I really wonder why it is you like him so much. What is it you see!

topscribe
05-20-2011, 01:57 PM
overall a very mediocre athlete in the arena of the NFL, He is mediocre in almost all areas. i don't see anywhere where he is particularly strong; again, in this arena. he just does not stand out Top. Believe me, I like my dark horses, but I really wonder why it is you like him so much. What is it you see!

Might help if you start reading my posts. A little late though, as I'm about
through. But "mediocre in almost all areas" is not very specific.

It seems I have provided more documentation on Orton than just about
everyone else put together. And people such as Ravage (whom you cited,
which is why I named him) like to go on their own authority. Fine. If that's what
they want to do, but, try as they might, they will not change the facts by
attempting to assert their own.

Anyway, as I have mentioned many times, Orton was on a pace for 4,500
yards and had a 96.0 QBR until his injuries last season. As John Elway said,
Orton was "playing at a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level, and then there were
those rib injuries." That is far from mediocre.

To add to Orton's accomplishment was that he was playing with the last-place
running game, a porous O-line, and subpar receiving TEs.

Now, I never said anything here about Orton except what actually took place.
I only repeated the facts. That is all I have done all along. When I had an
opinion, I qualified it as an opinion and often added, "I may be wrong."

Now, you tell me where I am so damned unreasonable, as opposed to those
others whose analyses amount to "duh, he sucks."

Fine. I stand virtually alone. Maybe it can be said then, that I "got balls."

-----

robert ethan
05-20-2011, 01:57 PM
Orton is hugely underrated. He finished last season with the 10th highest passing yardage total in the league. Despite missing the final three games. His passer rating was in the top half of the league's starting quarterbacks on a team with NO RUNNING GAME, a dysfunctional offensive line, journeymen waiver wire receivers, and an all time awful defense. The guy should have been given the keys to the frigging city never mind a ticket out of town. As a rookie on a pretty good Chicago Bears team, Orton won 10 games, which I think was the second highest total ever for a rookie, and led them to the playoffs. So he definitely showed he can win with a strong supporting cast.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 02:01 PM
The Problem is Orton's biggest struggles are all the times when real franchise QBs excel RZ, 3rd down, end of close games. He sucks in those areas, the stats and the eyeball test show it, IMHO.

I agree. Orton needs a lot of improvement in those areas. I'm not sure just how
much improving the running game and adding a decent pass-catching TE will
help, but I am sure it will help to a degree. Then, after that happens, we will be
able to see just how much Orton himself needs to improve in those areas . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 02:08 PM
The Problem is Orton's biggest struggles are all the times when real franchise QBs excel RZ, 3rd down, end of close games. He sucks in those areas, the stats and the eyeball test show it, IMHO.

You can give 10 stats in how poorly he plays in the most important parts of the game, and it still will come back to "but his ribs hurt."

jhns
05-20-2011, 02:13 PM
To add to Orton's accomplishment was that he was playing with the last-place
running game

Now, I never said anything here about Orton except what actually took place.
I only repeated the facts.


LOL ???

One of the three "facts" you used in a post, claiming that you only used facts, is completely wrong.

You can keep claiming that we can't judge Orton because of injuries until the end of time. It is a wonderful excuse and Orton is always injured...

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 02:17 PM
You can give 10 stats in how poorly he plays in the most important parts of the game, and it still will come back to "but his ribs hurt."

It's weak sauce. He's ok but he's no play maker. When you have as many chance to tie or take a lead in games and come up short on most of them you can't blame it all on ankles, ribs, fingers or any other excuse that might be convenient

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 02:19 PM
LOL ???

One of the three "facts" you used in a post, claiming that you only used facts, is completely wrong.

You can keep claiming that we can't judge Orton because of injuriez until the end of time. It is a wonderful excuse and Orton is always injured...

Adversity is part of game. Players either overcome it and succeed or they don't.

BroncoStud
05-20-2011, 02:19 PM
Because he is such a strong mentor!!!!

No kidding. That would be like asking John Wayne Gacy to babysit your son. :elefant:

BroncoStud
05-20-2011, 02:21 PM
LOL ???

One of the three "facts" you used in a post, claiming that you only used facts, is completely wrong.

You can keep claiming that we can't judge Orton because of injuriez until the end of time. It is a wonderful excuse and Orton is always injured...

Didn't you get that memo, Kyle Orton is the ONLY NFL athlete that gets banged up during a 16 game season... :rolleyes:

topscribe
05-20-2011, 02:22 PM
Didn't you get that memo, Kyle Orton is the ONLY NFL athlete that gets banged up during a 16 game season... :rolleyes:

Case in point to post #80. ^^^

Thank you for providing the example.

-----

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 02:24 PM
Have given it before, but its almost embarrassing when someone doesn't know the definition of "average." EVERYONE knows what you mean when you say "average joe."

av·er·age
noun, adjective, verb, -aged, -ag·ing.

-adjective

Average: [av-er-ij, av-rij] typical; common; ordinary: The average secretary couldn't handle such a workload. His grades were nothing special, only average.

Hmmmmmm.... where in this does not explain Orton's QB'ing? Typical, common, ordinary... NOTHING SPECIAL.

I hope we can put that lame question to rest since its a very, VERY, common word used.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 02:38 PM
Have given it before, but its almost embarrassing when someone doesn't know the definition of "average." EVERYONE knows what you mean when you say "average joe."

av·er·age
noun, adjective, verb, -aged, -ag·ing.

-adjective

Average: [av-er-ij, av-rij] typical; common; ordinary: The average secretary couldn't handle such a workload. His grades were nothing special, only average.

Hmmmmmm.... where in this does not explain Orton's QB'ing? Typical, common, ordinary... NOTHING SPECIAL.

I hope we can put that lame question to rest since its a very, VERY, common word used.

It wont put questions of some to rest, that just a fact of life.

Imho if Elway and Fox thought Orton was anything more than "average" they would probably something to the effect that Orton doesn't have to compete to keep the job. The very fact Elway in the end of the draft press conference said they would be looking next year's crop of quarterbacks is a strong indicator they probably never see Orton as anything more than.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 02:45 PM
It wont put questions of some to rest, that just a fact of life.

Imho if Elway and Fox thought Orton was anything more than "average" they would probably something to the effect that Orton doesn't have to compete to keep the job. The very fact Elway in the end of the draft press conference said they would be looking next year's crop of quarterbacks is a strong indicator they probably never see Orton as anything more than.

I find it amusing when some try to use Elway's quote, "playing at a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level" as if that is anything more than a GM complimenting a player, on his team, to the press. Thats all it is, nothing more. The actions of the team and the remaining quotes can not be ignored, as you have just pointed out.

Complimenting a player doesn't mean anything. Most players are complimented by their GMs and coaches as they are being shipped off to someone else. Whats to gain by Elway saying anything different?

I feel its pretty safe to say that 7 years in the NFL has given everyone more than enough evidence to see that Orton is pretty average.

topscribe
05-20-2011, 02:47 PM
It wont put questions of some to rest, that just a fact of life.

Imho if Elway and Fox thought Orton was anything more than "average" they would probably something to the effect that Orton doesn't have to compete to keep the job. The very fact Elway in the end of the draft press conference said they would be looking next year's crop of quarterbacks is a strong indicator they probably never see Orton as anything more than.

That may be true.

It would, then, also have to be true of one Tim Tebow . . . :coffee:

-----

SOCALORADO.
05-20-2011, 02:48 PM
That may be true.

It would, then, also have to be true of one Tim Tebow . . . :coffee:

-----

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgld0bvC3w1qce7cdo1_500.gif

underrated29
05-20-2011, 02:48 PM
It wont put questions of some to rest, that just a fact of life.

Imho if Elway and Fox thought Orton was anything more than "average" they would probably something to the effect that Orton doesn't have to compete to keep the job. The very fact Elway in the end of the draft press conference said they would be looking next year's crop of quarterbacks is a strong indicator they probably never see Orton as anything more than.



Yep!

Or that fact that they said they were seeing if there was a franchise QB in the draft. They may have one on the roster now but they are not sure and need TT to develop into it. He is not one right now.


They never ever mentioned Orton with any of that. It has also never been mentioned for TT to be traded. And if Kyle was our franchise QB- they would come out and say no we do not intend to trade kyle. Anything can happen with the right offer, but Kyle is our guy.



They have said nothing like the above..Which means. KO is not a franchise QB in the front office eyes. Which is fine- we still like kyle and like what he has done and perhaps what he will do here, but anyone can see that his days are numbered now that we have Tebow.

WARHORSE
05-20-2011, 03:07 PM
I would not let him go to Minnesota cheap.

Orton would be a great fit with AP running behind him as he is one of the best play action QBs out there. He carries out his fakes very, very well.

That extra second that it brings because of a RB like AP, leads to slow LBs and Safeties in their drops.


If the Vikings defense is up to snuff, and plays like it has over the past few years, they can possibly win it all. Im not saying how much of a chance, but they could definitely conceivably do it.:coffee:


Im not takin just a second rounder for Kyle-0.

Minnesota has already shown a willingness to overspend or reach on a QB.......so hold out on em till we get a kings ransom.:salute:

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 03:11 PM
That may be true.

It would, then, also have to be true of one Tim Tebow . . . :coffee:

-----

I didn't realize Tim Tebow determined if Orton is, or is not, a franchise QB.

But I think its clear that the Bronco FO is not very certain about the QBs they have on the roster. We DO know, that every coach that has had Orton on their roster, has replaced him

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 03:16 PM
I would not let him go to Minnesota cheap.

Orton would be a great fit with AP running behind him as he is one of the best play action QBs out there. He carries out his fakes very, very well.

That extra second that it brings because of a RB like AP, leads to slow LBs and Safeties in their drops.


If the Vikings defense is up to snuff, and plays like it has over the past few years, they can possibly win it all. Im not saying how much of a chance, but they could definitely conceivably do it.:coffee:


Im not takin just a second rounder for Kyle-0.

Minnesota has already shown a willingness to overspend or reach on a QB.......so hold out on em till we get a kings ransom.:salute:

All good p oints, but the common going rate for a starting QB is a second. They (Vikings) have already drafted their future QB. Whomever they do trade for, is going to be nothing more than a place holder. That will be his role to the team, nothing more.

That being the case, they most likely will trade for someone like McNabb or Orton. McNabb being at the end of his career, and Orton not being anything other than a place-holding, traveling, QB. Either way, there is no way to believe that Minnesota is willing to give up too much for a QB when they already have one on the roster that they plan to be their future. If they can get one at a reasonable trade offer that can hold the reigns for a year, great. If not, then they could just move forward with the rookie, or simply trade for McNabb.

I say we take the 2nd the moment its offered (if offered). I can't see us being offered more than that for a temporary QB.

SOCALORADO.
05-20-2011, 03:21 PM
I would not let him go to Minnesota cheap.

Orton would be a great fit with AP running behind him as he is one of the best play action QBs out there. He carries out his fakes very, very well.

