PDA

View Full Version : T.D. says - it's tebow time..



nevcraw
05-23-2011, 09:57 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/09000d5d81ff8dd9/T-D-It-s-Tebow-time-in-Denver


was a skeptic
likens to him to michael Jordan on how he elevates other's play
says Orton is a good QB but has maxed out on his his talents
"he gives the broncos the best chance to win, right now and I am saying that"...

hamrob
05-23-2011, 10:30 PM
Yep, this says alot to me.

Tebow just has "it". He's the type of guy that you just can't wait to see what he does next. I hate to say it....but, he reminds me of Elway (in that way).

I don't like getting my hopes up...because it could be a big disapointment...but, I'm a huge Tebow fan. T.D. sees it and really anyone that knows what a "winner" looks like, knows it.

Tned
05-23-2011, 10:42 PM
It seems to be the opinion that most people get after spending time around Tebow or speaking to people that have. Also, I think his thoughts on Orton mirrors many. Nice guy, solid QB, but what we've seen (Den and Chi) is what we'll get going forward.

broncofaninfla
05-24-2011, 11:43 AM
After seeing them both play last year, I agree with TD. Tebow can make things happen when the play breaks down, Orton just gets sacked of fails to convert when it counts. Tewbo has the intangibles to be a special QB in this league. Orton is only good withen the confines of a system and horrible ouside of it, all the makings of a very good back up QB.

GEM
05-24-2011, 11:45 AM
Let's go TE-BOW! :rockon:

:D

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 12:08 PM
After seeing them both play last year, I agree with TD. Tebow can make things happen when the play breaks down, Orton just gets sacked of fails to convert when it counts. Tewbo has the intangibles to be a special QB in this league. Orton is only good withen the confines of a system and horrible ouside of it, all the makings of a very good back up QB.

Orton has generally been good in the first have of games but get to the second half and it's different story generally speaking.

Npba900
05-24-2011, 12:21 PM
Question I have....why is Brady Quinn the forgotten man? In a straight up QB competition can Tebow beat out Quinn? I think Elway and Fox will give both Tebow and Quinn a chance to battle it out for the starting job. It wouldn't be fair to Tebow just to hand him the starting job and wouldn't be fair to Quinn to not allow him to competed for the job as well. Just my humble opinion.

Ravage!!!
05-24-2011, 12:36 PM
Question I have....why is Brady Quinn the forgotten man? In a straight up QB competition can Tebow beat out Quinn? I think Elway and Fox will give both Tebow and Quinn a chance to battle it out for the starting job. It wouldn't be fair to Tebow just to hand him the starting job and wouldn't be fair to Quinn to not allow him to competed for the job as well. Just my humble opinion.

Quinn is the forgotten man, because he's not any good.

GEM
05-24-2011, 12:36 PM
Question I have....why is Brady Quinn the forgotten man? In a straight up QB competition can Tebow beat out Quinn? I think Elway and Fox will give both Tebow and Quinn a chance to battle it out for the starting job. It wouldn't be fair to Tebow just to hand him the starting job and wouldn't be fair to Quinn to not allow him to competed for the job as well. Just my humble opinion.

In an article posted yesterday, Elway said that Quinn would have as equal a shot as the other 2.

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 12:37 PM
Quinn is the forgotten man, because he's not any good.

:lol::lol::lol::laugh:

NorCalBronco7
05-24-2011, 12:39 PM
Start Tebow. I dont think anyone here believes the games bigger than Tebow right now. Not sure he gives the Broncos a better chance at winning next year, but being a first round pick, he needs to get his own shot.

TD seems to gush about Tebow and thats good to hear. It seems he already has respect from many former Bronco greats.

Juriga72
05-24-2011, 12:44 PM
So now BOTH Elway and TD think "Orton has maxed out and its not good enough"

Boy I wish they knew more than some DBMB posters did....

topscribe
05-24-2011, 12:47 PM
Orton has generally been good in the first have of games but get to the second half and it's different story generally speaking.

Hmmm . . . welllll . . . you wouldn't be referring to the St. Louis game, would you?

-----

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 12:47 PM
So now BOTH Elway and TD think "Orton has maxed out and its not good enough"

Boy I wish they knew more than some DBMB posters did....

Come on Juriga dumb posters are not the topic of the thread. :D

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 12:48 PM
Hmmm . . . welllll . . . you wouldn't be referring to the St. Louis game, would you?

-----

Hey, 1 out of 68 ain't so bad... :laugh:



:coffee:

topscribe
05-24-2011, 12:49 PM
Start Tebow. I dont think anyone here believes the games bigger than Tebow right now. Not sure he gives the Broncos a better chance at winning next year, but being a first round pick, he needs to get his own shot.

TD seems to gush about Tebow and thats good to hear. It seems he already has respect from many former Bronco greats.

The problem is, TD also gushed over Moreno.

It's amazing to me how Elway's gushing over Orton is so discounted, but now
TD's opinion of Tebow is worthy of putting up in lights.

I hope TD's right about Tebow. I really do. But it is just another opinion . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
05-24-2011, 12:56 PM
Elway did not 'gush' about Orton :lol:

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 12:58 PM
The problem is, TD also gushed over Moreno.

It's amazing to me how Elway's gushing over Orton is so discounted, but now
TD's opinion of Tebow is worthy of putting up in lights.

I hope TD's right about Tebow. I really do. But it is just another opinion . . .

-----

Because Elway is trying to get a trade done and TD is just speaking his mind. Elway knows full well how feeble Orton is when it matters TOP, he's been watching. If Elway REALLY endorsed Orton he would come out and say that Kyle is the future, etc, etc, all he has said is that as of TODAY (until a trade gets done :laugh:) Orton is the starter and there will be open competition when the season resumes between all 3...

:lol:

Hardly "gushing"... More like keeping Orton's trade value up.

topscribe
05-24-2011, 01:01 PM
I wouldn't say gushed. He did complement him ONCE in galaxy far, far away.

I would say gushed. TD said specifically that Moreno can be a GREAT RB in
an interview I watched a couple months ago.

-----

GEM
05-24-2011, 01:04 PM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:

topscribe
05-24-2011, 01:11 PM
Because Elway is trying to get a trade done and TD is just speaking his mind. Elway knows full well how feeble Orton is when it matters TOP, he's been watching. If Elway REALLY endorsed Orton he would come out and say that Kyle is the future, etc, etc, all he has said is that as of TODAY (until a trade gets done :laugh:) Orton is the starter and there will be open competition when the season resumes between all 3...

:lol:

Hardly "gushing"... More like keeping Orton's trade value up.

You always have your own explanation as to what they are thinking, don't you?
And then you launch it forth, representing it as fact.

Only thing is, Orton WAS playing at a "record-shattering, Pro Bowl level."
People are suggesting that he will break records if he keeps it up and were
suggesting him as a possible Pro Bowl candidate. And then Elway added,
"And then there were those rib injuries" -- you know, where it was
suggested Elway was lying or that he didn't have a clue?

Those were Elway's words. And you know what?--That was on Elway's very
first day of employment, or close to it. No one in the FO was giving the QBs
much of a thought then.

Oh yes, I will answer your "what else is he going to say?" that you will shoot
right back: Why would Elway just gush like that? If it was just a perfunctory
compliment, then why didn't he say something to the effect of, "I think he's
a good quarterback"?

It's so much BS. TD compliments Tebow, and it's hallelujah time. Elway
compliments Orton, and it's passed like something one would flush down
the toilet.

As I have already mentioned, the place reeks of double-standard . . .

-----

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 01:13 PM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:

Sorry. :sad: :kiss:

topscribe
05-24-2011, 01:13 PM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:

Sorry. :focus:

-----

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 01:17 PM
Sorry. :focus:

-----

That's right it's all your fault. :throwrock: :D

Ravage!!!
05-24-2011, 01:29 PM
You always have your own explanation as to what they are thinking, don't you?
And then you launch it forth, representing it as fact.
Irony since you just claimed the next statement as "gushing."


"record-shattering, Pro Bowl level."


"And then there were those rib injuries"

Sooo.. this is gushing now? :confused:

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 02:07 PM
Irony since you just claimed the next statement as "gushing."





Sooo.. this is gushing now? :confused:

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

No kidding. TOP thinks WE hold a double standard. :laugh:

NightTerror218
05-24-2011, 02:10 PM
Question I have....why is Brady Quinn the forgotten man? In a straight up QB competition can Tebow beat out Quinn? I think Elway and Fox will give both Tebow and Quinn a chance to battle it out for the starting job. It wouldn't be fair to Tebow just to hand him the starting job and wouldn't be fair to Quinn to not allow him to competed for the job as well. Just my humble opinion.


He is a bust.

vandammage13
05-24-2011, 02:49 PM
Hmmm . . . welllll . . . you wouldn't be referring to the St. Louis game, would you?

-----

LOL...you mean that game where Orton excelled vs. a prevent defense when the game was practically over? Shame on the Rams for utilizing the prevent defense, as the only thing it does is prevent you from winning.

I will give Orton credit for making the most of that situation (and not rolling over like he did in some other games), but lets be honest here...Orton was getting nothing done when the Rams were actually running their real defense.

Northman
05-24-2011, 02:51 PM
It seems to be the opinion that most people get after spending time around Tebow or speaking to people that have. Also, I think his thoughts on Orton mirrors many. Nice guy, solid QB, but what we've seen (Den and Chi) is what we'll get going forward.

Exactly.

Northman
05-24-2011, 02:53 PM
Question I have....why is Brady Quinn the forgotten man? In a straight up QB competition can Tebow beat out Quinn? I think Elway and Fox will give both Tebow and Quinn a chance to battle it out for the starting job. It wouldn't be fair to Tebow just to hand him the starting job and wouldn't be fair to Quinn to not allow him to competed for the job as well. Just my humble opinion.

Who says Quinn is the forgotten man? Elway has stated all the QB's will have a chance to compete. I dont understand the confusion there.

topscribe
05-24-2011, 02:57 PM
It seems to be the opinion that most people get after spending time around Tebow or speaking to people that have. Also, I think his thoughts on Orton mirrors many. Nice guy, solid QB, but what we've seen (Den and Chi) is what we'll get going forward.

And Churchill was nearly the only person in all of England who did not believe Hitler.

Popular opinion is not necessarily an evidential factor . . .

-----

NorCalBronco7
05-24-2011, 02:58 PM
And Churchill was nearly the only person in all of England who did not believe Hitler.

Popular opinion is not necessarily an evidential factor . . .

-----

But Top, everybodies doing it :protest:

Northman
05-24-2011, 03:00 PM
And Churchill was nearly the only person in all of England who did not believe Hitler.

Popular opinion is not necessarily an evidential factor . . .

-----

Oh lord.

Davii
05-24-2011, 03:02 PM
Glad to hear it . If nothing else Tim brings excitement. If he brings back the Mile High Salute and sustained drives ending in points he's got my vote for just about anything.

rcsodak
05-24-2011, 03:45 PM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:
:lol:
How many times do you tell posters that bitch about threads,'nobody made you enter it'?

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 03:50 PM
Glad to hear it . If nothing else Tim brings excitement. If he brings back the Mile High Salute and sustained drives ending in points he's got my vote for just about anything.

In the immortal words of Randy "Macho Man" Savage "You need a lttle excitement? Snap into a Tebow! Oh Yeaaah!" :D

topscribe
05-24-2011, 03:59 PM
In the immortal words of Randy "Macho Man" Savage "You need a lttle excitement? Snap into a Tebow! Oh Yeaaah!" :D

:faint:

-----

rcsodak
05-24-2011, 04:07 PM
In the immortal words of Randy "Macho Man" Savage "You need a lttle excitement? Snap into a Tebow! Oh Yeaaah!" :D

Link?

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 04:10 PM
Link?

He's deceased.

rcsodak
05-24-2011, 04:13 PM
He's deceased.

But you quoted.

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 04:19 PM
But you quoted.

It wasn't on the internet.

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 04:21 PM
:faint:

-----

I always heard The Mancho Man caused young girls to faint. I had no idea that he had the same effect on older men. :shocked:

rcsodak
05-24-2011, 04:28 PM
It wasn't on the internet.
Well, just glad he had images of TT dancing in the poppy field as he met his demise.

TXBRONC
05-24-2011, 04:48 PM
Well, just glad he had images of TT dancing in the poppy field as he met his demise.

I don't know if that's what was going through his mind when he met his end but if it was ok.

Juriga72
05-24-2011, 05:35 PM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:

Can I just tell you that you are HOT when pissed off..... just sayin....:welcome:

BroncoStud
05-24-2011, 08:24 PM
And Churchill was nearly the only person in all of England who did not believe Hitler.

Popular opinion is not necessarily an evidential factor . . .

-----

Churchhill, Tebow, and Hitler in the same context... :shocked:

I am sure there were plenty of English who didn't support Adolf Hitler, by the way... :laugh:

nevcraw
05-24-2011, 08:36 PM
And Churchill was nearly the only person in all of England who did not believe Hitler.

Popular opinion is not necessarily an evidential factor . . .

-----

someone needs a nap

topscribe
05-24-2011, 10:40 PM
Churchhill, Tebow, and Hitler in the same context... :shocked:

I am sure there were plenty of English who didn't support Adolf Hitler, by the way... :laugh:

I guess they didn't teach you a lot about allegory in school?

It's a shame . . . I made sure my students learned about it . . .

-----

FanInAZ
05-25-2011, 01:44 AM
:lol:
How many times do you tell posters that bitch about threads,'nobody made you enter it'?

Well, she is a mod and therefore I think she should be required to read posts in all of the threads to make sure everyone his behaving. This doesn’t mean that she has to read every single post, but she I would think she does need to read just enough to know if a riot is breaking out.

However, you do have a valid point that griping doesn't change people behavior. As a rank and file member of this board, I just take a break from coming here whenever I get sick and tired of reading the same things over and over again.

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 03:41 AM
I guess they didn't teach you a lot about allegory in school?

It's a shame . . . I made sure my students learned about it . . .

-----

I've read just about everything I've gotten ahold of about WW2. There were PLENTY of English who were not Nazi-supporters. :laugh:

Hell, there were plenty of Germans who were not Nazi-supporters.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 04:44 AM
Well, she is a mod and therefore I think she should be required to read posts in all of the threads to make sure everyone his behaving. This doesn’t mean that she has to read every single post, but she I would think she does need to read just enough to know if a riot is breaking out.