That extra second that it brings because of a RB like AP, leads to slow LBs and Safeties in their drops.


If the Vikings defense is up to snuff, and plays like it has over the past few years, they can possibly win it all. Im not saying how much of a chance, but they could definitely conceivably do it.:coffee:


Im not takin just a second rounder for Kyle-0.

Minnesota has already shown a willingness to overspend or reach on a QB.......so hold out on em till we get a kings ransom.:salute:

If MIN is really interested in Orton, then they clearly think he will at least caretake the team deep into the playoffs if not to a SB, so yeah, DEN should hold their feet to the fire, and also quitetly let ARI,MIA and SEA know whats goin on.
MIN is loaded. I personally would rather have an impact player that could start right away.
So, either get MLB Jasper Brinkley or RB Toby Gerhardt.
MIN already has E.J. Henderson, and Lorenzo Boooker, plus they added LB Ross Homan in the draft, and in FA, they could easily get a Ronnie Brown or a Ricky Williams to come in and help carry the rock.
DEN would get a young, talented player in either of those guys who would start right away.
Or a 2012 2nd round pick. I would set the bar high. Rape em.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 03:34 PM
Yep!

Or that fact that they said they were seeing if there was a franchise QB in the draft. They may have one on the roster now but they are not sure and need TT to develop into it. He is not one right now.


They never ever mentioned Orton with any of that. It has also never been mentioned for TT to be traded. And if Kyle was our franchise QB- they would come out and say no we do not intend to trade kyle. Anything can happen with the right offer, but Kyle is our guy.



They have said nothing like the above..Which means. KO is not a franchise QB in the front office eyes. Which is fine- we still like kyle and like what he has done and perhaps what he will do here, but anyone can see that his days are numbered now that we have Tebow.

Here's how I see it. When Elway and Fox said that they wanted to see if a franchise quarterback was in this draft and they'll do the same thing next season Orton and Tebow should pay attention. That said, I think the news if far worse for Orton than it is for Tebow. Orton has four years of starting experience half of that in Denver. He will the same offensive coordinator under Fox that he had under McDaniels. Yet Elway and Fox are not sure about him? On top of that Mike McCoy worked for Fox seven season prior to coming to the Broncos iirc. Did you see the end of the draft press conference with EFX? Fox was asked about the starting quarterback situation and I thought his reply was curious. It was something to the effect you start off with a depth chart and you from or something to that effect. It was no ringing endorsement of Orton that's for sure.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 03:41 PM
That may be true.

It would, then, also have to be true of one Tim Tebow . . . :coffee:

-----

I've said that in different threads. However, it looks to me like it's worse news for a seven year vet with four years of starting experience.

T.K.O.
05-20-2011, 03:55 PM
i thought the OP article said they thought they could get Orton for a 3rd or 4th ?:confused:

Timmy!
05-20-2011, 04:29 PM
My buddy is a die hard Vikes fan and has been loving the idea of them getting Orton for months, not that Orton is a great or even "good" QB, but that he would flourish with what the Vikes have in place already. I honestly think (if the friggin CBA is done in time), we are going to get a 2nd, 3rd at worst for him between Arizona or Minny.

chazoe60
05-20-2011, 05:09 PM
Another thing to think about is that Orton is on a 1 year deal and if he goes to a team like Minny with a young guy waiting in the wings he's not going to sign any kind of extension with them, so basically Minny would be a one year stint and that surely drives the price down in their eyes.

A 3rd or 4th would be great for Kyle Orton. We only gave a 5th for him. He was drafted in the 4th. I've never seen so much fuss over an obviously mediocre player before.

TXBRONC
05-20-2011, 05:11 PM
i thought the OP article said they thought they could get Orton for a 3rd or 4th ?:confused:

I don't remember seeing any mention of picks. :whoknows:

FanInAZ
05-20-2011, 05:54 PM
I am going to need someone to define "franchise QB".

It's simple...

"Franchise QB" is a term used by the propaganda departments of bad teams. It embodies the notion that a young collage QB can take over a team and single handedly win the SB, in spite of the gross incompetency of the front office in player personal decisions resulting in the "franchise QB" never getting the supporting talent necessary to win a SB.

Any questions?

Juriga72
05-20-2011, 06:03 PM
Minnesota's o-line is a terrible pass blocking group.

Kyle will fit right in with THAT....lmao

topscribe
05-20-2011, 07:39 PM
It's simple...

"Franchise QB" is a term used by the propaganda departments of bad teams. It embodies the notion that a young collage QB can take over a team and single handedly win the SB, in spite of the gross incompetency of the front office in player personal decisions resulting in the "franchise QB" never getting the supporting talent necessary to win a SB.

Any questions?

Thanks for putting a smile on my face . . .

-----

rcsodak
05-20-2011, 11:16 PM
I am going to need someone to define "franchise QB".

Evidently, a qb drafted by your own team. :coffee:

rcsodak
05-20-2011, 11:18 PM
overall a very mediocre athlete in the arena of the NFL, He is mediocre in almost all areas. i don't see anywhere where he is particularly strong; again, in this arena. he just does not stand out Top. Believe me, I like my dark horses, but I really wonder why it is you like him so much. What is it you see!

nut, you don't even know football.

****.

















:laugh:

chazoe60
05-20-2011, 11:22 PM
Evidently, a qb drafted by your own team. :coffee:

Come on RC, do you honestly see Orton as a Franchise QB?

rcsodak
05-20-2011, 11:23 PM
Have given it before, but its almost embarrassing when someone doesn't know the definition of "average." EVERYONE knows what you mean when you say "average joe."

av·er·age
noun, adjective, verb, -aged, -ag·ing.

-adjective

Average: [av-er-ij, av-rij] typical; common; ordinary: The average secretary couldn't handle such a workload. His grades were nothing special, only average.

Hmmmmmm.... where in this does not explain Orton's QB'ing? Typical, common, ordinary... NOTHING SPECIAL.

I hope we can put that lame question to rest since its a very, VERY, common word used.

So when he was leading the league in almost every qb category, was he still "average"?

Oh wait....it's the uber qb-friendly scheme he was in.

Guess that means TBrady is ordinary as well. :rolleyes:

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:25 PM
:lol: wow, you REALLY showed me!!

rcsodak
05-20-2011, 11:25 PM
I find it amusing when some try to use Elway's quote, "playing at a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level" as if that is anything more than a GM complimenting a player, on his team, to the press. Thats all it is, nothing more. The actions of the team and the remaining quotes can not be ignored, as you have just pointed out.

Complimenting a player doesn't mean anything. Most players are complimented by their GMs and coaches as they are being shipped off to someone else. Whats to gain by Elway saying anything different?

I feel its pretty safe to say that 7 years in the NFL has given everyone more than enough evidence to see that Orton is pretty average.

Except wasn't it you that pointed out Elway wasn't with the team at the time?

Sounds more like a HOF SB winning QB talking, to me. :coffee:

rcsodak
05-20-2011, 11:32 PM
Come on RC, do you honestly see Orton as a Franchise QB?

Still waiting for the definition

chazoe60
05-20-2011, 11:38 PM
Still waiting for the definition

Just like the Supreme Court definition of porn:

"I know it when I see it."

FanInAZ
05-20-2011, 11:40 PM
Still waiting for the definition

What's wrong with my rigorously honest definition 9 post earlier (#106)?

chazoe60
05-20-2011, 11:53 PM
What's wrong with my rigorously honest definition 9 post earlier (#106)?

Nothing. It's your definition, which is probably different from mine, which is different from RC's. It's the beauty of humanity, we all see shit differently.

Ravage!!!
05-20-2011, 11:56 PM
Nothing. It's your definition, which is probably different from mine, which is different from RC's. It's the beauty of humanity, we all see shit differently.

The only reason anyone would ever ask for something simple to be 'defined'... is so they can try to punch holes in your definition. There is no other motive than that.

Define it how you want. If that definition includes Kyle Orton as being a "Franchise QB".... well, then most would think they need a new definition :lol: But whatever floats their boat.

BroncoStud
05-21-2011, 12:07 AM
This is GREAT news. Hopefully soon Orton will be a problem for the Vikings to deal with. Now someone else gets to boo him for a change. He should be able to beat out Christian Ponder with relative ease, that was the biggest stretch of a 1st round draft pick I've ever seen.

FanInAZ
05-21-2011, 12:49 AM
Nothing. It's your definition, which is probably different from mine, which is different from RC's. It's the beauty of humanity, we all see shit differently.

I guess some of your overly serious types haven’t pick-up that I’m trying to make a point rather than an actual definition. So I guess I’ll just spell it out for you. Last season I watched the Rams place Tom Brady/Payton Manning like expectation on rookie QB, Sam Bradford. Unfortunately, he’s not Brady or Manning, at least not yet.

In the regular season finally, I watched Steven Jackson churn out over 4 yards/carry against the Seahawks…the 11 times he was allowed to carry the ball. Meanwhile, Bradford throws the ball 36 times. After all, that’s what expected of VETERANS Brady & Manning in such situation. After all, half of the football commentators (including all most all of those who were former QBs & WRs) a few members of this site insist that unless impersonate the Patriots & the Colts, you can’t win in the NFL today. So what were the results? Bradford only completes 19 of the passes for only 155 yards, 0 TD & 1 INT. If the Ram wouldn’t have been trying to have him impersonate Brady & Manning in the win or else game, I have no doubt that Jackson rushes for at least 150 yards & probably 1 or 2 TDs. Most importantly, the Rams win the game and the division crown.

This wasn’t the only time I watched something like this happen last season, it’s just the one in which I know for a fact that a team blew a division title because they insisted on trying to impersonate the Patriots & Colts, rather than just being themselves and using a game plan past on their player personnel. If I was to take the time to watch every game played last season, I’ve no doubt that I could find at least one example of this every. Week one, the Rams did this exact same thing during Bradford’s pro-debut. With those two wins that they gave away because they were trying to impersonate the Patriots & Colts, they would have been 9-6 and champions of the NFCW.

This is why I have such a negative view of the concept of “franchise QBs.” Maybe Bradford will be on par with Brady & Manning in another 3-4 years, but he wasn’t their last year. The Rams attempts to make him into something that he wasn’t ready to be cost them at least two wins, a winning record, playoff spot and a division championship.

I have the same concern over what I believe may be unrealistic expectations for Tebow over the seasons. I would be trilled if he could become the next John Elway this season, but let’s not throw away what we might be able to achieve this season by expecting him to grow up faster than is realistic for him.

Agent of Orange
05-21-2011, 07:23 AM
The vikes have a legitimate shot at a superbowl run with Orton. Without they do not.


Ponder is fine but he is not ready polished to win the big dance. It just wont happen.

Same thing can be said for San Francisco.

Juriga72
05-21-2011, 09:26 AM
So when he was leading the league in almost every qb category, was he still "average"?
Oh wait....it's the uber qb-friendly scheme he was in.

Guess that means TBrady is ordinary as well. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't say that "Lowest 3rd down QB rating by a starting NFL QB" is a stat you really want to lead for a career......

"Most pick sixes"
"Game ending INT's"
"Lowest red zone scoring"
"Most losses by starting qb"

Are also stats you dont want to lead in the NFL....

Ravage!!!
05-21-2011, 10:21 AM
Saw this post by Canmore on another thread, that seems makes me :lol: when I see someone tell me that Orton was "leading the league in almost every category." :lol:


Neither did I feel confident in Kyle's come from behind ability and 2010 season statistics back that up. According to Mark Simon of ESPN Stats and Information. In the fourth quarter when down by eight points or less, Orton completed 50 percent of his passes, which was the sixth worst percentage in the NFL. He had a passer rating of 51.3, which was the tied for the fifth worst in the league.

Orton wasn’t much better on third down. He completed 50 percent of his passes on third down, which was tied for the eighth worst in the league. His passer rating on third down was 58.0. He threw five interceptions on third down.

turftoad
05-21-2011, 11:20 AM
Saw this post by Canmore on another thread, that seems makes me :lol: when I see someone tell me that Orton was "leading the league in almost every category." :lol:

Exactly!!! Orton is not a closer.

HammeredOut
05-21-2011, 12:16 PM
I wouldn't say that "Lowest 3rd down QB rating by a starting NFL QB" is a stat you really want to lead for a career......

"Most pick sixes"
"Game ending INT's"
"Lowest red zone scoring"
"Most losses by starting qb"

Are also stats you dont want to lead in the NFL....

No-show Moreno averaged 2.2 from his own 20, litterally no stats on 3rd down, and 1.8 inside the redzone. THe defense also gave up 30 points a game average. Even im not that confident in Orton to put up over 30 points a night to win the game.

HammeredOut
05-21-2011, 12:18 PM
I wouldn't say that "Lowest 3rd down QB rating by a starting NFL QB" is a stat you really want to lead for a career......

"Most pick sixes"
"Game ending INT's"
"Lowest red zone scoring"
"Most losses by starting qb"

Are also stats you dont want to lead in the NFL....

im on the Andrew Luck bandwagon, Im a strong believer we will be in the running for him at the end of the season if we are starting TT and Quinn backing him up. 2-4 wins this season if Tebow starts. 5-7 wins if Orton starts and we manage to keep teams under 20 points in some games.

Slick
05-21-2011, 12:25 PM
I guess some of your overly serious types haven’t pick-up that I’m trying to make a point rather than an actual definition. So I guess I’ll just spell it out for you. Last season I watched the Rams place Tom Brady/Payton Manning like expectation on rookie QB, Sam Bradford. Unfortunately, he’s not Brady or Manning, at least not yet.

In the regular season finally, I watched Steven Jackson churn out over 4 yards/carry against the Seahawks…the 11 times he was allowed to carry the ball. Meanwhile, Bradford throws the ball 36 times. After all, that’s what expected of VETERANS Brady & Manning in such situation. After all, half of the football commentators (including all most all of those who were former QBs & WRs) a few members of this site insist that unless impersonate the Patriots & the Colts, you can’t win in the NFL today. So what were the results? Bradford only completes 19 of the passes for only 155 yards, 0 TD & 1 INT. If the Ram wouldn’t have been trying to have him impersonate Brady & Manning in the win or else game, I have no doubt that Jackson rushes for at least 150 yards & probably 1 or 2 TDs. Most importantly, the Rams win the game and the division crown.

This wasn’t the only time I watched something like this happen last season, it’s just the one in which I know for a fact that a team blew a division title because they insisted on trying to impersonate the Patriots & Colts, rather than just being themselves and using a game plan past on their player personnel. If I was to take the time to watch every game played last season, I’ve no doubt that I could find at least one example of this every. Week one, the Rams did this exact same thing during Bradford’s pro-debut. With those two wins that they gave away because they were trying to impersonate the Patriots & Colts, they would have been 9-6 and champions of the NFCW.

This is why I have such a negative view of the concept of “franchise QBs.” Maybe Bradford will be on par with Brady & Manning in another 3-4 years, but he wasn’t their last year. The Rams attempts to make him into something that he wasn’t ready to be cost them at least two wins, a winning record, playoff spot and a division championship.

I have the same concern over what I believe may be unrealistic expectations for Tebow over the seasons. I would be trilled if he could become the next John Elway this season, but let’s not throw away what we might be able to achieve this season by expecting him to grow up faster than is realistic for him.

Good points. However fox's conservative run first offenses shouldn't ask much out of tebow. If we're going to plat ball control we don't need kyle orrtopn to do that. Treat tebow like the jets treated sanchez.

Tned
05-21-2011, 12:56 PM
According to Chris Mortensen of ESPN, the Vikings have Orton on there radar to bring along Chris Ponder.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/kyle_orton_is_on_the_vikings_radar/4763305

Considering how unprofessional Orton was when Tebow took over, I would think teams would think twice before looking to Orton for a mentoring role. He appears to be a 'me first' guy.

Nomad
05-21-2011, 12:57 PM
im on the Andrew Luck bandwagon, Im a strong believer we will be in the running for him at the end of the season if we are starting TT and Quinn backing him up. 2-4 wins this season if Tebow starts. 5-7 wins if Orton starts and we manage to keep teams under 20 points in some games.

BRONCOS will have to have the #1 pick to get Luck. The team with the #1 pick will not pass on him, unless of course, he pulls an Elway or Manning.

Ravage!!!
05-21-2011, 02:35 PM
BRONCOS will have to have the #1 pick to get Luck. The team with the #1 pick will not pass on him, unless of course, he pulls an Elway or Manning.

Or if that team just spent a top round on a QB in the last couple years.

TXBRONC
05-21-2011, 03:49 PM
Good points. However fox's conservative run first offenses shouldn't ask much out of tebow. If we're going to plat ball control we don't need kyle orrtopn to do that. Treat tebow like the jets treated sanchez.

Fox was asked about how he like to run an offense he says that understands you have to have a good balance between run and pass. He's never had a franchise quarterback so I would think that contributed to his overly heavy reliance on the run. I'm not saying it would be bombs away but I would hope that eventually has quarterback that he put the game in hands that he'll try to have about a 50-50 split between run and pass.

FanInAZ
05-21-2011, 03:58 PM
Good points. However fox's conservative run first offenses shouldn't ask much out of tebow. If we're going to plat ball control we don't need kyle orrtopn to do that. Treat tebow like the jets treated sanchez.

Which means one of our RBs needs to step up and produce. I did take a look at Knowshon Moreno's stat line, and it showed that was solid when he was used:

13 Games
182 carries for 779 yards (4.28 per carry) & 5 TDs
37 receptions for 372 yards (10.05 yards per reception) & 3 TDs
219 touches for 1,151 yards from scrimmage, 8 TDs & 48 points.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MoreKn00/gamelog/2010/

I defiantly hope Fox gives him enough touches to gain at least 1,000 yards rushing & 1,500 yards from scrimmage & 15 TDs.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
05-21-2011, 04:11 PM
Fox was asked about how he like to run an offense he says that understands you have to have a good balance between run and pass. He's never had a franchise quarterback so I would think that contributed to his overly heavy reliance on the run. I'm not saying it would be bombs away but I would hope that eventually has quarterback that he put the game in hands that he'll try to have about a 50-50 split between run and pass.

Not only that, but there offense was built to run anyway. Outside of Steve Smith they've never really had depth at WR. Combine that with a QB who isn't really adept at throwing the ball down the field, and you get a conservative offense.....kind of like Kyle in Chicago,except I think Kyle has a better arm than Delhomme.

TXBRONC
05-21-2011, 04:34 PM
Not only that, but there offense was built to run anyway. Outside of Steve Smith they've never really had depth at WR. Combine that with a QB who isn't really adept at throwing the ball down the field, and you get a conservative offense.....kind of like Kyle in Chicago,except I think Kyle has a better arm than Delhomme.

Delhomme may not have as good are now but I think earlier in his career he had pretty decent arm with nice touch on the deep ball.

WARHORSE
05-21-2011, 06:20 PM
Delhomme, Schmelhomme.


If you can line up and run the ball.........bingo. You can KILL it with a QB like Tebow.

Tebows third and long, and redzone conversion rates were tops in the league iirc. Third and 11 or more his QB rating was 150 something. Third and 6 or more, QB rating of 125 plus.

With his ability to run, plus a FoX running game to go with it?

Tebow has more than enough passing skills to go down the field and score.

I put bank on it.


Tebow simply CONVERTS.

In the preseason, when Tebow was getting reps with the ones, he was slingin it all over the place. His timing was better, etc, because he was doin it in practice.

Then to move to NOT getting reps for 13 weeks, then to go under center after one week of reps, how could anyone expect a rookie like him, with the given weaknesses he had to work on, to come in and throw it around like Brady?


Three weeks. Tebow had three weeks after 13 weeks of no reps.


I like what I saw considering all things, and Im looking forward to watching him play.

Orton is ALSO a QB that can THRIVE with a great run game.

But we will lose him at the end of the season, unless he plays at a franchise QB pace.

Ravage!!!
05-21-2011, 08:19 PM
Simms looked good in pre-season as well. That doesn't really hold an ounce of water.

I get that the 4 games gave some people hope, but its far too small of a sampling. He has to improve on a LOT of things and improve a lot (these are the words by those in the know, that break down game tape and know the NFL game).

As it is right now, Tebow is NOT good at reading defenses, and certainly is not a good passer. He's behind, especially for a first round QB.

But I would still rather watch him play than Orton.

Lonestar
05-21-2011, 08:31 PM
Good post War.

The things that Tebow needs to do better is long. And not having any OTas puts him behind even more.

Starting from under center -
Reading defenses pre snap-
Post snap -
throwing accuracy-
Throwing motion-
Knowing the playbook-

Ability to improvise+
short passing game+
run the ball+
Smart+
Attitude++
winner+++

He just needs time to get it together.

HammeredOut
05-22-2011, 01:04 PM
Which means one of our RBs needs to step up and produce. I did take a look at Knowshon Moreno's stat line, and it showed that was solid when he was used:

13 Games
182 carries for 779 yards (4.28 per carry) & 5 TDs
37 receptions for 372 yards (10.05 yards per reception) & 3 TDs
219 touches for 1,151 yards from scrimmage, 8 TDs & 48 points.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MoreKn00/gamelog/2010/

I defiantly hope Fox gives him enough touches to gain at least 1,000 yards rushing & 1,500 yards from scrimmage & 15 TDs.


the most important stat you can look up is. Know-show Moreno only had 2, 100 yard+ games in 2 seasons. He averaged 59 yards a game this season. Know-shows longest runs came off of draw plays 3rd and long. So defenses we never ready to stop the run on his longest plays of the year. Also he only averages 2.2 yards from his own 20 yard line, and only 1.8 yards inside the redzone. Know-show also averaged like 1.7 yards when he was 1st and inbetween 1-7. So the stats basically say, Know-show can't run the ball First Down and short after penalties on the line, and also he is non-existant in the Redzone.