However, you do have a valid point that griping doesn't change people behavior. As a rank and file member of this board, I just take a break from coming here whenever I get sick and tired of reading the same things over and over again.

It was meant to be sarcastic. ;l

But with all sarcasm comes a little truth.

Juriga72
05-25-2011, 06:47 AM
I guess they didn't teach you a lot about allegory in school?

It's a shame . . . I made sure my students learned about it . . .

-----

Neville Chamberlain thought that Kyle Orton had that "IT" thing going for him too....

vandammage13
05-25-2011, 09:45 AM
Hmmm . . . welllll . . . you wouldn't be referring to the St. Louis game, would you?

-----

I also find it amusing that the best example you could come up with for Orton was still in a loss.

Juriga72
05-25-2011, 09:48 AM
I also find it amusing that the best example you could come up with for Orton was still in a loss.

Didnt you see Kyle "Light up" Baltimore this year?

314 yards...2 td!!!!!! 104.5 qb rating!!!!!!

"He was not the reason they lost the game"

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 09:53 AM
Here we go....another ******* thread turned into Orton vs. Tebow. Orton lovers vs. Teboners.

Every ******* thread has to turn into this bullshit. :rolleyes:
Guess you reply don't have to read it if it is as offensive as your *** seem to indicate.

Or as your *** are to some.

GEM
05-25-2011, 10:01 AM
Guess you reply don't have to read it if it is as offensive as your *** seem to indicate.

Or as your *** are to some.

Or maybe threads have a topic. This one is td and tebow. There are plenty of threads battling out orton. *** are allowed, even encouraged. Offend you? Too ******* bad. Just like orton taking over every tebow thread. I can not like it and post my aggravation with it.

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 10:10 AM
Well, she is a mod and therefore I think she should be required to read posts in all of the threads to make sure everyone his behaving. This doesn’t mean that she has to read every single post, but she I would think she does need to read just enough to know if a riot is breaking out.

However, you do have a valid point that griping doesn't change people behavior. As a rank and file member of this board, I just take a break from coming here whenever I get sick and tired of reading the same things over and over again.

A very valid point , but she has the options of either cleaning up the tread deleting said off topic posts, not commenting on it ( a form of censorship ) or not be a mod.

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 10:11 AM
I also find it amusing that the best example you could come up with for Orton was still in a loss.

Yet he did not fall into a "fetal position" like so many like to quote. Hmmmmmmmm

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 10:13 AM
Or maybe threads have a topic. This one is td and tebow. There are plenty of threads battling out orton. *** are allowed, even encouraged. Offend you? Too ******* bad. Just like orton taking over every tebow thread. I can not like it and post my aggravation with it.

See post before. Those seem to be your options. plus I guess yOU can just be rude like in this post.

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 10:19 AM
See post before. Those seem to be your options. plus I guess yOU can just be rude like in this post.

You don't have room to call anyone out on being rude.

Juriga72
05-25-2011, 10:22 AM
Yet he did not fall into a "fetal position" like so many like to quote. Hmmmmmmmm

Lets see......
Last drive St. Luois game-


Denver Broncos at 01:06
1-10-DEN 34 (1:06) Direction Change (Shotgun) 8-K.Orton pass incomplete short right to 84-B.Lloyd (24-R.Bartell). Penalty on SL-24-R.Bartell, Defensive Pass Interference, offsetting, enforced at DEN 34 - No Play. Penalty on DEN-8-K.Orton, Illegal Motion, offsetting.

1-10-DEN 34 (1:00) (Shotgun) 8-K.Orton sacked at DEN 28 for -6 yards (72-C.Long).

WATCH HIGHLIGHT
2-16-DEN 28 (:40) (Shotgun) 8-K.Orton pass incomplete deep middle to 89-D.Graham (55-J.Laurinaitis) Orton found in "fetal ball position".

3-16-DEN 28 (:34) (Shotgun) 8-K.Orton pass incomplete deep middle to 19-E.Royal. Penalty on DEN-74-R.Harris, Illegal Use of Hands, declined.

4-16-DEN 28 (:27) (Shotgun) 8-K.Orton pass incomplete short right to 19-E.Royal [72-C.Long "Orton found cleaning out pants with brown stains in it"



yup.. looks pretty bad there

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 10:31 AM
which (tying into another thread) Elway says that you have to win on the field and not just the stat sheet.

When your career average is scoring 1.4 TDs a game, it doesn't take many points to beat you. Having to build a defense that keeps teams in the low teens, is ESPECIALLY tough in today's NFL where the rules are made to help offenses score (even when the rules help, Orton can't score).

Seems that no one "knows" if Tebow is going to be good. But they know they want to see him try rather than watch Orton be Orton. I know I would rather watch Tebow than watch Orton. We've seen the best of Kyle. Its a pretty short, and pretty boring, highlight reel.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 10:37 AM
You don't have room to call anyone out on being rude.maybe you would be better served to not constantly interject your opine in, matters that don't concern you, tx. NOBODY on this board is faultless...including you. ;)

<Pmke>

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 10:40 AM
maybe you would be better served to not constantly interject your opine in, matters that don't concern you, tx. NOBODY on this board is faultless...including you. ;)

<Pmke>

Take your own first and then I'll consider what you've said. :2thumbs:

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 10:45 AM
which (tying into another thread) Elway says that you have to win on the field and not just the stat sheet.

When your career average is scoring 1.4 TDs a game, it doesn't take many points to beat you. Having to build a defense that keeps teams in the low teens, is ESPECIALLY tough in today's NFL where the rules are made to help offenses score (even when the rules help, Orton can't score).

Seems that no one "knows" if Tebow is going to be good. But they know they want to see him try rather than watch Orton be Orton. I know I would rather watch Tebow than watch Orton. We've seen the best of Kyle. Its a pretty short, and pretty boring, highlight reel.
Weird how posters can talk of how sucky mcd was at game planning, play calling, drafting....

...and yet, hold the players in those sucky plays/schemes to account.

Seems kinda detrimental to the arguments. :shrugs:

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 11:03 AM
Take your own first and then I'll consider what you've said. :2thumbs:I included myself, tx.
I'm trying to stay above the frays....you havent noticed? ;)

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 11:16 AM
I included myself, tx.
I'm trying to stay above the frays....you havent noticed? ;)

So am I. Calling someone account doesn't mean you're degrading the other person.

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 11:31 AM
When your career average is scoring 1.4 TDs a game, it doesn't take many points to beat you. Having to build a defense that keeps teams in the low teens, is ESPECIALLY tough in today's NFL where the rules are made to help offenses score (even when the rules help, Orton can't score).



Orton hasn't been with Denver his entire career. Weird how some posters will blame McD for Orton's defiencies, even though Orton hasn't always been with McD.

Weird how some posters will always continue to make excuses for Orton, even when its putting down the very coach they have tried sooo hard to make excuses for! :lol:

GEM
05-25-2011, 11:32 AM
maybe you would be better served to not constantly interject your opine in, matters that don't concern you, tx. NOBODY on this board is faultless...including you. ;)

<Pmke>


Well ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. :laugh: How rich. :lol:

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 11:33 AM
Well ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. :laugh: How rich. :lol:

Its the very definition of irony, and hypocrisy, all rolled up into one tiny post :elefant:

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 11:43 AM
Pot calling the kettle black. Hmmmmm do not recall every third Post or so having a potty mouth. And frankly other than saying logical verses being emotional I am not rude even if you consider logic/emo rude. Just stating facts. And been a blue moon since I have cursed in posts. And certainly not in back to back post while whinning about the direction the thread has went.

Those are the facts.

Because some do not like my POV is not the same as being rude. But then I guess if the shoe fits wear it.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 11:52 AM
Well ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. :laugh: How rich. :lol:wow. Guess you missed that last sentence too.

And guess what the <Pmke> stands for. Yes, G....I knew your response before even you did. ;)

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 12:04 PM
Its the very definition of irony, and hypocrisy, all rolled up into one tiny post :elefant:guess the only difference, then, is your posts have more words. :elefant:
/last word

GO BRONCOS

RAH RAH REE
KICK EM IN THE KNEE
RAH RAH RUTS
KICK EM IN THE OTHER KNEE

:pompoms:

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 12:04 PM
:rolleyes:

GEM
05-25-2011, 12:43 PM
Pot calling the kettle black. Hmmmmm do not recall every third Post or so having a potty mouth. And frankly other than saying logical verses being emotional I am not rude even if you consider logic/emo rude. Just stating facts. And been a blue moon since I have cursed in posts. And certainly not in back to back post while whinning about the direction the thread has went.

Those are the facts.

Because some do not like my POV is not the same as being rude. But then I guess if the shoe fits wear it.

Quit whining about my potty mouth. I don't circumvent the filter so if you don't like it, lump it. What you consider logic, I consider crap. Just because you find it logical doesn't make it so. Just the same, what I find logical, you don't. You think trashing Shanahan while praising McDaniels logical....well, I say, gimme some of what you're freaking drinking. Unless it's Josh's koolaid cause I was tricked into drinking that once and it left an awful imprint on the franchise that I hold dear.

You're on a football message board, not a board for discussing Einstein and other logical thinkers.

Everything you lambaste everyone else for, you do 10 times worse. So get over yourself.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 12:44 PM
I've read just about everything I've gotten ahold of about WW2. There were PLENTY of English who were not Nazi-supporters. :laugh:

Hell, there were plenty of Germans who were not Nazi-supporters.

Okay, so in other words you know nothing of allegories.

So now we are embroiled in a WWII debate? If you cannot get the point of my
original comment, then the best approach would be not to comment at all on it. :rolleyes:

-----

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 01:00 PM
Okay, so in other words you know nothing of allegories.

So now we are embroiled in a WWII debate? If you cannot get the point of my
original comment, then the best approach would be not to comment at all on it. :rolleyes:

-----

No, I get the metaphor TOP. There were SOME Nazi's in England, for sure, here in the US as well. Metaphor, allegory, whatever you want to call it, Tebow is 1,000 times the leader than Orton is. QB is all about being a leader.

If your QB walks off the field and looks to everyone else and says "it's over" then chances are that will rub off in a negative manner. Its "over" because Orton will NEVER be the athlete capable of doing something other than managing a game. Unless you're a superbly built roster you need PLAYMAKERS. Orton isn't and never will be. He is too limited physically and doesn't have the guts it takes to put a team on his back when the going gets tough.

Hes so worried about another QB getting on the field and taking his job that he puts himself ahead of the team. And I would LOVE to hear your rebuttal on that. In Chicago when he had his "high ankle sprain" and Grossman put it to the Titans the first game Kyle was out, Kyle hurried back into the lineup the next week and pretty much sucked the rest of the season and it hurt the Bears. According to you, he did the same thing in 2010 with the Broncos. He was so pitiful against the Chiefs and Cardinals that he clearly LOST us both of those games. He has to take at least 75% of the blame for those pathetic showings, and if he was THAT hurt he should have had enough character to take butt off of the field.

But he didn't. He knew that one Tebow got on the field he was done. Why would he think that? Maybe because he knows his own limitations and is only trying to make as much money as possible while he can as a starter? Whether it's Grossman or Tebow, one thing is clear, Orton has to worry about his status as a starter because he isn't good enough to keep the job without doubt. 31% on 3rd downs is NEVER going to cut it. NEVER. He finished middle of the pack in most major statistics this year, in what was his best season. Middle of the pack running a spread offense and throwing damn near 40 times a game?

How anyone can defend this nonsense is beyond me. He's either mediocre, selfish, or BOTH. I tend to believe it's both.

NorCalBronco7
05-25-2011, 01:18 PM
No, I get the metaphor TOP. There were SOME Nazi's in England, for sure, here in the US as well. Metaphor, allegory, whatever you want to call it, Tebow is 1,000 times the leader than Orton is. QB is all about being a leader.

If your QB walks off the field and looks to everyone else and says "it's over" then chances are that will rub off in a negative manner. Its "over" because Orton will NEVER be the athlete capable of doing something other than managing a game. Unless you're a superbly built roster you need PLAYMAKERS. Orton isn't and never will be. He is too limited physically and doesn't have the guts it takes to put a team on his back when the going gets tough.

Hes so worried about another QB getting on the field and taking his job that he puts himself ahead of the team. And I would LOVE to hear your rebuttal on that. In Chicago when he had his "high ankle sprain" and Grossman put it to the Titans the first game Kyle was out, Kyle hurried back into the lineup the next week and pretty much sucked the rest of the season and it hurt the Bears. According to you, he did the same thing in 2010 with the Broncos. He was so pitiful against the Chiefs and Cardinals that he clearly LOST us both of those games. He has to take at least 75% of the blame for those pathetic showings, and if he was THAT hurt he should have had enough character to take butt off of the field.

But he didn't. He knew that one Tebow got on the field he was done. Why would he think that? Maybe because he knows his own limitations and is only trying to make as much money as possible while he can as a starter? Whether it's Grossman or Tebow, one thing is clear, Orton has to worry about his status as a starter because he isn't good enough to keep the job without doubt. 31% on 3rd downs is NEVER going to cut it. NEVER. He finished middle of the pack in most major statistics this year, in what was his best season. Middle of the pack running a spread offense and throwing damn near 40 times a game?

How anyone can defend this nonsense is beyond me. He's either mediocre, selfish, or BOTH. I tend to believe it's both.

LOL!

You really shine here, Stud.

frauschieze
05-25-2011, 01:18 PM
Alright EVERYONE!

This thread has a topic. Let's get on it.

To anyone that has a problem with the way Gem posts because she is a mod, you are welcome to address it directly to Tned and the rest of the mod staff. You ARE NOT allowed to openly criticize or second guess her intentions per this site's rules. Continuing to do so will not be tolerated going forward.

So, now....

:focus:

slim
05-25-2011, 01:22 PM
Wait, we are not allowed to make fun of gem?

How about top? Can we make fun of him?

frauschieze
05-25-2011, 01:24 PM
Wait, we are not allowed to make fun of gem?

How about top? Can we make fun of him?

In the Lounge, baby. In the Lounge.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 01:28 PM
No, I get the metaphor TOP. There were SOME Nazi's in England, for sure, here in the US as well. Metaphor, allegory, whatever you want to call it, Tebow is 1,000 times the leader than Orton is. QB is all about being a leader.

If your QB walks off the field and looks to everyone else and says "it's over" then chances are that will rub off in a negative manner. Its "over" because Orton will NEVER be the athlete capable of doing something other than managing a game. Unless you're a superbly built roster you need PLAYMAKERS. Orton isn't and never will be. He is too limited physically and doesn't have the guts it takes to put a team on his back when the going gets tough.

Hes so worried about another QB getting on the field and taking his job that he puts himself ahead of the team. And I would LOVE to hear your rebuttal on that. In Chicago when he had his "high ankle sprain" and Grossman put it to the Titans the first game Kyle was out, Kyle hurried back into the lineup the next week and pretty much sucked the rest of the season and it hurt the Bears. According to you, he did the same thing in 2010 with the Broncos. He was so pitiful against the Chiefs and Cardinals that he clearly LOST us both of those games. He has to take at least 75% of the blame for those pathetic showings, and if he was THAT hurt he should have had enough character to take butt off of the field.

But he didn't. He knew that one Tebow got on the field he was done. Why would he think that? Maybe because he knows his own limitations and is only trying to make as much money as possible while he can as a starter? Whether it's Grossman or Tebow, one thing is clear, Orton has to worry about his status as a starter because he isn't good enough to keep the job without doubt. 31% on 3rd downs is NEVER going to cut it. NEVER. He finished middle of the pack in most major statistics this year, in what was his best season. Middle of the pack running a spread offense and throwing damn near 40 times a game?

How anyone can defend this nonsense is beyond me. He's either mediocre, selfish, or BOTH. I tend to believe it's both.

Deep breaths, Stud. Deep breaths.

You look at it one way, and I look at it another. The difference is, you use
your own scenarios and conjectures and represent them as facts.

I am a cause and effect person. That is what I learned, and that is what I
taught. Some people have not responded well to that on this board, labeling
me an "Ortonite," when I have analyzed other players the same way over the
years.

Well, maybe logic has nothing to do with it on a football message board. At
least, that is what I get from some posters. But I have tried to show why
certain things may have happened, rather than just looking at the surface.
But, I know, they are just "excuses" to some people.

Well, you do it your way, and I'll do it mine. I can live with that if you can. I
just wish you would rely more on documentation and less on your own
imagination in the formation of what you believe are facts . . .

-----

topscribe
05-25-2011, 01:30 PM
Wait, we are not allowed to make fun of gem?

How about top? Can we make fun of him?

Huh? I thought that was already happening . . . :look:

-----

slim
05-25-2011, 01:31 PM
Huh? I thought that was already happening . . . :look:

-----

You aint' seen nothin', yet :cool:

topscribe
05-25-2011, 01:32 PM
You aint' seen nothin', yet :cool:

:couch:

-----

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 01:38 PM
Deep breaths, Stud. Deep breaths.

You look at it one way, and I look at it another. The difference is, you use
your own scenarios and conjectures and represent them as facts.

I am a cause and effect person. That is what I learned, and that is what I
taught. Some people have not responded well to that on this board, labeling
me an "Ortonite," when I have analyzed other players the same way over the
years.

Well, maybe logic has nothing to do with it on a football message board. At
least, that is what I get from some posters. But I have tried to show why
certain things may have happened, rather than just looking at the surface.
But, I know, they are just "excuses" to some people.

Well, you do it your way, and I'll do it mine. I can live with that if you can. I
just wish you would rely more on documentation and less on your own
imagination in the formation of what you believe are facts . . .

-----

Just to be clear TOP, you use as much conjecture represented as fact, as I do, and you know it. :laugh::laugh:

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 01:41 PM
No, I get the metaphor TOP. There were SOME Nazi's in England, for sure, here in the US as well. Metaphor, allegory, whatever you want to call it, Tebow is 1,000 times the leader than Orton is. QB is all about being a leader.

If your QB walks off the field and looks to everyone else and says "it's over" then chances are that will rub off in a negative manner. Its "over" because Orton will NEVER be the athlete capable of doing something other than managing a game. Unless you're a superbly built roster you need PLAYMAKERS. Orton isn't and never will be. He is too limited physically and doesn't have the guts it takes to put a team on his back when the going gets tough.

Hes so worried about another QB getting on the field and taking his job that he puts himself ahead of the team. And I would LOVE to hear your rebuttal on that. In Chicago when he had his "high ankle sprain" and Grossman put it to the Titans the first game Kyle was out, Kyle hurried back into the lineup the next week and pretty much sucked the rest of the season and it hurt the Bears. According to you, he did the same thing in 2010 with the Broncos. He was so pitiful against the Chiefs and Cardinals that he clearly LOST us both of those games. He has to take at least 75% of the blame for those pathetic showings, and if he was THAT hurt he should have had enough character to take butt off of the field.

But he didn't. He knew that one Tebow got on the field he was done. Why would he think that? Maybe because he knows his own limitations and is only trying to make as much money as possible while he can as a starter? Whether it's Grossman or Tebow, one thing is clear, Orton has to worry about his status as a starter because he isn't good enough to keep the job without doubt. 31% on 3rd downs is NEVER going to cut it. NEVER. He finished middle of the pack in most major statistics this year, in what was his best season. Middle of the pack running a spread offense and throwing damn near 40 times a game?

How anyone can defend this nonsense is beyond me. He's either mediocre, selfish, or BOTH. I tend to believe it's both.

I think the fact mcd didn't give backup qb's any snaps, is why orton stayed in the game.

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 01:42 PM
I think the fact mcd didn't give backup qb's any snaps, is why orton stayed in the game.

And probably another major reason McD has to be one of the top 10 worst coaching hires in NFL history. He made Nick Saban look like Vince Lombardi.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 01:43 PM
Alright EVERYONE!

This thread has a topic. Let's get on it.

To anyone that has a problem with the way Gem posts because she is a mod, you are welcome to address it directly to Tned and the rest of the mod staff. You ARE NOT allowed to openly criticize or second guess her intentions per this site's rules. Continuing to do so will not be tolerated going forward.

So, now....

:focus:

Honest question: at what point are mods posting as mods, or posting as posters?

Or are they off limits, period!?

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 01:45 PM
And probably another major reason McD has to be one of the top 10 worst coaching hires in NFL history. He made Nick Saban look like Vince Lombardi.

He did have his faults. Who doesn't?

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 01:46 PM
He did have his faults. Who doesn't?

It's safe to say he had a few more faults than the average NFL head coach. Josh is a joke, a bad, bad, joke and we all got to witness the horrible punchline.

To sum: He was horrible, pathetic, and disasterous. Faults or not.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 02:11 PM
It's safe to say he had a few more faults than the average NFL head coach. Josh is a joke, a bad, bad, joke and we all got to witness the horrible punchline.

To sum: He was horrible, pathetic, and disasterous. Faults or not.

I hear the raiders thought the same of a young, 1st time head coach called MShannahan.
Not saying mcd will end up with 2 SB's, but one can see the similarities if they're not afraid to look.

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 02:13 PM
Name them.

GEM
05-25-2011, 02:16 PM
One is an offensive mastermind...the other is an offensive tweedledum.

MileHighCrew
05-25-2011, 02:19 PM
I hear the raiders thought the same of a young, 1st time head coach called MShannahan.
Not saying mcd will end up with 2 SB's, but one can see the similarities if they're not afraid to look.

Maybe you are right, he will become a coaching mastermind, but sadly in this case we are the Raiders or the Browns and not the Broncos or the Pats. We took the chance and lost.

rcsodak
05-25-2011, 02:43 PM
Maybe you are right, he will become a coaching mastermind, but sadly in this case we are the Raiders or the Browns and not the Broncos or the Pats. We took the chance and lost.
Denver is no different than the other 31 teams, then.
Just the fans. :lol:

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 02:58 PM
I hear the raiders thought the same of a young, 1st time head coach called MShannahan.
Not saying mcd will end up with 2 SB's, but one can see the similarities if they're not afraid to look.

Other than they both were fired from their first head coaching gigs I don't think there is all that much similar between their respective tenures.

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 05:21 PM
Quit whining about my potty mouth. I don't circumvent the filter so if you don't like it, lump it. What you consider logic, I consider crap. Just because you find it logical doesn't make it so. Just the same, what I find logical, you don't. You think trashing Shanahan while praising McDaniels logical....well, I say, gimme some of what you're freaking drinking. Unless it's Josh's koolaid cause I was tricked into drinking that once and it left an awful imprint on the franchise that I hold dear.
You're on a football message board, not a board for discussing Einstein and other logical thinkers.
Everything you lambaste everyone else for, you do 10 times worse. So get over yourself.

Wow I guess I've been told.

You want to have a potty mouth guess that is your cross to bear.

If y'all let go of the hate or love and look at things with a critical eye and think logically then you come up with totally different reasons and conclusions than most on here do.

Again that is y'alls loss nit mine.

I'm perfectly happy and content in my stances. Some day y'all will see that the hate for Josh and the love for mikey was misPlaced.

That is your cross to bear not mine.

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 05:29 PM
:lol: :lol:

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 05:33 PM
I think the fact mcd didn't give backup qb's any snaps, is why orton stayed in the game.

The reasoning as I see this still being a New scheme the QB and Wes still needed as much time together as they could get.

Was that short sighted? Perhaps but then only the haters and Tebow lovers had problems when he and the team was on a roll offensively USing pass to move the ball

Just maybe Josh etal knew TE issues on the OL and made a conscious decision not to run THe ball but do what they could to move the ball.

But then everyone here knows more than the coaching staff when it pertains to the readiness of players and their injuries.

Being mmqb is easy because you do not have anything to risk.

frauschieze
05-25-2011, 05:39 PM
Honest question: at what point are mods posting as mods, or posting as posters?

Or are they off limits, period!?

I started a thread in Town Hall answering this question. :D

nevcraw
05-25-2011, 07:45 PM
Was that short sighted? Perhaps but then only the haters and Tebow lovers had problems when he and the team was on a roll offensively USing pass to move the ball

admist the the juggernaut of a 4-12 season when pray tell was this offensive roll?

MileHighCrew
05-25-2011, 07:50 PM
admist the the juggernaut of a 4-12 season when pray tell was this offensive roll?

Thank you, there is only one stat that matters and it is 4-12. We can all use certain stats to back any point we are trying to make by 4-12 is everything.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 07:57 PM
Thank you, there is only one stat that matters and it is 4-12. We can all use certain stats to back any point we are trying to make by 4-12 is everything.

You hit the proverbial nail on the head. It certainly is. However, that doesn't
satisfy the true reasons why the Broncos were 4-12. Several on this board seem
to have only one reason for it. But when I look at the defense, running game,
O-line, as well as the QB, I see several reasons.

4-12 is everything. But I'm an old school, cause and effect sort of guy. I gotta dig . . .

-----

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 07:57 PM
admist the the juggernaut of a 4-12 season when pray tell was this offensive roll?


Thank you, there is only one stat that matters and it is 4-12. We can all use certain stats to back any point we are trying to make by 4-12 is everything.

In 7 of Denver's 12 losses they failed score 20 points. We were nothing close to an offensive juggernaut.

MileHighCrew
05-25-2011, 08:02 PM
You hit the proverbial nail on the head. It certainly is. However, that doesn't
satisfy the true reasons why the Broncos were 4-12. Several on this board seem
to have only one reason for it. But when I look at the defense, running game,
O-line, as well as the QB, I see several reasons.

4-12 is everything. But I'm an old school, cause and effect sort of guy. I gotta dig . . .

-----

I agree but like you said QB RB O line entire D, lack of return game, can't tackle on special team.... the list goes on and on. and that is the frustration when I read the defence of Orton or of McD as a coach. Orton clearly wasn't part of the solution, he had decent numbers but he isn't clutch. McD, well that is different, he is responsible for the entire mess.
I feel for Orton, he could be a decent role player QB, but he isn't the guy you want to have the ball with the game on the line. We have 2 years of video to prove it.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 08:07 PM
I agree but like you said QB RB O line entire D, lack of return game, can't tackle on special team.... the list goes on and on. and that is the frustration when I read the defence of Orton or of McD as a coach. Orton clearly wasn't part of the solution, he had decent numbers but he isn't clutch. McD, well that is different, he is responsible for the entire mess.
I feel for Orton, he could be a decent role player QB, but he isn't the guy you want to have the ball with the game on the line. We have 2 years of video to prove it.

MHC, what is "clutch" in a hopeless situation?

I just can't help but to repeat: I would like to see Orton with at least a half-way
respectable running game and a TE the defense truly respects (doesn't have to
be "feared," just respected), then see how "clutch" he is.

I know he isn't Peyton Manning, but I do not believe he is as bad as some
think if just given some halfway decent tools . . . :noidea:

-----

MileHighCrew
05-25-2011, 08:10 PM
The season wasn't helpless when it started. It was only hopeless after Orton gave the game away in the 4th week after week.
I wouldn't mind seeing what he can do with decent tools either, provided it is in another uniform. I don't hate the guy, I just hate he is the starter for the Broncos

nevcraw
05-25-2011, 08:10 PM
MHC, what is "clutch" in a hopeless situation?

I just can't help but to repeat: I would like to see Orton with at least a half-way
respectable running game and a TE the defense truly respects (doesn't have to
be "feared," just respected), then see how "clutch" he is.

-----

Orton is about as clutch as an automatic car.

nevcraw
05-25-2011, 08:25 PM
MHC, what is "clutch" in a hopeless situation?

I just can't help but to repeat: I would like to see Orton with at least a half-way
respectable running game and a TE the defense truly respects (doesn't have to
be "feared," just respected), then see how "clutch" he is.

I know he isn't Peyton Manning, but I do not believe he is as bad as some
think if just given some halfway decent tools . . . :noidea:

-----


So --- you have spent the last gaziilion posts defending a QB that saves his clutch moments for a better surounding cast? LOL.. yeah.. that's the qb i want leading my team..

Qb's that are clutch just are reguardless of what or who. they make those around them clutch as well. not the other way around..
for someone who is has been watching football since the pick up game between the apostles just before Jesus called them for the last supper - I would hope you would know the difference.

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 08:25 PM
MHC, what is "clutch" in a hopeless situation?

I just can't help but to repeat: I would like to see Orton with at least a half-way
respectable running game and a TE the defense truly respects (doesn't have to
be "feared," just respected), then see how "clutch" he is.