I have money on DeAngelo Williams taking over as the franchise back this season when FA opens up. I don't see Know Show as a starter in this league, but one of the better 3rd down change of pace backs.

HammeredOut
05-22-2011, 01:13 PM
Delhomme, Schmelhomme.


If you can line up and run the ball.........bingo. You can KILL it with a QB like Tebow.

Tebows third and long, and redzone conversion rates were tops in the league iirc. Third and 11 or more his QB rating was 150 something. Third and 6 or more, QB rating of 125 plus.

With his ability to run, plus a FoX running game to go with it?

Tebow has more than enough passing skills to go down the field and score.

I put bank on it.


Tebow simply CONVERTS.

In the preseason, when Tebow was getting reps with the ones, he was slingin it all over the place. His timing was better, etc, because he was doin it in practice.

Then to move to NOT getting reps for 13 weeks, then to go under center after one week of reps, how could anyone expect a rookie like him, with the given weaknesses he had to work on, to come in and throw it around like Brady?


Three weeks. Tebow had three weeks after 13 weeks of no reps.


I like what I saw considering all things, and Im looking forward to watching him play.

Orton is ALSO a QB that can THRIVE with a great run game.

But we will lose him at the end of the season, unless he plays at a franchise QB pace.

Tebow has never faced any college defenses who came to stop his passing ability. Tebow only averaged 15 completions a game, and most of those were dump offs in the flat to his sub 4.4 WR / scatbacks.

Most of Tebows 3rd down plays were run/option plays to the half back, inwhich the play was designed like a bootleg play to either dump off to the half back, or tebow run the ball, or tebow hit somebody in the seam. Most college teams were worried about the sub 4.4 scatbacks and closed the edge, leaving Tebow 1 on 1 with an undersized College Linebacker, or he had somebody 1 on 1 in the seam which is pitch and catch at that point.

Not once did teams ever worry about Stopping Tim "The Catapult" Tebow arm and his passing threat or ability. Tebow I think was simply a draft pick to run the "wildhorses" formation which was fad because of the Miami Dolphins. The Broncos win 2-4 games with Tebow starting. The defense nor Tebow is good enough to win us more games.

FanInAZ
05-22-2011, 01:58 PM
the most important stat you can look up is. Know-show Moreno only had 2, 100 yard+ games in 2 seasons. He averaged 59 yards a game this season. Know-shows longest runs came off of draw plays 3rd and long. So defenses we never ready to stop the run on his longest plays of the year. Also he only averages 2.2 yards from his own 20 yard line, and only 1.8 yards inside the redzone. Know-show also averaged like 1.7 yards when he was 1st and inbetween 1-7. So the stats basically say, Know-show can't run the ball First Down and short after penalties on the line, and also he is non-existant in the Redzone.

I have money on DeAngelo Williams taking over as the franchise back this season when FA opens up. I don't see Know Show as a starter in this league, but one of the better 3rd down change of pace backs.

The reason that any back who is averaging 4.28 yards per carry doesn't break 100 yards is because the coach doesn't let him carry the ball 23.7 times a game. So, is that the fault of the player or the fault of the coach? Could it be that this is another example of what I posted earlier in this thread about everyone trying to impersonate the Patriots & Colts, including teams that don't have the player personal to implement such a game plan?

On the other hand, this could also be a change in standard operating procedure that most football teams are going to. It seems that most teams these don’t have a “featured back” because give someone the ball 25-30 a game wear them down. I heard it said years ago that the Chargers may have shortened LT career by having him carry such a heavy load for the team. That’s when they started using a #2 back more often, and most teams seem to be following that mold by having their #2 back carry the ball more.

Therefore, because this is a pass happy league and teams are doing more “platooning” with their RBs, its unfair to rate a RB by how many times he breaks 100 yards. As far as the rest of your stats, they would be of great concern, if you can provide a link that backs them up. I’m not saying that you or anyone else at this site makes up stat, but it would be easy to get numbers that we heard a while back mixed up. It happens to me all the time, that why I always double check my stats from a reliable source (usually http://www.pro-football-reference.com/) and then post the link to the actual page with the stats.

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 05:42 PM
Good post War.

The things that Tebow needs to do better is long. And not having any OTas puts him behind even more.

Starting from under center -
Reading defenses pre snap-
Post snap -
throwing accuracy-
Throwing motion-
Knowing the playbook-

Ability to improvise+
short passing game+
run the ball+
Smart+
Attitude++
winner+++

He just needs time to get it together.

I know I speak for many others when I say I would rather watch Tim Tebow LEARN and play his ass of than watch Orton fold like paper in crucial situations and throw in the towel when the going gets rough.

Tebow getting valuable learning time and Denver winning 6 games is a HELL OF A LOT BETTER than Orton stinking it up on conversion downs and Denver winning 8 games.

In my HUMBLE opinion.

This Orton being the starter nonsense has gone on long enough. The dude sucks when it matters and his attitude and ambiance rubs off on every member of the Denver offense and defense. Orton gives the Broncos ZERO chance to come back and win tough games. We might as well punt on 3rd down and line up for a FG once we hit the 20 redzone. It's been the most pathetic 2 years of Denver QB play we've witnessed in literally DECADES.

Top that with the fact that Orton is going to walk next season anyway, and Denver will get nothing of value for him then, it would be absolute stupidity to keep him and his mediocrity on this roster when we can trade him for a draft pick this year and move on and cut our losses. He was a McDumbass mistake from day 1. Elway isn't dumb, he knows what limitations Orton places on this offense, I have complete faith that Orton is gone as soon as player moves can be made.

topscribe
05-22-2011, 05:59 PM
I know I speak for many others when I say I would rather watch Tim Tebow LEARN and play his ass of than watch Orton fold like paper in crucial situations and throw in the towel when the going gets rough.

Tebow getting valuable learning time and Denver winning 6 games is a HELL OF A LOT BETTER than Orton stinking it up on conversion downs and Denver winning 8 games.

In my HUMBLE opinion.

This Orton being the starter nonsense has gone on long enough. The dude sucks when it matters and his attitude and ambiance rubs off on every member of the Denver offense and defense. Orton gives the Broncos ZERO chance to come back and win tough games. We might as well punt on 3rd down and line up for a FG once we hit the 20 redzone. It's been the most pathetic 2 years of Denver QB play we've witnessed in literally DECADES.

Top that with the fact that Orton is going to walk next season anyway, and Denver will get nothing of value for him then, it would be absolute stupidity to keep him and his mediocrity on this roster when we can trade him for a draft pick this year and move on and cut our losses. He was a McDumbass mistake from day 1. Elway isn't dumb, he knows what limitations Orton places on this offense, I have complete faith that Orton is gone as soon as player moves can be made.

Because Elway isn't dumb, I am sure he doesn't buy the crap you have
spewed about Orton. Orton was the offense. He almost was the team. I am
so thankful that the FO is not made up of those who would lay the losses of
a team with the last place defense and a nonexistent running game on the
shoulders of one quarterback.

It is amazing how some on this board have dared to speak for Fox and Elway.
In fact, last reports have it that the Broncos are not actively shopping Orton.

It is my belief that you are destined to watch Orton step up behind center on
the first play of the regular 2011 season. That's because Elway isn't dumb.
Neither is Fox . . .

-----

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 06:02 PM
Because Elway isn't dumb, I am sure he doesn't buy the crap you have
spewed about Orton. Orton was the offense. He almost was the team. I am
so thankful that the FO is not made up of those who would lay the losses of
a team with the last place defense and a nonexistent running game on the
shoulders of one quarterback.

It is amazing how some on this board have dared to speak for Fox and Elway.
In fact, last reports have it that the Broncos are not actively shopping Orton.

It is my belief that you are destined to watch Orton step up behind center on
the first play of the regular 2011 season. That's because Elway isn't dumb.
Neither is Fox . . .

-----

No TOP, the QB WAS the offense. If we had a REAL QB, Denver wouldn't have had the 2nd pick in the draft. The entire offense was built around short passing and a LOT of throws.

We will see, Elway was a hell of a player and he NEVER quit in a game. I have no doubt in my mind that he watched Orton pack in multiple times over the past 2 horrible seasons.

It will be a great day when Orton is sent packing and the mistake is corrected. :salute:

robert ethan
05-22-2011, 07:25 PM
I think Tebow had the best passer rating of any rookie quarterback last season.

gobroncsnv
05-22-2011, 07:36 PM
Kind of amazing to me the expectations hold of a qb without a running game to compliment the pass, and the expectations held of Moreno with the same lack of blocking that the qb had. With Clady out, Harris hurting, why is ANYbody surprised at our lack of point production...Can't think of ANY offenses that succeed with lousy blocking, no matter who are at the "skill' positions.

Ravage!!!
05-22-2011, 07:39 PM
I think Tebow had the best passer rating of any rookie quarterback last season.

Fewest passing attempts as well.. not to mention that he wenet 1-3.. had a 50% completion percentage... and QBR is about the dumbest thing ever.

TXBRONC
05-22-2011, 08:01 PM
Kind of amazing to me the expectations hold of a qb without a running game to compliment the pass, and the expectations held of Moreno with the same lack of blocking that the qb had. With Clady out, Harris hurting, why is ANYbody surprised at our lack of point production...Can't think of ANY offenses that succeed with lousy blocking, no matter who are at the "skill' positions.

I disagree with idea the offensive line was a problem the entire year. It started to gel when Denver faced the Chiefs in Denver. Moreno finished the season with a ypc over 4. Orton's stats on 3rd down and his stats in the 4th quarter were just as much apart of the problem as the offensive line imho.

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 09:18 PM
Kind of amazing to me the expectations hold of a qb without a running game to compliment the pass, and the expectations held of Moreno with the same lack of blocking that the qb had. With Clady out, Harris hurting, why is ANYbody surprised at our lack of point production...Can't think of ANY offenses that succeed with lousy blocking, no matter who are at the "skill' positions.

Despite all the excuses the 3 games that Tim Tebow played in, half of which were spent with an ultra-conservative playbook because McDumbass didn't give him any reps during the season, Tebow played with more poise and confidence than Orton showed in 2 seasons, hell, make that since he was drafted.

Tebow was supposed to be a longterm project, someone who would take YEARS to be ready to play a meaningful down of NFL football, but there he was throwing for 300 yeards, running over Oakland Raider defenders on his way to the endzone for a 40 yard TD, there he was damn near beating the Chargers, the same team that absolutely THROTTLED the Orton-led Broncos earlier in the season.

You can say what you want, you can defend however you like, but I've watched enough football to know the difference in mediocrity and a GOOD player. Orton has ALWAYS been mediocre when it mattered. Tebow may or may not be the answer but he showed me enough last year to HAPPILY trade Orton for some value and chance it with him.

Orton requires too much to go his way to win a game, Tebow can create. This team needs someone who can create. Like I said, QB is the most vital position on the roster, if your QB is a mediocre player who falls apart when the game is on the line, your team is SCREWED.