I know he isn't Peyton Manning, but I do not believe he is as bad as some
think if just given some halfway decent tools . . . :noidea:

-----

Top how would a tight end help? We had a good receiving tight end in Scheffler and he didn't utilize him that much. Nevertheless he prefers to throw the ball to wide outs.

I disagree with those who think the running game and offensive line were a problem all year long. By second half of the season the running game was working. The defense was a problem all year long however as it's many times there were six games this past season could have won or tied at the end because we held the ball for the last meaningful possession. Only once did we win.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 08:43 PM
Top how would a tight end help? We had a good receiving tight end in Scheffler and he didn't utilize him that much. Nevertheless he prefers to throw the ball to wide outs.

I disagree with those who think the running game and offensive line were a problem all year long. By second half of the season the running game was working. The defense was a problem all year long however as it's many times there were six games this past season could have won or tied at the end because we held the ball for the last meaningful possession. Only once did we win.

I don't think the problem with Scheff was Orton's. I think it was McDaniels. I'll
never understand what was going through McD's mind, I suppose, but the way
he kept Scheff (and Hillis) on the bench is just beyond me. But I remember some
of the spectacular grabs Scheff made when he was given the chance. Yes, a
good, pass-catching TE would make a difference, especially in the RZ and in
3rd downs.

But you're right: The running game began to improve in the last half of the
season (they rushed for more than 100 yards only once in the first eight
games). The results showed during the short time Orton was healthy. In the
first KC game -- the 9th game -- the Broncos rushed for 153 yards, and Orton
passed for 299. The 10th game was against the Chargers -- #1 defense, and
it showed, as neither the passing nor the rushing game could get off the
ground.

But in the St. Louis game, it picked up again -- after getting over the first
half turnovers. They rushed for 119 yards, and Orton passed for 330 (net),
including 3 TDs in the 4th quarter. That was Orton's last healthy game. He
couldn't throw it in the ocean in the KC game and should not have played
from that time on.

I hope they can keep up their running ways this year (if there is a "this year").
If they can, the QB will be much better just for that, whether Orton or Tebow.

-----

topscribe
05-25-2011, 08:44 PM
So --- you have spent the last gaziilion posts defending a QB that saves his clutch moments for a better surounding cast? LOL.. yeah.. that's the qb i want leading my team..

Qb's that are clutch just are reguardless of what or who. they make those around them clutch as well. not the other way around..
for someone who is has been watching football since the pick up game between the apostles just before Jesus called them for the last supper - I would hope you would know the difference.

Thank you for that moment of brilliance.

Moving right along . . . :coffee:

-----

chazoe60
05-25-2011, 08:54 PM
You hit the proverbial nail on the head. It certainly is. However, that doesn't
satisfy the true reasons why the Broncos were 4-12. Several on this board seem
to have only one reason for it. But when I look at the defense, running game,
O-line, as well as the QB, I see several reasons.

4-12 is everything. But I'm an old school, cause and effect sort of guy. I gotta dig . . .

-----

The thing is, some of us believe we would have won more games with a different QB.

It's apparent we would have won more games with a better defense. Or a better running game. but, quite a few of us, a majority from what I can tell, believe we would have also won more games if we had better QB.

The last Chiefs game is an easy one IMHO. That game would have been won by the vast majority of QBs in the NFL. And you take into account the horrid play by Orton in crucial spots (RZ, 3rd down, and 4th qtr of close games), which is backed up by the statistics, and a lot of us just want to see us go in a different direction.

And, all the frustration felt by fans who feel similar to the way I do is compounded by the stupid labor strife. Those things all make for a volatile mix where people are going to get pissy with each other. QB controversies suck on fan bases because most fans just want what's best for the team but see different avenues to achieving that, then just like politics, people start thinking that the other side must just be stupid for not seeing the obvious truth the way they do. It degrades fast.


But, I'm not saying anything most of you don't already know.

nevcraw
05-25-2011, 08:59 PM
Thank you for that moment of brilliance.

Moving right along . . . :coffee:

-----

you made the comment top.. :confused:

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 09:04 PM
The thing is, some of us believe we would have won more games with a different QB.

It's apparent we would have won more games with a better defense. Or a better running game. but, quite a few of us, a majority from what I can tell, believe we would have also won more games if we had better QB.



Exactly.. well put. Its not that we dont' recognize that the defense is a problem...hell, its the worst in the NFL, how is that NOT a problem? But why does that mean we don't believe that our offense would have been better with a different QB? Couldn't that have helped our chances? Wouldn't converting some 3rd downs have helped the running game.. and helped the defense? Sure it would have.

Would it had made us a playoff team? Helllll no. Would it have made a good team? Hell no. But that doesn't mean we wouldn't have been a BETTER team with a better QB. Thats it. We know Orton isn't our long term solution, we know that this team is never going to be "good" with an Orton as our QB. Its really that simple.

Lonestar
05-25-2011, 09:20 PM
Chaz your correct. Had we played Brady we may have won a game or two more. Would 6-10 been any better.

Yes the labor strife is an issue but the hate for Orton started almost the day wing jay was traded. Maybe even the day that mike was fired, yes I know that is abut far fetched.
But there were so many members that were so in love with mikeyans the superbolws that they were pissed at whoever was brought in to replace him.

A guy from NE that was an offensive minded guy. Many thought that we should have just kept mikey. Or even some that thought we should keep his play book.

They could not get past that point and anything past there was never going to work.

So anything that Josh did would not be go enough in their eyes.
When jay whined his way out of town that converted those that thought he walked on water. So that was a double whammy on Orton.

What no one was willing to admit was just how rotten to the core our team was. The only stat that folks could hang there hat on was being the #2 yardage offense.

We all know after even in this thread that stats alone do not mean a thing.

GEM
05-25-2011, 09:28 PM
So he took an already rotten team and made it worse.


Chaz your correct. Had we played Brady we may have won a game or two more. Would 6-10 been any better.

Yes the labor strife is an issue but the hate for Orton started almost the day wing jay was traded. Maybe even the day that mike was fired, yes I know that is abut far fetched.
But there were so many members that were so in love with mikeyans the superbolws that they were pissed at whoever was brought in to replace him.

A guy from NE that was an offensive minded guy. Many thought that we should have just kept mikey. Or even some that thought we should keep his play book.

They could not get past that point and anything past there was never going to work.

So anything that Josh did would not be go enough in their eyes.
When jay whined his way out of town that converted those that thought he walked on water. So that was a double whammy on Orton.

What no one was willing to admit was just how rotten to the core our team was. The only stat that folks could hang there hat on was being the #2 yardage offense.

We all know after even in this thread that stats alone do not mean a thing.

Ravage!!!
05-25-2011, 09:32 PM
here we go. The only reason we don't like Orton is because of Jay, the only reason we don't like McDoosh is because of Shanahan. Its not because these two have earned their own criticisms... No no no.. that would make too much sense.

But bu all means.. defend Orton because you didn't like Jay, and defend McDoosh because you didn't like SHanahan. Makes perfect sense to the "only logical and stater of facts" poster.:rolleyes:

TXBRONC
05-25-2011, 09:37 PM
here we go. The only reason we don't like Orton is because of Jay, the only reason we don't like McDoosh is because of Shanahan. Its not because these two have earned their own criticisms... No no no.. that would make too much sense.

But bu all means.. defend Orton because you didn't like Jay, and defend McDoosh because you didn't like SHanahan. Makes perfect sense to the "only logical and stater of facts" poster.:rolleyes:

Clearly the droning of hate for Orton is only because of Jay and hate for joshy is only because of Shanahan is devoid of logic.

topscribe
05-25-2011, 10:00 PM
you made the comment top.. :confused:

I made a lot of comments in an endeavor to conduct an intelligent discussion.
Thanks for the break in the action . . . :coffee:

-----

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 11:08 PM
MHC, what is "clutch" in a hopeless situation?

I just can't help but to repeat: I would like to see Orton with at least a half-way
respectable running game and a TE the defense truly respects (doesn't have to
be "feared," just respected), then see how "clutch" he is.

I know he isn't Peyton Manning, but I do not believe he is as bad as some
think if just given some halfway decent tools . . . :noidea:

-----

It's only "hopeless" because Orton lacks the ability to overcome it. Tebow overcame a 17 point deficit in his 2nd start as a rookie... Orton has NO games like that so far in his career.

Woe is Orton, the world is out to get him, he's a victim of such untimely circumstance... :coffee:

BroncoStud
05-25-2011, 11:11 PM
Chaz your correct. Had we played Brady we may have won a game or two more. Would 6-10 been any better.

Yes the labor strife is an issue but the hate for Orton started almost the day wing jay was traded. Maybe even the day that mike was fired, yes I know that is abut far fetched.
But there were so many members that were so in love with mikeyans the superbolws that they were pissed at whoever was brought in to replace him.

A guy from NE that was an offensive minded guy. Many thought that we should have just kept mikey. Or even some that thought we should keep his play book.

They could not get past that point and anything past there was never going to work.

So anything that Josh did would not be go enough in their eyes.
When jay whined his way out of town that converted those that thought he walked on water. So that was a double whammy on Orton.

What no one was willing to admit was just how rotten to the core our team was. The only stat that folks could hang there hat on was being the #2 yardage offense.

We all know after even in this thread that stats alone do not mean a thing.

Playing Orton wasn't the matter of 2 games in either direction. A REAL NFL QB would have made Denver much more competitive. Keep on accepting mediocrity and choking in the clutch, accept 31% on 3rd downs... It's worked great so far... :elefant::laugh::rolleyes:

Lonestar
05-26-2011, 01:22 AM
Playing Orton wasn't the matter of 2 games in either direction. A REAL NFL QB would have made Denver much more competitive. Keep on accepting mediocrity and choking in the clutch, accept 31% on 3rd downs... It's worked great so far... :elefant::laugh::rolleyes:

So the 31% is Solely on Ortons shoulders, he called the play instead of trying to run the plays called into him, he made the blocks to protect him or open the holes for the RB, or for that matter also caught the passes he passed. He was the only guy on the field that should be held resposible.

Granted I did not see every game and record them. But I do not remember him playing as badly as you seem to believe.

Maybe it is time to agreeing to disagree.

Davii
05-26-2011, 01:34 AM
So he took an already rotten team and made it worse.

No, he took a rotten team, killed it, burned the remains, pissed on the ashes, then punched everyone that attended the funeral in the face. He would've gotten away with it for a little while longer but he got caught snapping nudie pics of the deceased's friends wives.

Analogies FTW!

Davii
05-26-2011, 01:39 AM
It's only "hopeless" because Orton lacks the ability to overcome it. Tebow overcame a 17 point deficit in his 2nd start as a rookie... Orton has NO games like that so far in his career.

Woe is Orton, the world is out to get him, he's a victim of such untimely circumstance... :coffee:

That I have to agree with. Tebow's drive, determination, and infectious will to win showed more in that game than Orton did all season.

Once his skills catch up to his intangibles... Tebow will be phenomenal, I just hope it's sooner rather than later.

Timmy!
05-26-2011, 02:03 AM
Tebow>Orton

/thread

Juriga72
05-26-2011, 06:22 AM
So again..... Guy's like Trent Dlifer, Rich Gannon... never were's who "Like Klye Orton" are who we are supposed to listen to as experts...

Guy's like John Elway ( HOF 2x Super Bowl Champ, Denver Bronco exec), Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe, and John Lynch ... are "Lost because they dont see the Greatness of Kyle Orton"


goit it

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:15 AM
I started a thread in Town Hall answering this question. :Dthanks, frau. ;)

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:25 AM
You hit the proverbial nail on the head. It certainly is. However, that doesn't
satisfy the true reasons why the Broncos were 4-12. Several on this board seem
to have only one reason for it. But when I look at the defense, running game,
O-line, as well as the QB, I see several reasons.

4-12 is everything. But I'm an old school, cause and effect sort of guy. I gotta dig . . .

-----

Sad part being, one could be a 5th grade dropout and see that the least of the problems was qb.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:28 AM
Orton is about as clutch as an automatic car.
Never claimed to be a mechanic, but........

chazoe60
05-26-2011, 07:34 AM
Sad part being, one could be a 5th gra?de dropout and see that the least of the problems was qb.

The least of a problem is still a problem. Might as well try to solve all the problems, eh?

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:40 AM
Exactly.. well put. Its not that we dont' recognize that the defense is a problem...hell, its the worst in the NFL, how is that NOT a problem? But why does that mean we don't believe that our offense would have been better with a different QB? Couldn't that have helped our chances? Wouldn't converting some 3rd downs have helped the running game.. and helped the defense? Sure it would have.

Would it had made us a playoff team? Helllll no. Would it have made a good team? Hell no. But that doesn't mean we wouldn't have been a BETTER team with a better QB. Thats it. We know Orton isn't our long term solution, we know that this team is never going to be "good" with an Orton as our QB. Its really that simple.

_efense gave up an avg of 29.4ppg.
TBrady wasn't available.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:44 AM
It's only "hopeless" because Orton lacks the ability to overcome it. Tebow overcame a 17 point deficit in his 2nd start as a rookie... Orton has NO games like that so far in his career.

Woe is Orton, the world is out to get him, he's a victim of such untimely circumstance... :coffee:
So youre saying the qb that was top 3 in passing yards would NOT have eaten the #32 passing D up? After a 1 start rook did?

:laugh:

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:51 AM
That I have to agree with. Tebow's drive, determination, and infectious will to win showed more in that game than Orton did all season.

Once his skills catch up to his intangibles... Tebow will be phenomenal, I just hope it's sooner rather than later.
Wonder how he would've felt after 2yrs of it?

I mean, we've already witnessed his breaking down after 1 bad college game, right?

Contrary to popular belief, TT IS human.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 07:53 AM
The least of a problem is still a problem. Might as well try to solve all the problems, eh?True. But do you address the BIGGEST 1st or the least?

HORSEPOWER 56
05-26-2011, 07:55 AM
So youre saying the qb that was top 3 in passing yards would NOT have eaten the #32 passing D up? After a 1 start rook did?

:laugh:

Like he did vs Arizona?

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 07:56 AM
I don't think the problem with Scheff was Orton's. I think it was McDaniels. I'll
never understand what was going through McD's mind, I suppose, but the way
he kept Scheff (and Hillis) on the bench is just beyond me. But I remember some
of the spectacular grabs Scheff made when he was given the chance. Yes, a
good, pass-catching TE would make a difference, especially in the RZ and in
3rd downs.

But you're right: The running game began to improve in the last half of the
season (they rushed for more than 100 yards only once in the first eight
games). The results showed during the short time Orton was healthy. In the
first KC game -- the 9th game -- the Broncos rushed for 153 yards, and Orton
passed for 299. The 10th game was against the Chargers -- #1 defense, and
it showed, as neither the passing nor the rushing game could get off the
ground.

But in the St. Louis game, it picked up again -- after getting over the first
half turnovers. They rushed for 119 yards, and Orton passed for 330 (net),
including 3 TDs in the 4th quarter. That was Orton's last healthy game. He
couldn't throw it in the ocean in the KC game and should not have played
from that time on.

I hope they can keep up their running ways this year (if there is a "this year").
If they can, the QB will be much better just for that, whether Orton or Tebow.

-----

Top, Orton gained the reputation of being immobile long before he had a high ankle sprain. I really don't know were you come with idea that Orton is a mobile quarterback. That's just something he's never been. That in and of itself is not the worst thing in the world because there still plenty of quarterbacks including the two best who couldn't run to save their lives. They make up for their lack of mobility by having excellent pocket presence. That is something I don't see in Orton. High sprain(s) shouldn't prevent a quarterback from feeling pressure and sliding away from it.

As far as Orton's arm is concerned he doesn't a cannon attacked to his body. He once threw a football 74 yards in high school. He hasn't been high school in over a decade and hasn't repeated that feat since. Just because guy breaks a world record doesn't mean he will equal or surpass that same mark every time he competes. Many times it's a once in a lifetime event.

Being on the money is a matter of perspective I suppose. Being on the money to me means hitting a wide receiver in stride. I have yet to see Orton do that with the long ball. He completed a bunch of long passes this past season but adjustments by the receivers, primarily Lloyd. I would say that if it had Gaffney on the other end of the majority of those passes I would Orton would not have completed nearly as many as he did.

I doubt I'm ever going be sold on Orton as long term solution as starting quarterback. I would rather have a crippled Charley Johnson or Craig Morton if they played today. That aside, if Orton is here and he's starter so be it. It's not something I have any control over but I doesn't mean I'm satisfied with a second tier quarterback.

chazoe60
05-26-2011, 07:57 AM
True. But do you address the BIGGEST 1st or the least?

Yes you try to solve the biggest problems first. But, if the solution to one of the smaller problems presents itself you don't hesitate to give it a whirl.

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 09:05 AM
True. But do you address the BIGGEST 1st or the least?

QB is the most important position on a team. You always have to address it if it isn't getting the job done.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 09:39 AM
So again..... Guy's like Trent Dlifer, Rich Gannon... never were's who "Like Klye Orton" are who we are supposed to listen to as experts...

Guy's like John Elway ( HOF 2x Super Bowl Champ, Denver Bronco exec), Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe, and John Lynch ... are "Lost because they dont see the Greatness of Kyle Orton"


goit it

Those guys aren't on the level of Elway by any means, but Dilfer won a Super Bowl, and Gannon won an MVP...Give the guys a little bit of credit, they might not be HOFers, but they weren't "never weres" either.

Still, I would definitely take Elway's opinion over theirs...

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 09:41 AM
Those guys aren't on the level of Elway by any means, but Dilfer won a Super Bowl, and Gannon won an MVP...Give the guys a little bit of credit, they might not be HOFers, but they weren't "never weres" either.

Still, I would definitely take Elway's opinion over theirs...

Gannon was a damn good QB, Dilfer did almost NOTHING to help the Ravens win a championship other than not throw interceptions. He rarely made plays and in fact, the Ravens when like 4 games in a row without an offensive TD that year, if I recall.

Gannon, however, was a very good QB.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 09:41 AM
So youre saying the qb that was top 3 in passing yards would NOT have eaten the #32 passing D up? After a 1 start rook did?

:laugh:

Based on Orton's last couple games....I can definitively say "NO"

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 09:45 AM
Gannon was a damn good QB, Dilfer did almost NOTHING to help the Ravens win a championship other than not throw interceptions. He rarely made plays and in fact, the Ravens when like 4 games in a row without an offensive TD that year, if I recall.

Gannon, however, was a very good QB.

You are correct about the 4 games without a TD, but those were with Tony Banks at the helm and then Dilfer took over.

I agree that Dilfer was not a great QB, but that one year, while not spectacular, he made enough plays when called upon to get them to the top. He was definitely a game manager, but was able to make the plays when they needed them (which wasn't many times, because of the Ravens D)...But that's more than I can say for Orton, who is a game manager incapable of making even a few plays when it is on the line.

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 10:04 AM
You are correct about the 4 games without a TD, but those were with Tony Banks at the helm and then Dilfer took over.

I agree that Dilfer was not a great QB, but that one year, while not spectacular, he made enough plays when called upon to get them to the top. He was definitely a game manager, but was able to make the plays when they needed them (which wasn't many times, because of the Ravens D)...But that's more than I can say for Orton, who is a game manager incapable of making even a few plays when it is on the line.

Dilfer threw for 1,500 yards, 12 Tds, 11 Ints, completed 59% of his passes, and had a 76 rating... That's freaking God awful for a team that won a Super Bowl in the modern era. I can only imagine how easy it would have been for the Ravens if they had a REAL QB.

I don't see much difference in Orton and Dilfer, I think Orton may be somewhat better actually. In my opinion at least.

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 10:10 AM
Gannon was a damn good QB, Dilfer did almost NOTHING to help the Ravens win a championship other than not throw interceptions. He rarely made plays and in fact, the Ravens when like 4 games in a row without an offensive TD that year, if I recall.

Gannon, however, was a very good QB.

That's true but it wasn't Dilfer who was at the helm when they went throught streak. It was Tony Banks iirc.

Don't get me I'm not defending Dilfer in the least I'm just saying he wasn't the starting quarterback at that point.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 10:13 AM
Dilfer threw for 1,500 yards, 12 Tds, 11 Ints, completed 59% of his passes, and had a 76 rating... That's freaking God awful for a team that won a Super Bowl in the modern era. I can only imagine how easy it would have been for the Ravens if they had a REAL QB.

I don't see much difference in Orton and Dilfer, I think Orton may be somewhat better actually. In my opinion at least.

Just looking at stats, I would tend to agree. But I remember that season very well, and the way that team was set up (Ultimate Defense, Good Running Game), Dilfer was not required or asked to do much (nor should he have been, based on how great that defense was). But I remember specifically Dilfer making plays when called upon that year. Plays to Brandon Stokely and Shannon Sharpe come to mind (especially in their playoff run).

I'll take the guy who is making plays when his team needs him to, and you can have the guy who throws for 3,800 yards and struggles when his team needs him most.

Ravage!!!
05-26-2011, 10:26 AM
Just looking at stats, I would tend to agree. But I remember that season very well, and the way that team was set up (Ultimate Defense, Good Running Game), Dilfer was not required or asked to do much (nor should he have been, based on how great that defense was). But I remember specifically Dilfer making plays when called upon that year. Plays to Brandon Stokely and Shannon Sharpe come to mind (especially in their playoff run).

I'll take the guy who is making plays when his team needs him to, and you can have the guy who throws for 3,800 yards and struggles when his team needs him most.

Exactly. You can't just look at the stat sheet and determine when a person is making the plays WHEN needed. Stats don't tell the story. Thats why most fans know that Orton is NOT the guy of the future, despite his high number of yards thrown last year. He couldn't convert 3rd downs, he was horrible in the fourth quarter, and completely failed when the game was on the line. But his "stats" look pretty (to some).

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 10:29 AM
Just looking at stats, I would tend to agree. But I remember that season very well, and the way that team was set up (Ultimate Defense, Good Running Game), Dilfer was not required or asked to do much (nor should he have been, based on how great that defense was). But I remember specifically Dilfer making plays when called upon that year. Plays to Brandon Stokely and Shannon Sharpe come to mind (especially in their playoff run).

I'll take the guy who is making plays when his team needs him to, and you can have the guy who throws for 3,800 yards and struggles when his team needs him most.

Yeah, good points. Dilfer was probably better when it matters than Orton is.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 10:36 AM
Yeah, good points. Dilfer was probably better when it matters than Orton is.

I am glad I was able to make my point...But let me be clear, I wouldn't want Dilfer as my QB either...Had it not been for the stellar Ravens D, the few plays he was able to make per game would not have been enough. He is similar to Orton, in the sense that if he's your QB, then the rest of your team better be spectacular, because neither have/had what it takes to shoulder the load and make up for the teams other deficiencies.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 10:38 AM
Exactly. You can't just look at the stat sheet and determine when a person is making the plays WHEN needed. Stats don't tell the story. Thats why most fans know that Orton is NOT the guy of the future, despite his high number of yards thrown last year. He couldn't convert 3rd downs, he was horrible in the fourth quarter, and completely failed when the game was on the line. But his "stats" look pretty (to some).

Correct...Looking at the stat sheet, Orton is a Pro-Bowl QB. However, watching the games it was easy to tell how he accumulated those numbers and how he performed when the game was on the line. Basic stats won't tell you that, only watching him play will.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 10:40 AM
Yes you try to solve the biggest problems first. But, if the solution to one of the smaller problems presents itself you don't hesitate to give it a whirl.well, that could also be a formula for disaster. Or not giving TT the chance to win. I highly doubt he'll score 30ppg next year. So the FO better hope they find some magic.

chazoe60
05-26-2011, 10:42 AM
well, that could also be a formula for disaster. Or not giving TT the chance to win. I highly doubt he'll score 30ppg next year. So the FO better hope they find some magic.

Why does TT have to score 30ppg, Orton sure as hell doesn't?

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 10:44 AM
QB is the most important position on a team. You always have to address it if it isn't getting the job done.
See above. Or the previous X years under shanny.
The D was the #1 problem, and to date, still is.
Almost looks to me like they're setting TT up to fail.
I hope i'm wrong.

HammeredOut
05-26-2011, 10:44 AM
I'd say start Tebow all season, we can have a chance at Andrew Luck.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 10:45 AM
Gannon was a damn good QB, Dilfer did almost NOTHING to help the Ravens win a championship other than not throw interceptions. He rarely made plays and in fact, the Ravens when like 4 games in a row without an offensive TD that year, if I recall.

Gannon, however, was a very good QB.
Agreed.

chazoe60
05-26-2011, 10:47 AM
I'd say start Tebow all season, we can have a chance at Andrew Luck.

Yeah, you've said that about a hundred times before. We get it broken record dude.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 10:49 AM
Just looking at stats, I would tend to agree. But I remember that season very well, and the way that team was set up (Ultimate Defense, Good Running Game), Dilfer was not required or asked to do much (nor should he have been, based on how great that defense was). But I remember specifically Dilfer making plays when called upon that year. Plays to Brandon Stokely and Shannon Sharpe come to mind (especially in their playoff run).

I'll take the guy who is making plays when his team needs him to, and you can have the guy who throws for 3,800 yards and struggles when his team needs him most.

Oh how orton could have used a HOF TE and a young stokely with a running game to keep the D honest.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 10:52 AM
Exactly. You can't just look at the stat sheet and determine when a person is making the plays WHEN needed. Stats don't tell the story. Thats why most fans know that Orton is NOT the guy of the future, despite his high number of yards thrown last year. He couldn't convert 3rd downs, he was horrible in the fourth quarter, and completely failed when the game was on the line. But his "stats" look pretty (to some).

Let's be clear.....orton was NOT the worst qb in those stats. And he had no run game or TE.

EManning?
MSanchez?
Delhomme?

Just the opposite.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 10:53 AM
Oh how orton could have used a HOF TE and a young stokely with a running game to keep the D honest.

Every QB could use that...Orton would win a lot of games in that situation. Still, he would not be able to take them all the way until he started performing in the clutch, because even the greatest of teams are going to need their QB to make a few plays at some point. Orton has not shown that he is capable of consistently performing in the clutch.

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 10:57 AM
Let's be clear.....orton was NOT the sorst ab in those stats. And he had no run game or TE.

EManning?
MSanchez?
Delhomme?

Just the opposite.

One could argue that Orton's numbers were a biproduct of not having a good running game and a terrible defense. No running game/No defense = more passing attempts = more yards. It should also = more passing touchdowns, although Orton only managed 21 TDs despite being among the league leaders in attempts.

I will give Orton a lot of credit for not turning the ball over that much. Most QB's in that situation would have a high turnover rate, and given the circumstances, Orton did a pretty commendable job protecting the ball.

BroncoJoe
05-26-2011, 11:00 AM
Orton is what he is and always has been. Plays to his teams strengths and weaknesses. He is just not a good guy to have handling every snap when the team is struggling.

chazoe60
05-26-2011, 11:22 AM
Oh how this team could have used a QB who could perform in the clutch, or on third down. I bet it would have kept our defense a little more rested to have a QB who was a little more adept at moving the chains.

Maybe, just maybe all aspects of a football team feed off of the other aspects. I'm just spitballing here but I bet a better defense would help the offense and a better offense would help the defense.

topscribe
05-26-2011, 11:25 AM
Top, Orton gained the reputation of being immobile long before he had a high ankle sprain. I really don't know were you come with idea that Orton is a mobile quarterback. That's just something he's never been. That in and of itself is not the worst thing in the world because there still plenty of quarterbacks including the two best who couldn't run to save their lives. They make up for their lack of mobility by having excellent pocket presence. That is something I don't see in Orton. High sprain(s) shouldn't prevent a quarterback from feeling pressure and sliding away from it.

It depends on what you call a "mobile" quarterback. Do you mean John Elway?
Fran Tarkenton? Then, no, Orton is not a "mobile" quarterback. If you compare
him to, say, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, however, then, yes, a healthy
Orton is more mobile than they are.

How long have you personally followed Orton? I ask because he suffered high
ankle sprains from halfway through 2008 all the way through 2009.

To understand how a high ankle sprain can affect mobility, one needs to
understand high ankle sprains metabolically. A high ankle sprain, or syndesmotic
ankle sprain, is a stretched or torn ligament that connects the fibia and tibula.
It often will not affect straight ahead speed as much as it will change of
direction because a twisting motion is what causes the most pain. That is why
it also can significantly affect a QB's throw, in terms of velocity and accuracy,
and the ability to slip and slide around in the pocket.