Orton is a BACKUP, nothing more. You can quote me any NFL "expert" or analyst who claims Orton is a good QB and I would be willing to bet that person $1,000 that in 2 years Orton will be a career-backup for somebody. Tebow at least plays with passion and desire, a will to win, something Orton hasn't shown in his over-welcomed stay here in Denver.

You guys will make excuse after excuse for his mediocrity, Tebow is simply willing to go out and compete, no matter who he lines up next to. Excuses are for the weak, a REAL player would elevate his team, make them better, not put a ceiling on their potential. Orton is simply mediocre, even worse than that on 3rd downs and in the redzone, he simply sucks at that point.

topscribe
05-22-2011, 10:14 PM
Despite all the excuses the 3 games that Tim Tebow played in, half of which were spent with an ultra-conservative playbook because McDumbass didn't give him any reps during the season, Tebow played with more poise and confidence than Orton showed in 2 seasons, hell, make that since he was drafted.

Tebow was supposed to be a longterm project, someone who would take YEARS to be ready to play a meaningful down of NFL football, but there he was throwing for 300 yeards, running over Oakland Raider defenders on his way to the endzone for a 40 yard TD, there he was damn near beating the Chargers, the same team that absolutely THROTTLED the Orton-led Broncos earlier in the season.

You can say what you want, you can defend however you like, but I've watched enough football to know the difference in mediocrity and a GOOD player. Orton has ALWAYS been mediocre when it mattered. Tebow may or may not be the answer but he showed me enough last year to HAPPILY trade Orton for some value and chance it with him.

Orton requires too much to go his way to win a game, Tebow can create. This team needs someone who can create. Like I said, QB is the most vital position on the roster, if your QB is a mediocre player who falls apart when the game is on the line, your team is SCREWED.

Orton is a BACKUP, nothing more. You can quote me any NFL "expert" or analyst who claims Orton is a good QB and I would be willing to bet that person $1,000 that in 2 years Orton will be a career-backup for somebody. Tebow at least plays with passion and desire, a will to win, something Orton hasn't shown in his over-welcomed stay here in Denver.

You guys will make excuse after excuse for his mediocrity, Tebow is simply willing to go out and compete, no matter who he lines up next to. Excuses are for the weak, a REAL player would elevate his team, make them better, not put a ceiling on their potential. Orton is simply mediocre, even worse than that on 3rd downs and in the redzone, he simply sucks at that point.

Make excuse for mediocrity? I hardly think so.

Orton was without the benefit of any kind of running game. The O-line blew,
especially in the first part of the year. For all intents and purposes, he had no
TE to pass to. Yet he played "on a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level."

Excuses? Hardly. Rather, admiration . . . :coffee:

-----

Tned
05-22-2011, 10:19 PM
Make excuse for mediocrity? I hardly think so.

Orton was without the benefit of any kind of running game. The O-line blew,
especially in the first part of the year. For all intents and purposes, he had no
TE to pass to. Yet he played "on a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level."

Excuses? Hardly. Rather, admiration . . . :coffee:

-----

Yet, he was benched at the end of the season (and acted unprofessional when it happened), and Elway has said his roster status to start the year is in questions. The Broncos desperately need to get back to at least .500 to win fans back, but they don't seem convinced Orton can do it.

topscribe
05-22-2011, 10:24 PM
Yet, he was benched at the end of the season (and acted unprofessional when it happened), and Elway has said his roster status to start the year is in questions. The Broncos desperately need to get back to at least .500 to win fans back, but they don't seem convinced Orton can do it.

Dumervil was benched for the entire season. I guess injuries count only if their
name isn't Orton.

And I agree with a competition for the starting position. I don't think it has to
be because one QB or the other can't do it.

But that goes two ways. If they were so convinced Tebow could do it, then
Tebow would be the heir apparent. So I guess they must feel much the same
way about Tebow . . .

-----

rcsodak
05-22-2011, 10:28 PM
What's wrong with my rigorously honest definition 9 post earlier (#106)?I was laughing too hard to read it? ;)

rcsodak
05-22-2011, 10:41 PM
Exactly!!! Orton is not a closer.
And yet, when asked about this on sirius, rgannon said he doesn't doubt that, with no running game and a young Oline not yet gelled.
I'll go with the guy that's actually played the game.

rcsodak
05-22-2011, 10:54 PM
Kind of amazing to me the expectations hold of a qb without a running game to compliment the pass, and the expectations held of Moreno with the same lack of blocking that the qb had. With Clady out, Harris hurting, why is ANYbody surprised at our lack of point production...Can't think of ANY offenses that succeed with lousy blocking, no matter who are at the "skill' positions.

Its easier to accuse and bash specific players than be realistic and actually look at the reasons. ie young, struggling OL, always playing from behind, etc.
Fans that just bitch about players they have a bias toward wont delve any deeper than the skin. Thats why I appreciate what the PROS have to say.

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 11:36 PM
Make excuse for mediocrity? I hardly think so.

Orton was without the benefit of any kind of running game. The O-line blew,
especially in the first part of the year. For all intents and purposes, he had no
TE to pass to. Yet he played "on a record-shattering, Pro Bowl level."

Excuses? Hardly. Rather, admiration . . . :coffee:

-----

And how did that work out for Kyle? Benched, booed, and in all liklihood TRADED to another team lmao...

What is Elway supposed to say? "Kyle sucked last year, did you guys see his 3rd down conversions and redzone percentanges? Did you see that we only won 3 games with him? Well, give us a 2nd rounder and he's YOURS!"
Come on TOP, let's get real here. :coffee:

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 11:37 PM
And yet, when asked about this on sirius, rgannon said he doesn't doubt that, with no running game and a young Oline not yet gelled.
I'll go with the guy that's actually played the game.

And Rich Gannon is just as wrong as you and TOP. Experience doesn't make one right, it most experiences it just makes them stubborn.

BroncoStud
05-22-2011, 11:38 PM
Yet, he was benched at the end of the season (and acted unprofessional when it happened), and Elway has said his roster status to start the year is in questions. The Broncos desperately need to get back to at least .500 to win fans back, but they don't seem convinced Orton can do it.

This ^

rcsodak
05-22-2011, 11:49 PM
And Rich Gannon is just as wrong as you and TOP. Experience doesn't make one right, it most experiences it just makes them stubborn.
I'll ALWAYS take a players opinion over a fan.





ESPECIALLY when it coincides with mine. :lol:

BroncoStud
05-23-2011, 12:28 AM
I'll ALWAYS take a players opinion over a fan.





ESPECIALLY when it coincides with mine. :lol:

:laugh:

NorCalBronco7
05-23-2011, 01:10 AM
Yet, he was benched at the end of the season (and acted unprofessional when it happened), and Elway has said his roster status to start the year is in questions. The Broncos desperately need to get back to at least .500 to win fans back, but they don't seem convinced Orton can do it.

EFX - none of them are convinced with any Qb, not just Orton. You can make that seem any way you like though......

topscribe
05-23-2011, 02:02 AM
And how did that work out for Kyle? Benched, booed, and in all liklihood TRADED to another team lmao...

What is Elway supposed to say? "Kyle sucked last year, did you guys see his 3rd down conversions and redzone percentanges? Did you see that we only won 3 games with him? Well, give us a 2nd rounder and he's YOURS!"
Come on TOP, let's get real here. :coffee:

And what was Elway supposed to say about Tebow, and why didn't he say it?
After all, his comments were not all that complimentary toward Tebow the
quarterback. So why would he be so candid about Tebow and then lie about
Orton?

You're right: Let's get real here.



And Rich Gannon is just as wrong as you and TOP. Experience doesn't make one right, it most experiences it just makes them stubborn.

Right. And what makes you the expert?

Your foot is in your mouth all the way to the pelvis now. I've heard positive
comments about Orton from Elway, Gannon, Griese, and Theismann . . . all
stubborn quarterbacks.

And they are wrong and you are right . . . http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/BIGrofl2-1.gif

-----

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 07:02 AM
Yet, he was benched at the end of the season (and acted unprofessional when it happened), and Elway has said his roster status to start the year is in questions. The Broncos desperately need to get back to at least .500 to win fans back, but they don't seem convinced Orton can do it.

EFX - none of them are convinced with any Qb, not just Orton. You can make that seem any way you like though......

True but I think that's actually more of a problem for Orton than it is for Tebow. He's been a starter for three consecutive years the last two in Denver so there is plenty of tape on him. Also he'sgoing to have the same offensive coordinator even though we've switched head coaches.

HORSEPOWER 56
05-23-2011, 07:13 AM
For everyone using the O-line and running game to rate QB performance, I can think of 2 guys whose O-lines and running games were even worse than ours and their teams made the playoffs... one was the MVP of the Superbowl.

The Eagles and Packers both had worse O-lines and worse rushing offenses than we did, yet their QBs were probowlers and they won more games than they lost.

Those 2 factors play a part, but they shouldn't be the end all and be all. It wasn't as if our QBs had no time to throw the ball (then the passing #s wouldn't have been so high to begin with). Just throwing that out there.

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 07:41 AM
For everyone using the O-line and running game to rate QB performance, I can think of 2 guys whose O-lines and running games were even worse than ours and their teams made the playoffs... one was the MVP of the Superbowl.

The Eagles and Packers both had worse O-lines and worse rushing offenses than we did, yet their QBs were probowlers and they won more games than they lost.

Those 2 factors play a part, but they shouldn't be the end all and be all. It wasn't as if our QBs had no time to throw the ball (then the passing #s wouldn't have been so high to begin with). Just throwing that out there.

I think next retort will have something to do with defenses of those two teams.

topscribe
05-23-2011, 09:16 AM
For everyone using the O-line and running game to rate QB performance, I can think of 2 guys whose O-lines and running games were even worse than ours and their teams made the playoffs... one was the MVP of the Superbowl.

The Eagles and Packers both had worse O-lines and worse rushing offenses than we did, yet their QBs were probowlers and they won more games than they lost.

Those 2 factors play a part, but they shouldn't be the end all and be all. It wasn't as if our QBs had no time to throw the ball (then the passing #s wouldn't have been so high to begin with). Just throwing that out there.


I think next retort will have something to do with defenses of those two teams.

Good call. Since we apparently are confusing QB performance with playoff
appearances, it's hard to have a worse defense than the #32 ranked one in
the league, isn't it?

Especially when one considers that the Packers had the #5 defense in yards
allowed and the #2 defense points allowed.

Regarding "worse" O-lines, that is subjective. But The Broncos finished with
the #26 running game, and for a while were #32 in that category, but they
started to gel late in the season, which helped to bring that up.

The Packers ranked #24 in offensive rushing. It's kind of difficult for me to
make #24 worse than #26. But combined with the #5 defense, it's hard to
justify the opinion that the Packers had all the disadvantages of the Broncos,
with their #32 defense.

The Eagles actually were pretty good all around. They had a lot of sacks, true,
but more goes into sacks than just the O-line.

But their passing game was complemented by the #5 offensive rushing game
game by total yards, and #1 in the more important YPA in rushing. If that is
worse than the Broncos, then the Broncos must have had Jim Brown in his
prime on their team.

The Eagles' defense was significantly better than the Broncos', too, ranking #12.


Just saying . . . :coffee:

-----

Juriga72
05-23-2011, 09:33 AM
The Packers ranked #24 in offensive rushing. It's kind of difficult for me to
make #24 worse than #26. But combined with the #5 defense, it's hard to
justify the opinion that the Packers had all the disadvantages of the Broncos,
with their #32 defense.

The Eagles actually were pretty good all around. They had a lot of sacks, true,
but more goes into sacks than just the O-line.

But their passing game was complemented by the #5 offensive rushing game
game by total yards, and #1 in the more important YPA in rushing. If that is
worse than the Broncos, then the Broncos must have had Jim Brown in his
prime on their team.

The Eagles' defense was significantly better than the Broncos', too, ranking #12.


Just saying . . . :coffee:

-----

Hmmm lets see.....
Chicgao rushing-#22 (5 yards MORE a game than we had)
Rushing YPA ( you know "MOST important stat ever!!!)-3.9 Same as our terrible rush game

How about this... ATT per game-1 more than we had #21

which is it.... just stats that make Orton look human, or stats that make Orton not suck as much as he does?

BroncoJoe
05-23-2011, 09:34 AM
Kind of hard to have better rushing yardage when you're #27 in attempts.

turftoad
05-23-2011, 09:39 AM
Kind of hard to have better rushing yardage when you're #27 in attempts.

Agreed. Kind of tough to have many rushing attempts when you are playing from behind all time. Which also........ padded Ortons stats big time.

vandammage13
05-23-2011, 09:48 AM
Good call. Since we apparently are confusing QB performance with playoff
appearances, it's hard to have a worse defense than the #32 ranked one in
the league, isn't it?

Especially when one considers that the Packers had the #5 defense in yards
allowed and the #2 defense points allowed.

Regarding "worse" O-lines, that is subjective. But The Broncos finished with
the #26 running game, and for a while were #32 in that category, but they
started to gel late in the season, which helped to bring that up.

The Packers ranked #24 in offensive rushing. It's kind of difficult for me to
make #24 worse than #26. But combined with the #5 defense, it's hard to
justify the opinion that the Packers had all the disadvantages of the Broncos,
with their #32 defense.

The Eagles actually were pretty good all around. They had a lot of sacks, true,
but more goes into sacks than just the O-line.

But their passing game was complemented by the #5 offensive rushing game
game by total yards, and #1 in the more important YPA in rushing. If that is
worse than the Broncos, then the Broncos must have had Jim Brown in his
prime on their team.

The Eagles' defense was significantly better than the Broncos', too, ranking #12.


Just saying . . . :coffee:

-----

Regarding the lack of rushing attack last year, I'll admit that overall the production from the backs left much to be desired. They didn't perform nearly up to par and it showed.

Having said that, I will add that consistently playing from behind greatly contributed to their lack of production. Playing from behind = a great reduction in rushing attempts. This had a lot to do with many facets of the team: Terrible Defense, Orton-led early flameouts, porous run-blocking, as well as injuries that decimated the RB corps.

All of these reasons contributed to our running game sucking last year, and it goes well beyond not having a Jim Brown type guy back there.

I will say that if Tebow starts next year, you can count on the running game jumping up to the top half of the league due to his playmaking abilities. And before you say that Tebow is going to get hurt if he runs too much, consider that he was very smart about the way he was running the last year and didn't really take too many crushing blows in those three starts. I saw him running out of bounds after picking up first downs on more than one occasion, and as long as he continues to run smart, you can count on our running game to be very productive next year.

topscribe
05-23-2011, 09:51 AM
Kind of hard to have better rushing yardage when you're #27 in attempts.


Agreed. Kind of tough to have many rushing attempts when you are playing from behind all time. Which also........ padded Ortons stats big time.

Denver had 398 attempts, for a 3.9 YPA, which ranked them at #24. Again, that
was after the late season surge.

But, you know, since Denver and GB were so comparable in the rushing game
(GB had 421 attempts for a 3.8 YPA), that must have padded Rodgers stats, too.

BTW, I wonder where Denver stood on defense in 3rd down and RZ rushing
yardage? I don't have time to look it up today . . .

-----

BroncoJoe
05-23-2011, 09:55 AM
Denver had 398 attempts, for a 3.9 YPA, which ranked them at #24. Again, that
was after the late season surge.

I wonder where they stood in 3rd down and RZ rushing yardage? I don't have
time to look it up today . . .

-----

Three games won't alter season stats that much.

27th in attempts, 24th in YPA, 26th in total yards, 26th in rushing 1st downs.

It all starts with attempts.

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 09:56 AM
Good call. Since we apparently are confusing QB performance with playoff
appearances, it's hard to have a worse defense than the #32 ranked one in
the league, isn't it?

Especially when one considers that the Packers had the #5 defense in yards
allowed and the #2 defense points allowed.

Regarding "worse" running games and O-lines, that is subjective. The Broncos
finished with the #26 running game, and for a while were #32 in that
category, but they started to gel late in the season, which helped to bring
that up.

The Packers ranked #24 in offensive rushing. It's kind of difficult for me to
make #24 worse than #26. But combined with the #5 defense, it's hard to
justify the opinion that the Packers had all the disadvantages of the Broncos,
with their #32 defense.

The Eagles actually were pretty good all around. They had a lot of sacks, true,
but more goes into sacks than just the O-line.

But their passing game was complemented with the #5 offensive rushing game
game by total yards, and #1 in the more important YPA in rushing. If that is
worse than the Broncos, then the Broncos must have had Jim Brown in his
prime on their team.

Their defense was significantly better than the Broncos', too, ranking #12.


Just saying . . . :coffee:

-----

Are you not the least bit curious as why Elway and Fox will not commit to Orton being the starter coming opening day. They would obviously know everything you've brought up would they not? Yet the best we get out of them is Orton is the starter in name only.

I'm just saying.

Lonestar
05-23-2011, 09:57 AM
And how did that work out for Kyle? Benched, booed, and in all liklihood TRADED to another team lmao...
:
Everyone wanted to see the new toy that everyone said would take 2-3 years to be ready.

Do yiu think had it been Simms as the backup it would have gone down that way?

So the desire once the playoffs were out if sight as well as Orton being hurt. Logical that was the reasons for what happened

If Orton did not only have one year left on his contract the trade comments most likely not be even brought Up.

Less emtions mote logic please

vandammage13
05-23-2011, 10:10 AM
Three games won't alter season stats that much.

27th in attempts, 24th in YPA, 26th in total yards, 26th in rushing 1st downs.

It all starts with attempts.

And its hard to garner rushing attempts when you are starting out games being down 13-0 (wk3), 17-0 (wk5), 38-0 (wk7), 35-7 (wk11), 33-13 (wk12), 22-3 (wk14), 17-0 (wk16), and 16-7 (wk17).

Why we got down in the first place can be debated for many reasons, but the fact that our number of attempts suffered because of it cannot be.

topscribe
05-23-2011, 10:16 AM
Are you not the least bit curious as why Elway and Fox will commit to Orton being the starter coming opening day. They would obviously know everything you've brought up would they not? Yet the best we get out of them is Orton is the starter in name only.

I'm just saying.

I think you mean they will NOT commit?

Anyway, why would they commit? They have a #1 draft choice multimillionaire
on the roster. I would open it up to competition, too. Why do you think that is
such a reflection on one QB or the other?

You are not just saying; you are just grasping at straws . . .

-----

BroncoJoe
05-23-2011, 10:17 AM
And its hard to garner rushing attempts when you are starting out games being down 13-0 (wk3), 17-0 (wk5), 38-0 (wk7), 35-7 (wk11), 33-13 (wk12), 22-3 (wk14), 17-0 (wk16), and 16-7 (wk17).

Why we got down in the first place can be debated for many reasons, but the fact that our number of attempts suffered because of it cannot be.

Many of those games were still competitive at the half. To be clear, I blame coaching more than anything else. A good coach won't simply abandon the run game when down by 7-14 points at the half. McD did.

I'm simply pointing out that people who constantly blame the running game aren't looking at the whole picture.

BroncoStud
05-23-2011, 10:19 AM
Everyone wanted to see the new toy that everyone said would take 2-3 years to be ready.

Do yiu think had it been Simms as the backup it would have gone down that way?

So the desire once the playoffs were out if sight as well as Orton being hurt. Logical that was the reasons for what happened

If Orton did not only have one year left on his contract the trade comments most likely not be even brought Up.

Less emtions mote logic please

Sadly the new "toy" made the Broncos a more competitive team than Orton. Orton-led Broncos got DESTROYED by the Raiders and Chargers, and struggled in close games, the new "toy" who needed years looked a lot more poised.

BroncoStud
05-23-2011, 10:21 AM
Good call. Since we apparently are confusing QB performance with playoff
appearances, it's hard to have a worse defense than the #32 ranked one in
the league, isn't it?

Especially when one considers that the Packers had the #5 defense in yards
allowed and the #2 defense points allowed.

Regarding "worse" O-lines, that is subjective. But The Broncos finished with
the #26 running game, and for a while were #32 in that category, but they
started to gel late in the season, which helped to bring that up.

The Packers ranked #24 in offensive rushing. It's kind of difficult for me to
make #24 worse than #26. But combined with the #5 defense, it's hard to
justify the opinion that the Packers had all the disadvantages of the Broncos,
with their #32 defense.

The Eagles actually were pretty good all around. They had a lot of sacks, true,
but more goes into sacks than just the O-line.

But their passing game was complemented by the #5 offensive rushing game
game by total yards, and #1 in the more important YPA in rushing. If that is
worse than the Broncos, then the Broncos must have had Jim Brown in his
prime on their team.

The Eagles' defense was significantly better than the Broncos', too, ranking #12.


Just saying . . . :coffee:

-----

TOP, I wasn't aware that the Broncos defense was on the field on 3rd down and in the redzone... :rolleyes:

Excuses are for the weak, players like Tebow happily take a team and put them on their shoulders, guys like Orton melt under pressure.

Lonestar
05-23-2011, 10:24 AM
Many of those games were still competitive at the half. To be clear, I blame coaching more than anything else. A good coach won't simply abandon the run game when down by 7-14 points at the half. McD did.

I'm simply pointing out that people who constantly blame the running game aren't looking at the whole picture.

In almost none of those situations list were we down by that number of points.

Also those that do not take into account ALL of the factors do everyone a disservice.

vandammage13
05-23-2011, 10:25 AM
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFP-Sunday-Blitz-7671.html

In an interview with the National Football Post, Broncos executive John Elway said last year's starting quarterback, Kyle Orton, needs to win more games. "Kyle has had good numbers, but we haven’t won a lot of football games, that’s the bottom line. That’s a reflection of you as a quarterback whether you want it or not. I take it as a responsibility of that quarterback."