At the beginning of 2010, people were remarking at how much crisper and
more accurate Kyle's throws were. They also commented on his "surprising
mobility." Not much was mentioned about why there was this improvement,
but I knew: Kyle had recovered from his high ankle sprains.

As a result, Kyle went on a passing tear where he surpassed or crowded 300
yards in almost every game. And that wasn't just because he passed a lot: He
was also #2 in the league in yards per attempted pass (YPA).



As far as Orton's arm is concerned he doesn't a cannon attacked to his body. He once threw a football 74 yards in high school. He hasn't been high school in over a decade and hasn't repeated that feat since. Just because guy breaks a world record doesn't mean he will equal or surpass that same mark every time he competes. Many times it's a once in a lifetime event.

Being on the money is a matter of perspective I suppose. Being on the money to me means hitting a wide receiver in stride. I have yet to see Orton do that with the long ball. He completed a bunch of long passes this past season but adjustments by the receivers, primarily Lloyd. I would say that if it had Gaffney on the other end of the majority of those passes I would Orton would not have completed nearly as many as he did..

I don't know why you and others attach such hyperbole to my comments. Is
it not enough just to repeat what I said and then respond to it? When did I
say Kyle broke the world record?

And I never did use the word "cannon" in describing Kyle's arm. Did I? Anywhere?
If I had, please direct my attention to it so I can correct it.

I said Kyle has a strong arm, stronger than what some on this board are trying
to portray. And by "on the money," I meant precisely that he hit the receiver
in stride. I don't know what else you thought I meant. But if I ran the film
back and forth, and back and forth some more, as I said, do you really believe
I could be mistaken in how and where the ball came down?

And this receiver adjustment garbage is so lame. Do you really think that Brady
and Manning don't benefit from receiver adjustment? That is just silly. That is
some of the double standard I've talked about, where if it looks bad for Orton
it's all on him, but if it looks good there are reasons outside of him.

We need to understand that a QB has TD passes that were gifts to him, which
were not necessarily the result of his great play, and there are interceptions
for which he is not necessarily responsible. But the TDs count for him, and the
INTs count against. That's the bottom line

Same with receptions. There are some the QB put into a glove tight window,
and some that were wide open or the result of the receiver's adjustment.

For instance, I reviewed (ran tape back and forth) one of Kyle's pick-sixes last
year, and discovered that it was supposed to be a timing pattern and the
receiver (Gaffney, IIRC) broke the wrong way. So the only person there to
receive it was the defender. Would this justify in reducing Kyle's INT count by
one? No, of course not. It was an INT, and that is they way it went into the
books.

And so it is with a "gift" reception or TD. To make excuses such as receiver
adjustment to explain receptions is disingenuous. The stats are what they
are. And Kyles lights-out passing production, game in and game out, was not
all because of receiver adjustment. It is because Kyle can throw the crap out
of the ball, and he has proven it.



I doubt I'm ever going be sold on Orton as long term solution as starting quarterback. I would rather have a crippled Charley Johnson or Craig Morton if they played today. That aside, if Orton is here and he's starter so be it. It's not something I have any control over but I doesn't mean I'm satisfied with a second tier quarterback.

Charley Johnson was a touchdown machine. I watched him when he was with
the Broncos and when he was not. But Charley made a lot of bone-headed
mistakes and blew some games all by himself.

Morton was in a class by himself in his time, when it came to arm strength,
accuracy, and just plain guts. I was, and still am, a big fan of Morton's. The
Broncos would not have played in that Super Bowl, had Morton not been the
quarterback that year.


Nonetheless, I am roundly criticized for producing facts and figures that
contradict all the bashing of Orton that goes on. I am anathema because I
view him favorably.

I am reminded of how much of a minority I am in, as if I am among a bunch of
experts on this board. Einstein once said, "Great spirits have always
encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Not that I'm any kind of
"great spirit," but I surely have encountered the opposition, and it has led me
to suspect that there are a few mediocre minds involved, not necessarily in
terms of IQ, but in terms of football analysis (not at you, TX).

-----

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 11:33 AM
Why does TT have to score 30ppg, Orton sure as hell doesn't?29.4ppg AGAINST is why, chaz.

GEM
05-26-2011, 11:34 AM
Peyton Manning is a statue behind his line. Tom Brady, a bit better than Manning, but not by much. I would put Orton in their class of mobility...just doesn't have much.

Not trying to be disrespectful Top, I just don't see the stuff you do. That's ok though, you're still my buddy. :)

vandammage13
05-26-2011, 11:39 AM
It depends on what you call a "mobile" quarterback. Do you mean John Elway?
Fran Tarkenton? Then, no, Orton is not a "mobile" quarterback. If you compare him to, say, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, however, then, yes, a healthy Orton is more mobile than they are.

A turtle might be faster than an earthworm...that doesn't make the turtle fast.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 11:54 AM
Orton is what he is and always has been. Plays to his teams strengths and weaknesses. He is just not a good guy to have handling every snap when the team is struggling.
Who is?
You could prolly answer 'who couldnt', or start naming manning/brady/marino/elway, but you'd just be throwing around your opinion.

But I believe the plain truth is, orton did as well as he could with what he had to work with. It was him, a hungry wr, and a young mash unit on offense, with all the pressure to outscore each/every opponent.

I liken it to fending off 16 hungry wolves with a .44Mag and 5 bullets.
And here come the magpies.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 12:00 PM
It depends on what you call a "mobile" quarterback. Do you mean John Elway?
Fran Tarkenton? Then, no, Orton is not a "mobile" quarterback. If you compare
him to, say, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, however, then, yes, a healthy
Orton is more mobile than they are.

How long have you personally followed Orton? I ask because he suffered high
ankle sprains from halfway through 2008 all the way through 2009.

To understand how a high ankle sprain can affect mobility, one needs to
understand high ankle sprains metabolically. A high ankle sprain, or syndesmotic
ankle sprain, is a stretched or torn ligament that connects the fibia and tibula.
It often will not affect straight ahead speed as much as it will change of
direction because a twisting motion is what causes the most pain. That is why
it also can significantly affect a QB's throw, in terms of velocity and accuracy,
and the ability to slip and slide around in the pocket.

At the beginning of 2010, people were remarking at how much crisper and
more accurate Kyle's throws were. They also commented on his "surprising
mobility." Not much was mentioned about why there was this improvement,
but I knew: Kyle had recovered from his high ankle sprains.

As a result, Kyle went on a passing tear where he surpassed or crowded 300
yards in almost every game. And that wasn't just because he passed a lot: He
was also #2 in the league in yards per attempted pass (YPA).




I don't know why you and others attach such hyperbole to my comments. Is
it not enough just to repeat what I said and then respond to it? When did I
say Kyle broke the world record?

And I never did use the word "cannon" in describing Kyle's arm. Did I? Anywhere?
If I had, please direct my attention to it so I can correct it.

I said Kyle has a strong arm, stronger than what some on this board are trying
to portray. And by "on the money," I meant precisely that he hit the receiver
in stride. I don't know what else you thought I meant. But if I ran the film
back and forth, and back and forth some more, as I said, do you really believe
I could be mistaken in how and where the ball came down?

And this receiver adjustment garbage is so lame. Do you really think that Brady
and Manning don't benefit from receiver adjustment? That is just silly. That is
some of the double standard I've talked about, where if it looks bad for Orton
it's all on him, but if it looks good there are reasons outside of him.

We need to understand that a QB has TD passes that were gifts to him, which
were not necessarily the result of his great play, and there are interceptions
for which he is not necessarily responsible. But the TDs count for him, and the
INTs count against. That's the bottom line

Same with receptions. There are some the QB put into a glove tight window,
and some that were wide open or the result of the receiver's adjustment.

For instance, I reviewed (ran tape back and forth) one of Kyle's pick-sixes last
year, and discovered that it was supposed to be a timing pattern and the
receiver (Gaffney, IIRC) broke the wrong way. So the only person there to
receive it was the defender. Would this justify in reducing Kyle's INT count by
one? No, of course not. It was an INT, and that is they way it went into the
books.

And so it is with a "gift" reception or TD. To make excuses such as receiver
adjustment to explain receptions is disingenuous. The stats are what they
are. And Kyles lights-out passing production, game in and game out, was not
all because of receiver adjustment. It is because Kyle can throw the crap out
of the ball, and he has proven it.




Charley Johnson was a touchdown machine. I watched him when he was with
the Broncos and when he was not. But Charley made a lot of bone-headed
mistakes and blew some games all by himself.

Morton was in a class by himself in his time, when it came to arm strength,
accuracy, and just plain guts. I was, and still am, a big fan of Morton's. The
Broncos would not have played in that Super Bowl, had Morton not been the
quarterback that year.


Nonetheless, I am roundly criticized for producing facts and figures that
contradict all the bashing of Orton that goes on. I am anathema because I
view him favorably.

I am reminded of how much of a minority I am in, as if I am among a bunch of
experts on this board. Einstein once said, "Great spirits have always
encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Not that I'm any kind of
"great spirit," but I surely have encountered the opposition, and it has led me
to suspect that there are a few mediocre minds involved, not necessarily in
terms of IQ, but in terms of football analysis (not at you, TX).

-----
Great post, top.

powderaddict
05-26-2011, 01:24 PM
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Ravage!!!
05-26-2011, 01:30 PM
I think thats true, "orton did as well as he could".. yes... which is a problem and why its time to move on.

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 02:03 PM
It depends on what you call a "mobile" quarterback. Do you mean John Elway?
Fran Tarkenton? Then, no, Orton is not a "mobile" quarterback. If you compare
him to, say, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, however, then, yes, a healthy
Orton is more mobile than they are.

How long have you personally followed Orton? I ask because he suffered high
ankle sprains from halfway through 2008 all the way through 2009.

To understand how a high ankle sprain can affect mobility, one needs to
understand high ankle sprains metabolically. A high ankle sprain, or syndesmotic
ankle sprain, is a stretched or torn ligament that connects the fibia and tibula.
It often will not affect straight ahead speed as much as it will change of
direction because a twisting motion is what causes the most pain. That is why
it also can significantly affect a QB's throw, in terms of velocity and accuracy,
and the ability to slip and slide around in the pocket.

At the beginning of 2010, people were remarking at how much crisper and
more accurate Kyle's throws were. They also commented on his "surprising
mobility." Not much was mentioned about why there was this improvement,
but I knew: Kyle had recovered from his high ankle sprains.

As a result, Kyle went on a passing tear where he surpassed or crowded 300
yards in almost every game. And that wasn't just because he passed a lot: He
was also #2 in the league in yards per attempted pass (YPA).




I don't know why you and others attach such hyperbole to my comments. Is
it not enough just to repeat what I said and then respond to it? When did I
say Kyle broke the world record?

And I never did use the word "cannon" in describing Kyle's arm. Did I? Anywhere?
If I had, please direct my attention to it so I can correct it.

I said Kyle has a strong arm, stronger than what some on this board are trying
to portray. And by "on the money," I meant precisely that he hit the receiver
in stride. I don't know what else you thought I meant. But if I ran the film
back and forth, and back and forth some more, as I said, do you really believe
I could be mistaken in how and where the ball came down?

And this receiver adjustment garbage is so lame. Do you really think that Brady
and Manning don't benefit from receiver adjustment? That is just silly. That is
some of the double standard I've talked about, where if it looks bad for Orton
it's all on him, but if it looks good there are reasons outside of him.

We need to understand that a QB has TD passes that were gifts to him, which
were not necessarily the result of his great play, and there are interceptions
for which he is not necessarily responsible. But the TDs count for him, and the
INTs count against. That's the bottom line

Same with receptions. There are some the QB put into a glove tight window,
and some that were wide open or the result of the receiver's adjustment.

For instance, I reviewed (ran tape back and forth) one of Kyle's pick-sixes last
year, and discovered that it was supposed to be a timing pattern and the
receiver (Gaffney, IIRC) broke the wrong way. So the only person there to
receive it was the defender. Would this justify in reducing Kyle's INT count by
one? No, of course not. It was an INT, and that is they way it went into the
books.

And so it is with a "gift" reception or TD. To make excuses such as receiver
adjustment to explain receptions is disingenuous. The stats are what they
are. And Kyles lights-out passing production, game in and game out, was not
all because of receiver adjustment. It is because Kyle can throw the crap out
of the ball, and he has proven it.




Charley Johnson was a touchdown machine. I watched him when he was with
the Broncos and when he was not. But Charley made a lot of bone-headed
mistakes and blew some games all by himself.

Morton was in a class by himself in his time, when it came to arm strength,
accuracy, and just plain guts. I was, and still am, a big fan of Morton's. The
Broncos would not have played in that Super Bowl, had Morton not been the
quarterback that year.


Nonetheless, I am roundly criticized for producing facts and figures that
contradict all the bashing of Orton that goes on. I am anathema because I
view him favorably.

I am reminded of how much of a minority I am in, as if I am among a bunch of
experts on this board. Einstein once said, "Great spirits have always
encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Not that I'm any kind of
"great spirit," but I surely have encountered the opposition, and it has led me
to suspect that there are a few mediocre minds involved, not necessarily in
terms of IQ, but in terms of football analysis (not at you, TX).

-----

Top I made it pretty clear what I meant by mobility. I mentioned Brady and Manning who are the kind of quarterbacks who can slide away from pressure. Orton doesn't not slide around in the pocket all that well. He is not very consistent when it comes to stepping away from pressure. Top I have had several courses in anatomy and physiology. Having sprained ankle would not adversely effect his ability to slide around in the pocket. It's not the same thing as running. If they were that bad he couldn't support his own body weight. If is velocity is that severely effected he did not belong on the field.

My use of the "cannon arm" is just descriptive. If a quarterback can ball consistently 70 or so they are going to get tagged with term cannon arm. That said you have brought what Orton did over a decade ago in high school. Unless trying he has that good of arm why bring that happened that many years ago? He hasn't reached that mark since and this point he more than likely will again.

I watched ALL the game and not ONCE did Orton ever hit a receiver in stride. It is not disingenuous or silly to talk about the receivers had to make the long passes from Orton. I watched Brady and Manning enough that they actually hit receivers in stride.