Seems to sum up KO's season in a nutshell...Not exactly a vote of confidence IMO....

topscribe
05-23-2011, 10:31 AM
TOP, I wasn't aware that the Broncos defense was on the field on 3rd down and in the redzone... :rolleyes:

Excuses are for the weak, players like Tebow happily take a team and put them on their shoulders, guys like Orton melt under pressure.

That is the extent of your arguments. I provide facts and figures, documentation,
and you yell "excuses!"

Anyway, I didn't know that my post had anything to do at all with this response
of yours, if indeed you were responding to it. Maybe you got the posts mixed
up? Just doesn't seem to correlate . . .

-----

vandammage13
05-23-2011, 10:35 AM
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFP-Sunday-Blitz-7671.html

Elway also goes on to say this:

“Kyle is going to have a leg up because of the success he has had, but we want everybody to have a chance to compete for that job. When we go to camp, Kyle is going to be No. 1 on the depth chart when we go to camp. But [Tim] Tebow, as well as Brady Quinn, are going to have an opportunity to compete for that job.”

Nothing really new here, but it does reiterate the fact that the job is up for grabs and KO is only the #1 QB on paper.

Juriga72
05-23-2011, 10:48 AM
In almost none of those situations list were we down by that number of points.

Also those that do not take into account ALL of the factors do everyone a disservice.

Pick sixes by our QB led to many points for the other teams...

topscribe
05-23-2011, 10:50 AM
Three games won't alter season stats that much.

27th in attempts, 24th in YPA, 26th in total yards, 26th in rushing 1st downs.

It all starts with attempts.

It starts with attempts and ends with Yards Per Attempt. The important stat is
Yards Per Attempt. Anyone who is well acquainted with football knows that.

And, yes, three games can affect the stats significantly. That is nearly 20%
of the season. But actually, the running game started to pick up five games
from the end of the season. The defense didn't, but the running game did.


-----

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 11:37 AM
I think you mean they will NOT commit?

Anyway, why would they commit? They have a #1 draft choice multimillionaire
on the roster. I would open it up to competition, too. Why do you think that is
such a reflection on one QB or the other?

You are not just saying; you are just grasping at straws . . .

-----

Orton is also a multimillionaire so that is immaterial.

I made it clear on more than one occasion why it's a problem for Orton than for Tebow. Again you have mentioned on numerous occasions that Orton was on record shattering pace, you mentioned the injury issue, you mentioned the weaknesses on the team. You have also mention how Elway has said Tebow is great football player but not a great quarterback. Also Orton has been a starter for four years in this League. He will have the same offensive coordinator under Fox that he had under joshy boy. If McCoy who has seen Orton for the past two season view things the way you view them there should be no question as to the starting quarterback should be.

So no I'm not grasping at straws but maybe you are. :ponder:

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 11:40 AM
Kind of hard to have better rushing yardage when you're #27 in attempts.
Does a team usually go with its strengths, or weaknesses?
Joe, can you not agree the OL had 2 rooks, neither 1st round draft picks, and that clady, kuper, harrison were coming off injuries? That not having the starting rb's have any time with them in TC/PS was detrimental to gelling? Y'all just blowing off these facts is showing either your unwillingness to explore deeper the problems last year, or simply your unadulterated bias toward orton.
Nobody has said he was faultless. But saying he was given a fair shot at success would be a falsehood, imo.

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 11:45 AM
And its hard to garner rushing attempts when you are starting out games being down 13-0 (wk3), 17-0 (wk5), 38-0 (wk7), 35-7 (wk11), 33-13 (wk12), 22-3 (wk14), 17-0 (wk16), and 16-7 (wk17).

Why we got down in the first place can be debated for many reasons, but the fact that our number of attempts suffered because of it cannot be.

I bet a thinking man could surmise it had something to do with the _efense.

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 11:50 AM
Sadly the new "toy" made the Broncos a more competitive team than Orton. Orton-led Broncos got DESTROYED by the Raiders and Chargers, and struggled in close games, the new "toy" who needed years looked a lot more poised.
So you're TOTALLY discounting the new play calling/no tape on TT/the better play of the OL(namely harrison?

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 11:52 AM
TOP, I wasn't aware that the Broncos defense was on the field on 3rd down and in the redzone... :rolleyes:

Excuses are for the weak, players like Tebow happily take a team and put them on their shoulders, guys like Orton melt under pressure.
In their case, you're prolly right. I didn't see the _efense all year long.

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 11:53 AM
i bet a thinking man could surmise it had something to do with the _efense.

fwiw:


elway says broncos qb must win on field not in stats column
by abe brown
fnn staff writer
may 22, 2011

for hall-of-fame quarterback turned denver broncos top executive john elway, whether his team’s starting qb is kyle orton, tim tebow or brady quinn, he will be judged on wins and losses.

“you look at our quarterback situation,” elway told the national football post. “bottom line is we have three guys who can play. Kyle has had good numbers, but we haven’t won a lot of football games, that’s the bottom line. That’s a reflection of you as a quarterback whether you want it or not. I take it as a responsibility of that quarterback.”

http://www.footballnewsnow.com/2011/elway-says-broncos-qb-must-win-on-field-not-in-stats-column/

HammeredOut
05-23-2011, 01:09 PM
Agreed. Kind of tough to have many rushing attempts when you are playing from behind all time. Which also........ padded Ortons stats big time.

Taking large chunks of Clock up running the ball, when our defense gave up 14 points on 6 plays. Ya, I hear ya, it makes sense to pad Orton's stats. The Broncos had some pretty bad drafts even with the extra Chicago picks. I would have liked to see some impact players come to town, but guys like Jarvis Moss, Ayers, the rest of them couldn't get it done when we drafted those guys high, and paid them a ton of money.

I think were just feeling the effects of bad picks right now, and nothing panning out on defense.

TXBRONC
05-23-2011, 01:40 PM
taking large chunks of clock up running the ball, when our defense gave up 14 points on 6 plays. Ya, i hear ya, it makes sense to pad orton's stats. The broncos had some pretty bad drafts even with the extra chicago picks. I would have liked to see some impact players come to town, but guys like jarvis moss, ayers, the rest of them couldn't get it done when we drafted those guys high, and paid them a ton of money.

I think were just feeling the effects of bad picks right now, and nothing panning out on defense.


fyi


elway says broncos qb must win on field not in stats column
by abe brown
fnn staff writer
may 22, 2011

for hall-of-fame quarterback turned denver broncos top executive john elway, whether his team’s starting qb is kyle orton, tim tebow or brady quinn, he will be judged on wins and losses.

“you look at our quarterback situation,” elway told the national football post. “bottom line is we have three guys who can play. Kyle has had good numbers, but we haven’t won a lot of football games, that’s the bottom line. That’s a reflection of you as a quarterback whether you want it or not. I take it as a responsibility of that quarterback.”

http://www.footballnewsnow.com/2011/...-stats-column/

NorCalBronco7
05-23-2011, 02:06 PM
“Kyle is going to have a leg up because of the success he has had, but we want everybody to have a chance to compete for that job. When we go to camp, Kyle is going to be No. 1 on the depth chart when we go to camp. But [Tim] Tebow, as well as Brady Quinn, are going to have an opportunity to compete for that job.”


To Fox, experience seems to be the deciding factor in who starts for his teams. I think Fox views Orton as capable veteran and Tebow as a talented, unproven 2nd year pro.

Its up to Tebow to take the job away from Orton, who is the Broncos #1 Qb today. But knowing how Fox runs his teams, Tebow wont for any reason be given the staring Qb job unless he proves he gives the Broncos a better chance to win this season than Orton.

BroncoJoe
05-23-2011, 02:34 PM
It starts with attempts and ends with Yards Per Attempt. The important stat is
Yards Per Attempt. Anyone who is well acquainted with football knows that.

And, yes, three games can affect the stats significantly. That is nearly 20%
of the season. But actually, the running game started to pick up five games
from the end of the season. The defense didn't, but the running game did.


-----

Nice dig, top. Guess it's finally time to say "ditto" to your little comment left as a MHS a week or so ago.

Any seasoned coach knows you HAVE to have attempts to get the yardage. Without attempts, YPA doesn't mean diddly.

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 02:44 PM
fyi

Did you actually give npb900 hell for repeating his posts and now you're doing it?

Show me where orton HASN'T taken responsibility, Tx.

Or, just keep doing the wash/rinse/repeat. :lol:

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 02:47 PM
To Fox, experience seems to be the deciding factor in who starts for his teams. I think Fox views Orton as capable veteran and Tebow as a talented, unproven 2nd year pro.

Its up to Tebow to take the job away from Orton, who is the Broncos #1 Qb today. But knowing how Fox runs his teams, Tebow wont for any reason be given the staring Qb job unless he proves he gives the Broncos a better chance to win this season than Orton.
Exactly. And that's what us ortonarians have been saying.

But instead of his detractors reading that, they're somehow seeing 'HOF QB'. :lol:

rcsodak
05-23-2011, 02:58 PM
Nice dig, top. Guess it's finally time to say "ditto" to your little comment left as a MHS a week or so ago.

Any seasoned coach knows you HAVE to have attempts to get the yardage. Without attempts, YPA doesn't mean diddly.

Joe, you go with your strengths, and running was anything BUT.
Saying the OL sucked for 1/2-2/3 of the season is NOT just an excuse. And wasting time to TRY to get it going, in games where they were already getting beat, isn't going to fix it.
Instead, they went with their strength, throwing.
There's a reason they say running teams aren't built for outscoring. Or built for comebacks.

Kc/nyj got behind, they were more than likely coooked. Indy/NE/NO/SD got behind, they still were in it.
Mcd lost the opportunity for the rb's to get practice with the OL. And they lost the opportunity to get in game shape, from missing out in tc/preseason games. It took 1/2-2/3 of the season to get that done.

Lonestar
05-23-2011, 03:08 PM
Joe, you go with your strengths, and running was anything BUT.
Saying the OL sucked for 1/2-2/3 of the season is NOT just an excuse. And wasting time to TRY to get it going, in games where they were already getting beat, isn't going to fix it.
Instead, they went with their strength, throwing. There's a reason they say running teams aren't built for outscoring. Or built for comebacks.
Kc/nyj got behind, they were more than likely coooked. Indy/NE/NO/SD got behind, they still were in it.
Mcd lost the opportunity for the rb's to get practice with the OL. And they lost the opportunity to get in game shape, from missing out in tc/preseason games. It took 1/2-2/3 of the season to get that done.
There you go being logical again. :salute:

NorCalBronco7
05-23-2011, 03:18 PM
Joe, you go with your strengths, and running was anything BUT.
Saying the OL sucked for 1/2-2/3 of the season is NOT just an excuse. And wasting time to TRY to get it going, in games where they were already getting beat, isn't going to fix it.
Instead, they went with their strength, throwing.
There's a reason they say running teams aren't built for outscoring. Or built for comebacks.

Kc/nyj got behind, they were more than likely coooked. Indy/NE/NO/SD got behind, they still were in it.
Mcd lost the opportunity for the rb's to get practice with the OL. And they lost the opportunity to get in game shape, from missing out in tc/preseason games. It took 1/2-2/3 of the season to get that done.