I don't appreciate you talking down to me. I'm not being disingenuous or silly. I'm adult I have a family and other obligations to meet just many others on this board. I'm also very intelligent I have both a bachelor's degree and Master's degree and once I can get all the kid out of the nest I plan on pursuing a doctorate.

Lastly, I would still take Charely Johnson and Craig Morton over Kyle any day of the week. I've only seen Johson in little clips but I would still take him over Orton. I did see all of Morton's career in Denver so I'm pretty comfortable saying I would take over Orton.

topscribe
05-26-2011, 02:32 PM
Top I made it pretty clear what I meant by mobility. I mentioned Brady and Manning who are the kind of quarterbacks who can slide away from pressure. Orton doesn't not slide around in the pocket all that well. He is not very consistent when it comes to stepping away from pressure. Top I have had several courses in anatomy and physiology. Having sprained ankle would not adversely effect his ability to slide around in the pocket. It's not the same thing as running. If they were that bad he couldn't support his own body weight. If is velocity is that severely effected he did not belong on the field.

My use of the "cannon arm" is just descriptive. If a quarterback can ball consistently 70 or so they are going to get tagged with term cannon arm. That said you have brought what Orton did over a decade ago in high school. Unless trying he has that good of arm why bring that happened that many years ago? He hasn't reached that mark since and this point he more than likely will again.

I watched ALL the game and not ONCE did Orton ever hit a receiver in stride. It is not disingenuous or silly to talk about the receivers had to make the long passes from Orton. I watched Brady and Manning enough that they actually hit receivers in stride.

I don't appreciate you talking down to me. I'm not being disingenuous or silly. I'm adult I have a family and other obligations to meet just many others on this board. I'm also very intelligent I have both a bachelor's degree and Master's degree and once I can get all the kid out of the nest I plan on pursuing a doctorate.

Lastly, I would still take Charely Johnson and Craig Morton over Kyle any day of the week. I've only seen Johson in little clips but I would still take him over Orton. I did see all of Morton's career in Denver so I'm pretty comfortable saying I would take over Orton.

TX, you seem to have a fairly thin skin. I did not refer to you as disingenuous
or silly. Check back into the context of my post. I was referring to arguments
and comments, not you are anyone else as a person. I suggest you use your
education and intelligence to read what I actually said. I think I made it pretty
clear.

Regarding ankle sprain: You apparently referred generically to ankle sprains.
I referred to high ankle sprains. There is a difference. I have had both, and I
can guarantee that for you. Trust me.

I have also played on both an ankle sprain and a high ankle sprain. I could
move around fine with the regular sprain. Although I couldn't run as fast, I
could shift around fine. A high ankle sprain is almost the opposite: I could run
fairly well in a straight line, but I could not shift around.

The difference in Orton was very obvious. I saw him play before his sprains,
during his sprains, and last year after they had finally healed. There was a
tremendous difference in his mobility: running and shifting and sliding in the
pocket.

Regarding deep accuracy, I, too have watched Manning, Brady, and Orton. I
saw receivers catching the ball in stride from all three, and I have seen them
have to make adjustments from all three. And I maintain the "receiver
adjustment" argument is a disingenuous one.

And again, if you want to use the term "cannon arm," then I suggest you refer
to your own posts. I did not use the term "cannon arm" in reference to Orton.
Not ever. I said "strong" arm. Anyone denying Orton has a strong arm either
has not paid attention or is being less than candid. But "cannon" is Elway,
Favre, Cutler. I have never placed Orton in that class regarding arm strength.

I did compare him to Manning and Brady, as to arm strength -- not accuracy --
but sheer arm strength. But did I do it out of the blue, as so many have done
with their arguments here? Nope, I documented it. I mentioned what he did in
a QB competition as a (yet not fully developed) high school senior (74 yards)
and what Manning (68 yards) and Brady (67 yards) did in the 2002 NFL QB
competition. (I can't find the documentation now, but I had found it before
and posted it on three different boards. If someone was to take the time --
which I don't come close to having at the time -- I'm sure it could be found.)

Regarding Charley Johnson and Craig Morton, if you want to compare them to
Orton, then maybe someone else will take you up on that. I won't.

-----

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 03:02 PM
I think thats true, "orton did as well as he could".. yes... which is a problem and why its time to move on.
cherry pick much?

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 03:13 PM
TX, you seem to have a fairly thin skin. I did not refer to you as disingenuous
or silly. Check back into the context of my post. I was referring to arguments
and comments, not you are anyone else as a person. I suggest you use your
education and intelligence to read what I actually said. I think I made it pretty
clear.

Regarding ankle sprain: You apparently referred generically to ankle sprains.
I referred to high ankle sprains. There is a difference. I have had both, and I
can guarantee that for you. Trust me.

I have also played on both an ankle sprain and a high ankle sprain. I could
move around fine with the regular sprain. Although I couldn't run as fast, I
could shift around fine. A high ankle sprain is almost the opposite: I could run
fairly well in a straight line, but I could not shift around.

The difference in Orton was very obvious. I saw him play before his sprains,
during his sprains, and last year after they had finally healed. There was a
tremendous difference in his mobility: running and shifting and sliding in the
pocket.

Regarding deep accuracy, I, too have watched Manning, Brady, and Orton. I
saw receivers catching the ball in stride from all three, and I have seen them
have to make adjustments from all three. And I maintain the "receiver
adjustment" argument is a disingenuous one.

And again, if you want to use the term "cannon arm," then I suggest you refer
to your own posts. I did not use the term "cannon arm" in reference to Orton.
Not ever. I said "strong" arm. Anyone denying Orton has a strong arm either
has not paid attention or is being less than candid. But "cannon" is Elway,
Favre, Cutler. I have never placed Orton in that class regarding arm strength.

I did compare him to Manning and Brady, as to arm strength -- not accuracy --
but sheer arm strength. But did I do it out of the blue, as so many have done
with their arguments here? Nope, I documented it. I mentioned what he did in
a QB competition as a (yet not fully developed) high school senior (74 yards)
and what Manning (68 yards) and Brady (67 yards) did in the 2002 NFL QB
competition. (I can't find the documentation now, but I had found it before
and posted it on three different boards. If someone was to take the time --
which I don't come close to having at the time -- I'm sure it could be found.)

Regarding Charley Johnson and Craig Morton, if you want to compare them to
Orton, then maybe someone else will take you up on that. I won't.

-----

No you didn't make it clear. In fact I did make argument of about receivers having to make adjustements on the ball. You said those arguements are silly and disingenuous. So it makes sense that you're referring to me. I don't need reread your post. Putting people down the way you do doesn't further the conversation.

Please stop trying tell me about high ankle sprains. I know what they are and no I wasn't referring ankle sprains generically. I know exactly what I'm talking about with a high ankle. I had one myself it wasn't anything like you described it.

Again I don't need reread my post maybe should reread mine. Because you parsed what I said wrongly. We are talking about same thing when Orton arm. Mudding the waters with be offended over your nonuse "cannon arm". It's a waist time to get upset about it. Why muddy the water bring in Elway, Farve, and Cutler? I never implied you were putting Orton in that category. It really not that hard of concept to understand that quarterback throwing the 74 youds once in ten years ago doesn't mean he ever do it again. Reread my post and you be able see that was the gist.

Davii
05-26-2011, 03:30 PM
Folks, please bear in mind the topic is not individual posters or any grouping of posters. Let's steer this back too the original topic, Terrel Davis feeling it is time for Tebow to be handed the reigns.

LTC Pain
05-26-2011, 03:45 PM
Folks, please bear in mind the topic is not individual posters or any grouping of posters. Let's steer this back too the original topic, Terrel Davis feeling it is time for Tebow to be handed the reigns.

I couldn't agree more with this. One thing I've noticed in about every other Broncos thread, regardless of topic, is that somehow another Orton versus Tebow pissing contest gets started and goes for pages.

Mods can we sticky a Tebow versus Orton thread so this argument isn't splattered in every frickin thread?

topscribe
05-26-2011, 03:48 PM
No you didn't make it clear. In fact I did make argument of about receivers having to make adjustements on the ball. You said those arguements are silly and disingenuous. So it makes sense that you're referring to me. I don't need reread your post. Putting people down the way you do doesn't further the conversation.

Please stop trying tell me about high ankle sprains. I know what they are and no I wasn't referring ankle sprains generically. I know exactly what I'm talking about with a high ankle. I had one myself it wasn't anything like you described it.

Again I don't need reread my post maybe should reread mine. Because you parsed what I said wrongly. We are talking about same thing when Orton arm. Mudding the waters with be offended over your nonuse "cannon arm". It's a waist time to get upset about it. Why muddy the water bring in Elway, Farve, and Cutler? I never implied you were putting Orton in that category. It really not that hard of concept to understand that quarterback throwing the 74 youds once in ten years ago doesn't mean he ever do it again. Reread my post and you be able see that was the gist.


1u-I0D9ReqI



:focus:



-----

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 03:58 PM
1u-I0D9ReqI



:focus:



-----

Agreed you need to do a better job of focusing. :eviltongue: :D

Btw Cool Hand Luke is a great movie. :2thumbs:

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 07:14 PM
Peyton Manning is a statue behind his line. Tom Brady, a bit better than Manning, but not by much. I would put Orton in their class of mobility...just doesn't have much.

Not trying to be disrespectful Top, I just don't see the stuff you do. That's ok though, you're still my buddy. :)

The difference is that Manning and Brady hit the deeper intermediates without buying time to do so, and they get rid of the ball MUCH faster than Kyle. They are just simply on a level he can never be because he lacks the physical ability and the mental toughness in crucial situations.

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 07:17 PM
TX, you seem to have a fairly thin skin. I did not refer to you as disingenuous
or silly. Check back into the context of my post. I was referring to arguments
and comments, not you are anyone else as a person. I suggest you use your
education and intelligence to read what I actually said. I think I made it pretty
clear.

Regarding ankle sprain: You apparently referred generically to ankle sprains.
I referred to high ankle sprains. There is a difference. I have had both, and I
can guarantee that for you. Trust me.

I have also played on both an ankle sprain and a high ankle sprain. I could
move around fine with the regular sprain. Although I couldn't run as fast, I
could shift around fine. A high ankle sprain is almost the opposite: I could run
fairly well in a straight line, but I could not shift around.

The difference in Orton was very obvious. I saw him play before his sprains,
during his sprains, and last year after they had finally healed. There was a
tremendous difference in his mobility: running and shifting and sliding in the
pocket.

Regarding deep accuracy, I, too have watched Manning, Brady, and Orton. I
saw receivers catching the ball in stride from all three, and I have seen them
have to make adjustments from all three. And I maintain the "receiver
adjustment" argument is a disingenuous one.

And again, if you want to use the term "cannon arm," then I suggest you refer
to your own posts. I did not use the term "cannon arm" in reference to Orton.
Not ever. I said "strong" arm. Anyone denying Orton has a strong arm either
has not paid attention or is being less than candid. But "cannon" is Elway,
Favre, Cutler. I have never placed Orton in that class regarding arm strength.

I did compare him to Manning and Brady, as to arm strength -- not accuracy --
but sheer arm strength. But did I do it out of the blue, as so many have done
with their arguments here? Nope, I documented it. I mentioned what he did in
a QB competition as a (yet not fully developed) high school senior (74 yards)
and what Manning (68 yards) and Brady (67 yards) did in the 2002 NFL QB
competition. (I can't find the documentation now, but I had found it before
and posted it on three different boards. If someone was to take the time --
which I don't come close to having at the time -- I'm sure it could be found.)

Regarding Charley Johnson and Craig Morton, if you want to compare them to
Orton, then maybe someone else will take you up on that. I won't.

-----

TOP, you telling ANYONE else they have "thin skin" is just comical. If someone points out when you are misleading or outright wrong you cuss them out and put them on ignore.

In fact, you can't even read this since you put me on ignore after throwing a hissy fit because I don't think Orton can throw a football 74 yards or consider him mobile :laugh:.

Pot me kettle.

Davii
05-26-2011, 07:24 PM
Folks a moderator directive was issued to stop making each other the topic. Let's get it on topic before directives become actions.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 08:38 PM
The difference is that Manning and Brady hit the deeper intermediates without buying time to do so, and they get rid of the ball MUCH faster than Kyle. They are just simply on a level he can never be because he lacks the physical ability and the mental toughness in crucial situations.
Remind me how many years they've been on their teams again? Hellsbells, Pmanning IS the OC.
Way to grab the two best qb's as a comparison.
Keep that up, you might start thinking orton's 'elite'. :lol:

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 08:44 PM
Remind me how many years they've been on their teams again? Hellsbells, Pmanning IS the OC.
Way to grab the two best qb's as a comparison.
Keep that up, you might start thinking orton's 'elite'. :lol:

I used those 2 because the post I was responding to used them dude. :lol:

It's not even close in my opinion, Kyle is WAY better than either Manning or Brady now that he's a mobile QB.

rcsodak
05-26-2011, 08:46 PM
I used those 2 because the post I was responding to used them dude. :lol:

It's not even close in my opinion, Kyle is WAY better than either Manning or Brady now that he's a mobile QB.

Now you've overdosed on those pills.

SEEK MEDICAL HELP IMMEDIATELY!! :eek:

;)

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 08:55 PM
Fellas it's time to let go.

BroncoStud
05-26-2011, 09:03 PM
Fellas it's time to let go.

What else is there to talk about?? The lockout has us all bored.

TXBRONC
05-26-2011, 09:42 PM
What else is there to talk about?? The lockout has us all bored.

Davii is talking about the little digs at each other.

BroncoStud
05-27-2011, 08:35 AM
Davii is talking about the little digs at each other.

It doesn't bother me and I doubt it bothers RC, we're not saying anything that is hurtful. Just having a little fun.

rcsodak
05-27-2011, 09:33 AM
It doesn't bother me and I doubt it bothers RC, we're not saying anything that is hurtful. Just having a little fun.

I have a feeling Davii wasn't referring to our posts to each other.

Lonestar
05-27-2011, 11:41 AM
Yep TD seaz therefore it must be true.

Time to trade Orton and move on.

Let's just hold out for a high 2nd or a low first*. Count me in.











*For those that disagree see quote by the FO yesterday.

T.K.O.
05-27-2011, 12:15 PM
Orton will be a bronco next season unless we get a 2nd + player/pick
or a 1st........mark it down.
an average qb can win alot of games with some help:salute: (see flacco #'s last year)

Davii
05-27-2011, 12:22 PM
I'm honestly hoping for the trade. Don't get me wrong, I think Kyle could win games here and do good job. I think Tim can do just as well though in the short term, and in the long run, I think he has more upside.

spikerman
05-27-2011, 12:45 PM
I have nothing against Orton, but I don't see the upside of letting him play in Denver next year. No matter who starts, this team is not going to challenge for a championship and probably not even a playoff birth. Let Tebow get some games under his belt and see if he shows promise or not. If he does, then you have your QB of the future - if not, at least you know and can start looking in a different direction.

If Orton starts next year, the team (imho) will still be mediocre at best, but we'll have learned nothing about whether QB is a need or not.

topscribe
05-27-2011, 02:08 PM
I have nothing against Orton, but I don't see the upside of letting him play in Denver next year. No matter who starts, this team is not going to challenge for a championship and probably not even a playoff birth. Let Tebow get some games under his belt and see if he shows promise or not. If he does, then you have your QB of the future - if not, at least you know and can start looking in a different direction.

If Orton starts next year, the team (imho) will still be mediocre at best, but we'll have learned nothing about whether QB is a need or not.

Let me add this: This year, Denver is going to contend for a playoff birth.

Only I will add "in my opinon."

-----

Ravage!!!
05-27-2011, 02:14 PM
its redundant to state "in my opinion" when its obvious you are stating an opinion, especially when one is guessing the 'future'...unless of course you feel he actually CAN predict the future and need for him to distinguish between when he's giving his opinion and when he's giving facts.

spikerman
05-27-2011, 02:18 PM
Let me add this: This year, Denver is going to contend for a playoff birth.

Only I will add "in my opinon."

-----

I hope you're right, but when I look at the overall talent on the team coupled with the failure of the Broncos to address their greatest need in the draft, I'm not optimistic.

topscribe
05-27-2011, 02:32 PM
I hope you're right, but when I look at the overall talent on the team coupled with the failure of the Broncos to address their greatest need in the draft, I'm not optimistic.

Well, Spike, first of all, Fox said he doesn't believe the Broncos are as bad off at
DT as generally thought. He seems to think the present guys will do much better
in the 4-3 than they did the 3-4. Add who promises to be a superlative DC,
which they haven't had, with the exception of Nolan (and we saw the results -
i.e., 6-0 and #1 in the league - until McD started imposing his will).

I am positive they are going back after Bannan and re-signing Thomas when the
lockout mess lifts up.

Moreover, Fox has said he isn't through with adding talent. A very unhappy
Mebane is out there, as well as Cofield. Get one of those and another of a crop
of good rotational players available, and all the sudden the Broncos have
depth.

Look at linebacker now: D.J., Miller, Haggan, Mays, Irving . . . pretty well set.

Defensive backfield is fine, IMO.

Offensive line began to gel last year, and I expect will get better with
chemistry and experience.

TEs can now catch the ball with the additions of Green and J. Thomas.

And we know what a guru Fox is with the running game.

I'm just more optimistic about the cast than most, I guess. *shrugs*

Anyway, sorry for meandering. :focus:

-----

spikerman
05-27-2011, 03:09 PM
Ok, I don't want the thread to get too far off topic (again), but I just want to show you what I see, because you're right - you definitely see more in the cast than me.


Well, Spike, first of all, Fox said he doesn't believe the Broncos are as bad off at
DT as generally thought. He seems to think the present guys will do much better
in the 4-3 than they did the 3-4. Add who promises to be a superlative DC,
which they haven't had, with the exception of Nolan (and we saw the results -
i.e., 6-0 and #1 in the league - until McD started imposing his will).
I know he thinks that the guys will do better, but some of these guys were around when Denver was running the 4-3 before, and they were nothing special (Thomas). Vickerson is only on the Broncos because the Seahawks had no further need for him. Add to that that he just dropped a bunch of weight and he's probably greatly reduced his effectiveness as a run stopper. As for the new DC, I'm going to take the "wait and see" approach. New Orleans definitely hasn't had dominating defenses over the past few years. Opportunistic? - definitely. Stout? - Not so much. We'll see if he really can bring that kind of success to Denver. He does not have any DC experience at the NFL level and my guess is that there will be some growing pains.



I am positive they are going back after Bannan and re-signing Thomas when the
lockout mess lifts up.
It's good to be optimistic, but there is no guarantee they get Bannan (who is solid, but not spectacular) back and I don't believe Marcus Thomas has done much to show that he's much more than a rotational player in this league.



Moreover, Fox has said he isn't through with adding talent. A very unhappy
Mebane is out there, as well as Cofield. Get one of those and another of a crop
of good rotational players available, and all the sudden the Broncos have
depth.
I'm glad he's not finished adding talent because this team is pretty talent-deprived; however, there is no guarantee that they get any of these guys. There will be a lot of competition for their services.



Look at linebacker now: D.J., Miller, Haggan, Mays, Irving . . . pretty well set.

In order - solid (most of the time), rookie (looks to be a great talent, but who knows?), average player, was a special teams player only on a more talented roster, rookie (who knows?)



Defensive backfield is fine, IMO.
The Cox situation leaves them in flux, but overall probably one of the more solid areas on the team.



Offensive line began to gel last year, and I expect will get better with
chemistry and experience.
Hopefully a healthy Clady helps, but a rookie guarding Tebow's (if he's the starter) blindside is not comforting. As far as the rest of the line "gelling", I don't know - Denver never really got good at running the ball last year. Hopefully that's better this year.



TEs can now catch the ball with the additions of Green and J. Thomas.
Rookies, who are unproven at the NFL-level. In fact one of them has very little football experience overall.



And we know what a guru Fox is with the running game.
Now he just needs a solid back to carry it out.

So that's why I say that the team is depleted in talent. I may be wrong, but overall the team just doesn't look that strong to me.

Ok, sorry for the derailing. I'll go back to the topic now.

Lonestar
05-27-2011, 03:13 PM
I hope you're right, but when I look at the overall talent on the team coupled with the failure of the Broncos to address their greatest need in the draft, I'm not optimistic.

Not seeing playoff berth. As you said DT we have one under contract for 11.

Unless they sign atleast 3 we are going to suck hind teat again in stopping the run. Therefore the pass rush is negated. Then field position sucks and we are playing from behind once again. Just like the last 3-4 years.
We have a brutal schedule.
A first year head coach, dc and position coaches. a strike that'll not allow the players to be coached or for that matter get into football shape. Seek trainers or bronco doctors.

Anyone dreaming of someting more than 5 wins. DON'T

Lonestar
05-27-2011, 03:30 PM
Let me add we have some talent but Where it is ok it is only one deep much like it has been for going on a decade.

Almost no depth at any spot other than a few third tier guys in the LB. And db spots.

Only place I feel comfortable is WR and that does nit have loads of depth but is the deepest we have.

rcsodak
05-27-2011, 03:42 PM
its redundant to state "in my opinion" when its obvious you are stating an opinion, especially when one is guessing the 'future'...unless of course you feel he actually CAN predict the future and need for him to distinguish between when he's giving his opinion and when he's giving facts.
:lol:

BroncoStud
05-28-2011, 01:00 AM
Let me add this: This year, Denver is going to contend for a playoff birth.

Only I will add "in my opinon."

-----

That would be sweet, I sure hope you're right. 4-12 seasons are simply no fun.

TXBRONC
06-04-2011, 10:07 AM
That would be sweet, I sure hope you're right. 4-12 seasons are simply no fun.

I like our chances better if we can have some semblence of a full camp.

Softskull
06-04-2011, 10:34 AM
Not seeing playoff berth. As you said DT we have one under contract for 11.

Unless they sign atleast 3 we are going to suck hind teat again in stopping the run. Therefore the pass rush is negated. Then field position sucks and we are playing from behind once again. Just like the last 3-4 years.
We have a brutal schedule.
A first year head coach, dc and position coaches. a strike that'll not allow the players to be coached or for that matter get into football shape. Seek trainers or bronco doctors.

Anyone dreaming of someting more than 5 wins. DON'T

Damn Jr, We agree on something.
It will be a tough year. It's another transition and we still lack talent at several key locations. At this point, all I'm looking for is improvement over the course of the year. I'm not yet sold on Tebow, but he does seem to have the "it" factor that everyone wants from a team leader. Show me something.

Lonestar
06-04-2011, 11:39 AM
Damn Jr, We agree on something.
It will be a tough year. It's another transition and we still lack talent at several key locations. At this point, all I'm looking for is improvement over the course of the year. I'm not yet sold on Tebow, but he does seem to have the "it" factor that everyone wants from a team leader. Show me something.
While many of y'all did not see the "IT" in orton his teammates did or he would not have been elected a captain of the team from the git go.
Except For a couple of knuckleheads that are no longer with the TEAM we have made good progress.

Now would I rather have TEbow is playing absolutely. But for the only reason that I'd rather have quality players or draft choices for orton.

I think orton would be a good qb and could get us to the playoffs and win some of them but other areas has to be addressed for EITHER TT or KO and that is run stopping on d, ST and run blocking on O. Does not matter which qb we play neither is going to win consistently without those other areas fixed.

I'd love to have KO play this years and still get some value in return after the season as I do not think that TEbow is quite ready. Think he needs another year.

But if folks are willing to Put up with another 4-6 game wins this coming year play him.

Ravage!!!
06-04-2011, 11:42 AM
Being team captain does not mean you have "it" and doesn't mean your teammates think you have "it." Some of the very people you insult the most that used to be on this team, were team captains.

How are you going to get value for KO if we play him this year? Sign him to a long-term contract and trade him? Franchise tag him, and trade him?

MOtorboat
06-04-2011, 11:43 AM
\I'd love to have KO play this years and still get some value in return after the season

He's a free agent after the year. If you want to get something for him you have to do it before the 2011 season.

Lonestar
06-04-2011, 01:28 PM
He's a free agent after the year. If you want to get something for him you have to do it before the 2011 season.

Yes I know that is why I Said I'd love to play him and still get value for him.

But it is either or.

I'd hoped to get TEbow another year or so to work on his weaker points.

We may just have to dumb down the playbook and bone him up on reading NFL defenses.

Let the rookie play and that is really what he is a red shirt sophomore.

Softskull
06-04-2011, 02:11 PM
While many of y'all did not see the "IT" in orton his teammates did or he would not have been elected a captain of the team from the git go.
Except For a couple of knuckleheads that are no longer with the TEAM we have made good progress.

Now would I rather have TEbow is playing absolutely. But for the only reason that I'd rather have quality players or draft choices for orton.

I think orton would be a good qb and could get us to the playoffs and win some of them but other areas has to be addressed for EITHER TT or KO and that is run stopping on d, ST and run blocking on O. Does not matter which qb we play neither is going to win consistently without those other areas fixed.

I'd love to have KO play this years and still get some value in return after the season as I do not think that TEbow is quite ready. Think he needs another year.

But if folks are willing to Put up with another 4-6 game wins this coming year play him.

I like Orton, he's a good QB but I wouldn't say he has "it". He's just above the average by NFL standards, and certainly not a long term answer. Let's find out if Tebow is more than an underwear salesman. If not, let's move on until we have our guy.

So you're predicting a 4-6 win season with Tebow. What if Orton starts? 6-7 wins? I'd gladly give up those two wins for Tebow experience and a second rounder for next year. We aren't a condender at this point. We might as well let our future starters get their time and begin the gellin' process that only comes with time.

BroncoStud
06-04-2011, 03:08 PM
While many of y'all did not see the "IT" in orton his teammates did or he would not have been elected a captain of the team from the git go.
Except For a couple of knuckleheads that are no longer with the TEAM we have made good progress.

Now would I rather have TEbow is playing absolutely. But for the only reason that I'd rather have quality players or draft choices for orton.

I think orton would be a good qb and could get us to the playoffs and win some of them but other areas has to be addressed for EITHER TT or KO and that is run stopping on d, ST and run blocking on O. Does not matter which qb we play neither is going to win consistently without those other areas fixed.

I'd love to have KO play this years and still get some value in return after the season as I do not think that TEbow is quite ready. Think he needs another year.

But if folks are willing to Put up with another 4-6 game wins this coming year play him.

What makes ANYONE think that Orton would win more than 4-6 games as the starting QB? He won 3 last year... :laugh: The Broncos scoring offensve IMPROVED when Tebow started and Orton got benched.

BroncoStud
06-04-2011, 03:10 PM
He's a free agent after the year. If you want to get something for him you have to do it before the 2011 season.

Yes, yet some people have a VERY hard time grasping this. If he starts 2011 and sucks, like he did when the Tebow pressure starting mounting last year, then he won't even have trade value before the trade deadline expires.

If Denver doesn't think that Orton is the longterm solution (which they don't), then they would be foolish not to trade him before the season begins.

TXBRONC
06-04-2011, 05:02 PM
I like Orton, he's a good QB but I wouldn't say he has "it". He's just above the average by NFL standards, and certainly not a long term answer. Let's find out if Tebow is more than an underwear salesman. If not, let's move on until we have our guy.

So you're predicting a 4-6 win season with Tebow. What if Orton starts? 6-7 wins? I'd gladly give up those two wins for Tebow experience and a second rounder for next year. We aren't a condender at this point. We might as well let our future starters get their time and begin the gellin' process that only comes with time.

I don't thinking being elected team captain has nothing to do with "it" factor. If Orton's teammates felt that way I think they would have clamored for him be re-inserted into starting line-up once his ribs healed up.

Softskull
06-04-2011, 05:05 PM
I don't thinking being elected team captain has nothing to do with "it" factor. If Orton's felt that way I think they would have clamored for him be re-inserted into starting line-up once his ribs healed up.

Agreed, Orton is a known quantity. He may be the better player at the moment, but we've seen his top performance. Last year he had the benefit of a receiver that played out of his mind.

TXBRONC
06-04-2011, 05:14 PM
Agreed, Orton is a known quantity. He may be the better player at the moment, but we've seen his top performance. Last year he had the benefit of a receiver that played out of his mind.

I've said many times over if EFX was convinced about Orton being franchise quarterback they would have end speculation about whether or not he will start this next season. I also think EFX thought Orton had the "it" factor they would have already gotten him locked into a long term deal.