Speaking of weaknesses, how about the Broncos having the most play action attempts last year with a terrible running game?

LOL McDaniels was a douche.

topscribe
05-23-2011, 03:25 PM
Nice dig, top. Guess it's finally time to say "ditto" to your little comment left as a MHS a week or so ago.

Any seasoned coach knows you HAVE to have attempts to get the yardage. Without attempts, YPA doesn't mean diddly.

Don't take it personally, Joe. I didn't mean anything by that. In your case, it was more
like "as you know." But I didn't mean to belittle you. Sorry.

But that is why YPA is so important. That is the average per attempt. 400 attempts
should me more than enough to establish a viable average.

Nonetheless, the Broncos and the Packers each got about 400 attempts, so this should
satisfy the efforts of the previous poster to compare the two . . .

-----

topscribe
05-23-2011, 03:31 PM
Orton is also a multimillionaire so that is immaterial.

I made it clear on more than one occasion why it's a problem for Orton than for Tebow. Again you have mentioned on numerous occasions that Orton was on record shattering pace, you mentioned the injury issue, you mentioned the weaknesses on the team. You have also mention how Elway has said Tebow is great football player but not a great quarterback. Also Orton has been a starter for four years in this League. He will have the same offensive coordinator under Fox that he had under joshy boy. If McCoy who has seen Orton for the past two season view things the way you view them there should be no question as to the starting quarterback should be.

So no I'm not grasping at straws but maybe you are. :ponder:

That is a problem for Orton only if he loses the competition. And he decidedly
has a leg up in it, IMO. (My opinion is shared by some analysts.) And the fact
that more than once both Fox and Elway stated Orton is the starting QB (for
now) should indicate they have a starter's opinion of him. The "for now" part
does not necessarily mean anything to me. If it was up to me, I would say the
same thing, and I would open it to competition. Do you think that means I
have altered my mind about the QBs?

-----

Tned
05-23-2011, 05:30 PM
Speaking of weaknesses, how about the Broncos having the most play action attempts last year with a terrible running game?

LOL McDaniels was a douche.

When he took the job, he talked about about how dynamic his offense would be, how teams would struggle to gameplan the Broncos, because if they looked at the previous five games film, they would see a different offense each week. The fact is that it was insanely predictable. Whether it was not having enough talent on the field, or being on his own for the first time, the fact is his game plans and play calling were crap.

BigDaddyBronco
05-23-2011, 05:37 PM
When he took the job, he talked about about how dynamic his offense would be, how teams would struggle to gameplan the Broncos, because if they looked at the previous five games film, they would see a different offense each week. The fact is that it was insanely predictable. Whether it was not having enough talent on the field, or being on his own for the first time, the fact is his game plans and play calling were crap.
That's the damn truth. His idea of change was to go from WR bubble screens to TE bubble screens.

NorCalBronco7
05-23-2011, 05:38 PM
When he took the job, he talked about about how dynamic his offense would be, how teams would struggle to gameplan the Broncos, because if they looked at the previous five games film, they would see a different offense each week. The fact is that it was insanely predictable. Whether it was not having enough talent on the field, or being on his own for the first time, the fact is his game plans and play calling were crap.

He was completely predictable. But IMO the biggest issue was McDaniels forced the players to fit the scheme instead of the other way around.

Tned
05-23-2011, 05:47 PM
He was completely predictable. But IMO the biggest issue was McDaniels forced the players to fit the scheme instead of the other way around.

Yep, same thing Heimerdinger attempted to do. One trick ponies that don't realize (or aren't capable) that you have to adjust your schemes to the talent on the field, until you can change the personnel to fit your preferred scheme.

Npba900
05-23-2011, 09:18 PM
The Broncos would be better by just getting rid of Orton, addition by subtraction.

Agreed. Let TT and Quinn battle it out for the #1 spot. :woot:

BroncoStud
05-23-2011, 11:16 PM
Agreed. Let TT and Quinn battle it out for the #1 spot. :woot:

They will. Orton won't be on the roster if and when the season begins.

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 06:49 AM
They will. Orton won't be on the roster if and when the season begins.

If we have a truncated season Orton wont be going anywhere.

HORSEPOWER 56
05-24-2011, 07:45 AM
If we have a truncated season Orton wont be going anywhere.

I think it all really depends what we're offered. If someone offers a 2nd round pick, Orton can pack his bags. If not, it might not be worth the risk to not have him around as insurance. It really depends.

Honestly, I think Fox is being completely honest about the FO not knowing what they've got. They have game tape of their 3 QBs and not much else to go on when trying to create a depth chart and decide what to do as far as personnel moves. They have guys like Tebow and Quinn who've shown promise, but don't have much experience and they have Orton who has been jekyll and hyde his whole career. One week he's the guy who murdered Seattle, the next week he's the guy who couldn't complete a pass vs KC or find the endzone if his life depended on it even with a 100+ yard RB.

I think getting rid of Orton in favor of a guy like Marc Bulger who actually will mentor the two younger QBs on the roster (like he did with Flacco) and won't expect to be anything more than a backup like he was in Baltimore would be a good fit for us.

BroncoJoe
05-24-2011, 07:45 AM
And its hard to garner rushing attempts when you are starting out games being down 13-0 (wk3), 17-0 (wk5), 38-0 (wk7), 35-7 (wk11), 33-13 (wk12), 22-3 (wk14), 17-0 (wk16), and 16-7 (wk17).

Why we got down in the first place can be debated for many reasons, but the fact that our number of attempts suffered because of it cannot be.


Many of those games were still competitive at the half. To be clear, I blame coaching more than anything else. A good coach won't simply abandon the run game when down by 7-14 points at the half. McD did.

I'm simply pointing out that people who constantly blame the running game aren't looking at the whole picture.


In almost none of those situations list were we down by that number of points.

Also those that do not take into account ALL of the factors do everyone a disservice.

Wrong.

Week 3 = 13 -3 at the half (10 points)
Week 5 = 17 - 7 at the half (10 points)
Week 7 = 38 - 7 at the half (31 points)
Week 11 = 21 - 7 at the half (14 points)
Week 12 = 26 - 13 at the half (13 points)
Week 14 = 16 - 3 at the half (13 points)
Week 16 = 17 - 0 at the half (17 points - Tebow starting and we won)
Week 17 = 16 - 7 at the half (9 points - Tebow nearly brings us to a win)

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 07:55 AM
I think it all really depends what we're offered. If someone offers a 2nd round pick, Orton can pack his bags. If not, it might not be worth the risk to not have him around as insurance. It really depends.

Honestly, I think Fox is being completely honest about the FO not knowing what they've got. They have game tape of their 3 QBs and not much else to go on when trying to create a depth chart and decide what to do as far as personnel moves. They have guys like Tebow and Quinn who've shown promise, but don't have much experience and they have Orton who has been jekyll and hyde his whole career. One week he's the guy who murdered Seattle, the next week he's the guy who couldn't complete a pass vs KC or find the endzone if his life depended on it even with a 100+ yard RB.

I think getting rid of Orton in favor of a guy like Marc Bulger who actually will mentor the two younger QBs on the roster (like he did with Flacco) and won't expect to be anything more than a backup like he was in Baltimore would be a good fit for us.

If the offer that good then it might be hard to pass up. But on the other hand if we're talking about only have a couple of weeks to get ready for a season it wouldn't surprise me if they passed up a good deal under those circumstances.

HammeredOut
05-24-2011, 11:11 AM
I think it all really depends what we're offered. If someone offers a 2nd round pick, Orton can pack his bags. If not, it might not be worth the risk to not have him around as insurance. It really depends.

Honestly, I think Fox is being completely honest about the FO not knowing what they've got. They have game tape of their 3 QBs and not much else to go on when trying to create a depth chart and decide what to do as far as personnel moves. They have guys like Tebow and Quinn who've shown promise, but don't have much experience and they have Orton who has been jekyll and hyde his whole career. One week he's the guy who murdered Seattle, the next week he's the guy who couldn't complete a pass vs KC or find the endzone if his life depended on it even with a 100+ yard RB.

I think getting rid of Orton in favor of a guy like Marc Bulger who actually will mentor the two younger QBs on the roster (like he did with Flacco) and won't expect to be anything more than a backup like he was in Baltimore would be a good fit for us.


The Broncos have only given Orton 2 games in the past 2 seasons with RB who can get 100 plus yards on the ground. Know show Moreno is a draft bust thus far. In games when Orton gets 100 plus on the ground with the run game, he is 1-1. KC went to the playoffs this season, just so you know.

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 11:24 AM
The Broncos have only given Orton 2 games in the past 2 seasons with RB who can get 100 plus yards on the ground. Know show Moreno is a draft bust thus far. In games when Orton gets 100 plus on the ground with the run game, he is 1-1. KC went to the playoffs this season, just so you know.

The ONLY reason Orton has the whole "stats" argument to fall back on is because McDumbass thew the ball so much. In a typical NFL-styled offense Orton has proven to be mediocre, at best. In fact, when the running game picked up again this season he was horrible.

You want it both ways but that isn't reality. Orton has inflated stats because Denver threw the ball so much. History tells us that when Orton plays from under center and not in shotgun spread, he is a mediocre QB with a rating under 80.

Ravage!!!
05-24-2011, 11:53 AM
The ONLY reason Orton has the whole "stats" argument to fall back on is because McDumbass thew the ball so much. In a typical NFL-styled offense Orton has proven to be mediocre, at best. In fact, when the running game picked up again this season he was horrible.

You want it both ways but that isn't reality. Orton has inflated stats because Denver threw the ball so much. History tells us that when Orton plays from under center and not in shotgun spread, he is a mediocre QB with a rating under 80.

Bingo. People want to bring up and brag about Orton's passing yards, but want to complain about the running yards. If we ran the ball, Orton wouldn't have passed as much. We passed a TON of times...averaging something like 41 passes per game, and many times more than that. More passes will get you more yards.

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 12:15 PM
Bingo. People want to bring up and brag about Orton's passing yards, but want to complain about the running yards. If we ran the ball, Orton wouldn't have passed as much. We passed a TON of times...averaging something like 41 passes per game, and many times more than that. More passes will get you more yards.

There were games where the running game was working and McDaniels inexplicably abandoned it.

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 12:21 PM
Wrong.

Week 3 = 13 -3 at the half (10 points)
Week 5 = 17 - 7 at the half (10 points)
Week 7 = 38 - 7 at the half (31 points)
Week 11 = 21 - 7 at the half (14 points)
Week 12 = 26 - 13 at the half (13 points)
Week 14 = 16 - 3 at the half (13 points)
Week 16 = 17 - 0 at the half (17 points - Tebow starting and we won)
Week 17 = 16 - 7 at the half (9 points - Tebow nearly brings us to a win)

That should pretty much put an end to this foolish debate. :salute:

BroncoJoe
05-24-2011, 04:44 PM
That should pretty much put an end to this foolish debate. :salute:

Guess so! :shrugs: