PDA

View Full Version : Orton to Seattle? (Clayton)



MOtorboat
06-06-2011, 10:43 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=6625910


Q: Do you truly believe that Kyle Orton is a good fit for Seattle? I know that he was a good QB in Chicago, but did not really prove himself in Denver. I think it would be a great pickup for when Matt Hasselbeck leaves, but can it work?

Spencer in Gilbert, Ariz.

A: Orton would be a good fit, but it would serve the Seahawks better to re-sign Hasselbeck and not give up the second- or third-round choice it would cost to acquire Orton. Follow me on this. I'd rank Orton as the 17th-best quarterback in the league. He's not elite, but he's good. If the Cardinals can't get Kevin Kolb, they've got to come up with Orton. I have Hasselbeck now as No. 20, but still good. I actually think the Broncos should keep Orton. He was on pace for a 5,000-yard season at one point last season.

Seattle?

BroncoJoe
06-06-2011, 10:45 AM
Orton to .....

Sounds good to me. And no, I am not an Orton hater.

underrated29
06-06-2011, 10:50 AM
Orton and a 4th for mebaner and leon wash......prob not fair by us. But why nt dream a little

MOtorboat
06-06-2011, 10:51 AM
Orton to .....

Sounds good to me. And no, I am not an Orton hater.

Neither am I, and I agree. If Denver sticks with Orton, they sit on another certain quarterback.

MOtorboat
06-06-2011, 11:12 AM
Orton and a 4th for mebaner and leon wash......prob not fair by us. But why nt dream a little

Isn't Mebane a free agent regardless of whether they have new FA rules or use 2010 FA rules?

Shananahan
06-06-2011, 11:20 AM
I don't believe we'll know for sure what Mebane's status is until the dust settles.

Denver Native (Carol)
06-06-2011, 11:25 AM
Mike from Eugene, Ore., thinks the Seattle Seahawks would be better served considering Kyle Orton over Kevin Kolb among quarterback options, based in part on what K.C. Joyner wrote about Orton in a recent Insider piece.

Mike Sando: The Seahawks aren't attacking the quarterback situation very aggressively. They're building for the long term, focusing on the supporting cast and determined not to force the quarterback situation if there isn't a franchise-caliber option available.

Do Orton and Kolb qualify in the Seahawks' eyes as must-have, championship-caliber quarterbacks? That seems doubtful. I suspect the teams that know those players best would keep them if they viewed Orton and Kolb as being in that class.

For that reason, I doubt the Seahawks will meet any lucrative trade demands for Orton. The team might be more apt to bring back Matt Hasselbeck for another year, or even go with Charlie Whitehurst. Again, I'm sensing no rush from Seattle to patch the situation.

I do think Orton has appeal. He's had a winning record as a starter in every season except for 2010, when Denver fell off sharply. As Joyner points out, Orton is one of six quarterbacks with 20 victories as a starter since 2008. Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Brett Favre, Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers are the others.

Orton is 28 years old, seven years younger than Hasselbeck. He's bound to be hungry and motivated if Denver follows Chicago's lead by trading him despite decent production.

Orton has 7,455 yards with 41 touchdown passes and 21 interceptions over the last two seasons. Hasselbeck has 6,030 yards with 29 touchdowns and 34 interceptions over that span. Both were breaking in new coaches with new schemes for franchises in transition.

rest of article - http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/38951/on-kyle-ortons-viability-for-seahawks

RebelRocker
06-06-2011, 01:16 PM
Neither am I, and I agree. If Denver sticks with Orton, they sit on another certain quarterback.

Yeah... Brady Quinn:D


Kind of hard to "sit on" another QB if they don't earn the starting job.

slim
06-06-2011, 01:24 PM
Pete needs himself a drinking buddy

TXBRONC
06-06-2011, 02:18 PM
I like the idea.

I also think Clayton is spot on about where Orton ranks among starting quarterbacks.

WARHORSE
06-06-2011, 10:05 PM
If Orton is in camp when we start training camp, it will be hard for Tebow to unseat him if he does not show marked improvement in passing accuracy, drops, footwork, mechanics, etc.

His playmaking ability will not be as visible, and as soon as he decides to run with a red jersey on, first guy to touch him kills the play.

With that being said, I totally believe Tebow will be on a different level this year.

The man has been working, and that wont be stopping any time soon.

Now, that being said, would we want Orton sitting behind Tebow?

Not really.

Denver needs to deal a QB, and it wont be Tebow.

I dont at all pass on Quinn in a different offense than McDaniels, and believe he will get a fairer shake with Fox calling the shots.

At this point, Quinn is a better backup for what we want if Tebow is the starter.


First team to drop a QB to injury this offseason or preseason is going to come calling with flowers and a dinner date with EFX.

nevcraw
06-06-2011, 10:36 PM
It"s too bad mark Brunell will not be available in FA as BU. lefty, boyscout, coud win a couple still if had to, was a scrambler early on, and has proven to be a great teammate/mentor.

TXBRONC
06-06-2011, 11:34 PM
It"s too bad mark Brunell will not be available in FA as BU. lefty, boyscout, coud win a couple still if had to, was a scrambler early on, and has proven to be a great teammate/mentor.

There would probably be several descent option if Orton is dealt.

powderaddict
06-07-2011, 07:39 AM
I don't ever want to se Brunell in a Broncos uni.

Am I still bitter about the home playoff loss to the jags from a decade and a half ago?

You bet I am!!

TXBRONC
06-07-2011, 08:11 AM
I don't ever want to se Brunell in a Broncos uni.

Am I still bitter about the home playoff loss to the jags from a decade and a half ago?

You bet I am!!

Dang Powder. :lol:

Ravage!!!
06-07-2011, 10:22 AM
Not dealing Orton is a waste for this team. I agree with Clayton, wouldn't make sense for Seattle to give up a 3rd round pick for a one-year rental. Thats the problem we are going to find all over the league.

People could USE him, but no one wants to KEEP him.

TXBRONC
06-07-2011, 10:38 AM
Not dealing Orton is a waste for this team. I agree with Clayton, wouldn't make sense for Seattle to give up a 3rd round pick for a one-year rental. Thats the problem we are going to find all over the league.

People could USE him, but no one wants to KEEP him.

Possibly. But I don't think that would be true for every potential suitor. Take the Vikings for example. I think team might find having Orton there for a year or two be helpful in the development of Ponder. I don't mean in the sense of Orton being helpful in maturation process but he could kept the situation stable while Ponder is brought along. What he'll be paid this year isn't all that exorbitant so there could be some teams that have interest in him.

Ravage!!!
06-07-2011, 10:45 AM
Possibly. But I don't think that would be true for every potential suitor. Take the Vikings for example. I think team might find having Orton there for a year or two be helpful in the development of Ponder. I don't mean in the sense of Orton being helpful in maturation process but he could kept the situation stable while Ponder is brought along. What he'll be paid this year isn't all that exorbitant so there could be some teams that have interest in him.

I agree 100%. The Viking are ready to win NOW.. and could use the veteran QB. But I think they go with a guy like McNabb before they go with a guy like Orton. McNabb is someone that will earn respect from that locker room, immediately. Orton, notsomuch.

But if the Vikings don't get McNabb, I can see the move for Orton. Orton would be just good enough to keep them contenders.

TXBRONC
06-07-2011, 12:41 PM
I agree 100%. The Viking are ready to win NOW.. and could use the veteran QB. But I think they go with a guy like McNabb before they go with a guy like Orton. McNabb is someone that will earn respect from that locker room, immediately. Orton, notsomuch.

But if the Vikings don't get McNabb, I can see the move for Orton. Orton would be just good enough to keep them contenders.

If Orton is trade I think another potential landing spot is Miami.

Ravage!!!
06-07-2011, 01:58 PM
If Orton is trade I think another potential landing spot is Miami.

Yes.. one of the few teams that needed a QB, that didn't take one. Miami will probably be looking for a QB in 2012 which would be right on track for Orton's career. Holding the spot while the newly drafted QB gets ready.

TXBRONC
06-08-2011, 01:35 PM
Yes.. one of the few teams that needed a QB, that didn't take one. Miami will probably be looking for a QB in 2012 which would be right on track for Orton's career. Holding the spot while the newly drafted QB gets ready.

Orton is a good quarterback to have if you an interim.

BroncoNut
06-08-2011, 01:39 PM
this is just more fuel to add to the trade Orton now campaign. And like the midget says, if we keep Orton as our qb, we continie to sit on another certain quarterback. I think he was talking about Tim Tebow.

TXBRONC
06-08-2011, 01:44 PM
this is just more fuel to add to the trade Orton now campaign. And like the midget says, if we keep Orton as our qb, we continie to sit on another certain quarterback. I think he was talking about Tim Tebow.

What midget are you talking about?

RebelRocker
06-08-2011, 02:29 PM
Picking up Matt Moore would make a lot of sense, if Orton was dealt.

-Spent his whole career with Fox in CAR.
-Knows the offense
-Can push Tebow/Quinn for the starting job.
-Can come in,"manage the game" and win us a few, if he had to.
-Would probably be a lot cheaper than most of the veterans out there.

TXBRONC
06-08-2011, 02:42 PM
Picking up Matt Moore would make a lot of sense, if Orton was dealt.

-Spent his whole career with Fox in CAR.
-Knows the offense
-Can push Tebow/Quinn for the starting job.
-Can come in,"manage the game" and win us a few, if he had to.
-Would probably be a lot cheaper than most of the veterans out there.

Is he a free agent?

BroncoNut
06-08-2011, 02:55 PM
What midget are talking about?

Missouribronc, MO

Ravage!!!
06-08-2011, 02:59 PM
I don't want Moore anymore than Orton. If you are going to just keep a game manager, keep Orton. Makes no sense to trade Orton and get a guy like Moore, imo. Would seem to be trading green apples for red apples.

TXBRONC
06-08-2011, 03:01 PM
Missouribronc, MO

:doh:

How could I forget. :tsk:

WARHORSE
06-08-2011, 03:03 PM
Not dealing Orton is a waste for this team. I agree with Clayton, wouldn't make sense for Seattle to give up a 3rd round pick for a one-year rental. Thats the problem we are going to find all over the league.

People could USE him, but no one wants to KEEP him.


It wouldnt be a one year rental.

Any team that trades for Orton is going to get a demand from him for a new contract, or he will hold out. (thats what his agent will say)

And this would be status quo.

Denver wants a pick or player, the trading partner wants a QB, and Orton will want more stability.

Im sure the team will put together a contract that is stipulated by playing time and success.

Denver would be wise to do the same in their trade demands.

Settle for less, but makes SURE you put stipulations on Ortons playing time bringing a higher pick.

If Orton throws for a certain amount of TDs....certain amount of yardage....etc, etc.

TXBRONC
06-08-2011, 03:08 PM
I don't want Moore anymore than Orton. If you are going to just keep a game manager, keep Orton. Makes no sense to trade Orton and get a guy like Moore, imo. Would seem to be trading green apples for red apples.

Red apples are sweeter than green apples. :nod:

Juriga72
06-08-2011, 03:58 PM
Red apples are sweeter than green apples. :nod:

Kyle looks like he already has the green apple two step....

Ravage!!!
06-08-2011, 04:17 PM
It wouldnt be a one year rental.

Any team that trades for Orton is going to get a demand from him for a new contract, or he will hold out. (thats what his agent will say)

And this would be status quo.

Denver wants a pick or player, the trading partner wants a QB, and Orton will want more stability.

Im sure the team will put together a contract that is stipulated by playing time and success.

Denver would be wise to do the same in their trade demands.

Settle for less, but makes SURE you put stipulations on Ortons playing time bringing a higher pick.

If Orton throws for a certain amount of TDs....certain amount of yardage....etc, etc.

I'm sure he might get a 3-4 year contract, but I would bet money that no one keeps him as their starter for that long. I don't think we trade him to a team that doesn't plan on starting him, thus trading with stipulations for 'playing time' could only hurt us. They would also have a limit his signing bonus and give solid roster bonuses so that they won't be hit too hard by cutting him.

What if he gets hurt... check that.... what about WHEN he gets hurt? Thats would have a direct influence on where our pick may lie. If we trade with the expectations of him starting, then we get around a 2nd round pick for him. I guess we could get a 3rd that could move INTO a 2nd.

Either way, the team that trades for him already has a newly drafted QB on the roster, then Orton would only be the planned starter for the ONE year. Then, he would have to move on, because you don't keep the former incumbent. Rarely, if ever, do you PLAN on your first round QB sitting for more than ONE year (GB didn't plan on Rodgers sitting for more than one, and SD didn't plan on Rivers sitting at all).

This is where a team like Miami and AZ are the most attractive. They didn't use a draft pick on a QB THIS year.. thus that means Orton could be of use for 2 years (this year, and next year). Miami and AZ both will probably draft a QB in 2012. After that, they will want their QBs to be playing. The Vikings MIGHT be interested, but becaue they just spent a high round on a QB, they would more likely go for McNabb. A veteran guy that doesn't expect a long-term contract that can perform NOW, give the rookie some lessons, and not expect to start in 2012.

If Miami and AZ both dont' work out, then you look for a team that might have an injury to their starting QB.... which really sucks that we aren't having more practices and training camps that might make that more probable.

RebelRocker
06-09-2011, 12:36 AM
I don't want Moore anymore than Orton. If you are going to just keep a game manager, keep Orton. Makes no sense to trade Orton and get a guy like Moore, imo. Would seem to be trading green apples for red apples.

How is Moore a "game manager"?

He knows Fox's offense better than anybody else and he would be a great back up who could start, if he had to.

If that happens and Moore becomes our starter, then clearly our QB depth is crap and we'll be looking for the franchise QB next year in the draft.

RebelRocker
06-09-2011, 12:37 AM
Is he a free agent?

It depends. If the new CBA is like the one from a few years back, then yes. But if they're going by last year's CBA, then no. He'd be a RFA. If that's the case, we're better off signing somebody else because he's not worth giving up a draft pick for.

Shananahan
06-09-2011, 02:32 AM
How is Moore a "game manager"?
Seriously? Moore is a game manager simply because he is unable to win games on his own. He's more likely to throw six interceptions in a game than he is three touchdowns, and with him behind center the team would be playing a safe, low-risk offense to minimize on the amount of times Moore might give it away.

He's a horrible choice for a team like Denver, backup or otherwise. If you wanna point out that our QB depth might be crap, fine. If that's the case they should trot out unproven and unknown crap rather than certified crap like Matt Moore.

Lonestar
06-09-2011, 08:27 AM
Let's see if I have this correct some want Moore because he knows Fox and his offense, but IIRC we kept the OC and playbook from last year. Just how is that going help him?

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 09:03 AM
How is Moore a "game manager"?

He knows Fox's offense better than anybody else and he would be a great back up who could start, if he had to.

If that happens and Moore becomes our starter, then clearly our QB depth is crap and we'll be looking for the franchise QB next year in the draft.


Seriously? Moore is a game manager simply because he is unable to win games on his own. He's more likely to throw six interceptions in a game than he is three touchdowns, and with him behind center the team would be playing a safe, low-risk offense to minimize on the amount of times Moore might give it away.

He's a horrible choice for a team like Denver, backup or otherwise. If you wanna point out that our QB depth might be crap, fine. If that's the case they should trot out unproven and unknown crap rather than certified crap like Matt Moore.

Guys what does it matter if he's game manager or not. He wouldn't be brought in to be the starter.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 10:13 AM
How is Moore a "game manager"?

He knows Fox's offense better than anybody else and he would be a great back up who could start, if he had to.

If that happens and Moore becomes our starter, then clearly our QB depth is crap and we'll be looking for the franchise QB next year in the draft.

What "Fox" system are you talking about? Fox wasn't the OC in Carolina, and he's not going to be the OC in Denver.

Point is, what are you gaining by bringing in Moore? :confused: Nothing. Nothing at all. If you are looking for a QB to hold the reigns before we draft another, we have that on the roster.

I don't think Moore would be a great back-up by any means, because he doesn't bring anything to the table that we don't already have. Quinn is as good as Moore, and hopefully Tebow is starting. If the season is so bad tht we have to bring Quinn in as the starter, then we are already looking for the new guy to draft anyway.

If we bring in another QB, I'm hoping its a vet to give some experience on the sidelines for Tebow. Moore certainly is not that guy.

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 11:56 AM
What "Fox" system are you talking about? Fox wasn't the OC in Carolina, and he's not going to be the OC in Denver.

Point is, what are you gaining by bringing in Moore? :confused: Nothing. Nothing at all. If you are looking for a QB to hold the reigns before we draft another, we have that on the roster.

I don't think Moore would be a great back-up by any means, because he doesn't bring anything to the table that we don't already have. Quinn is as good as Moore, and hopefully Tebow is starting. If the season is so bad tht we have to bring Quinn in as the starter, then we are already looking for the new guy to draft anyway.

If we bring in another QB, I'm hoping its a vet to give some experience on the sidelines for Tebow. Moore certainly is not that guy.

If Orton is traded and Tebow is the starter I would bet Top's power chair that EFX brings in a veteran quarterback to help tutor Tebow. :geezer:

RebelRocker
06-09-2011, 12:53 PM
If Orton is traded and Tebow is the starter I would bet Top's power chair that EFX brings in a veteran quarterback to help tutor Tebow. :geezer:

bingo. It's better to bring in a guy that already knows Fox's system than somebody that doesn't. As for the OC, Mike McCoy spent many years in that offense.

RebelRocker
06-09-2011, 12:56 PM
What "Fox" system are you talking about? Fox wasn't the OC in Carolina, and he's not going to be the OC in Denver.

Point is, what are you gaining by bringing in Moore? :confused: Nothing. Nothing at all. If you are looking for a QB to hold the reigns before we draft another, we have that on the roster.

I don't think Moore would be a great back-up by any means, because he doesn't bring anything to the table that we don't already have. Quinn is as good as Moore, and hopefully Tebow is starting. If the season is so bad tht we have to bring Quinn in as the starter, then we are already looking for the new guy to draft anyway.

If we bring in another QB, I'm hoping its a vet to give some experience on the sidelines for Tebow. Moore certainly is not that guy.

Yeah, no shit. Fox is a defensive guy, but he retained Mike McCoy for a reason. He spent most of his career working in Fox's offense and he knows what Fox wants to run. In order to do that well, it would be beneficial to bring in a guy who's already been in that system that could help teach it to Quinn, Tebow, etc. How is that a bad thing?

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 01:00 PM
bingo. It's better to bring in a guy that already knows Fox's system than somebody that doesn't. As for the OC, Mike McCoy spent many years in that offense.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Delhomme.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 01:07 PM
Yeah, no shit. Fox is a defensive guy, but he retained Mike McCoy for a reason. He spent most of his career working in Fox's offense and he knows what Fox wants to run. In order to do that well, it would be beneficial to bring in a guy who's already been in that system that could help teach it to Quinn, Tebow, etc. How is that a bad thing?

Because the offensive system they ran in Carolina with Jeff Davidson isn't the same offensive scheme that is run by McCoy. Tebow, Quinn, and Orton have all had a season under McCoy's offense. All three of the QBs on the roster have more experience with McCoy than Moore does.

What would Moore bring to the table? He's spent his entire NFL career as Jeff Davidson as his OC. Matt's not good, he's not experienced, and he's not better than what we already have.

rcsodak
06-09-2011, 01:10 PM
Picking up Matt Moore would make a lot of sense, if Orton was dealt.

-Spent his whole career with Fox in CAR.
-Knows the offense
-Can push Tebow/Quinn for the starting job.
-Can come in,"manage the game" and win us a few, if he had to.
-Would probably be a lot cheaper than most of the veterans out there.

How does he know the offense? Its mccoys/mcd's.

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 01:15 PM
How does he know the offense? Its mccoys/mcd's.

I think what Rocker is trying to get at is that McCoy knows Fox comfortable with in running an offense. Even though it's the McCoy/McDaniels scheme as you put it I don't think the ratio of run to pass wil be the same.

rcsodak
06-09-2011, 01:16 PM
Guys what does it matter if he's game manager or not. He wouldn't be brought in to be the starter.

I disagree. I think EFX has made it perfectly clear that all positions are up for competition. Meaning he comes in competing for the starter position.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 01:28 PM
I disagree. I think EFX has made it perfectly clear that all positions are up for competition. Meaning he comes in competing for the starter position.

Yeah.. all teams say that, but we know logically that is not the case. They wouldn't bring a guy like Moore in and have him start over Tebow. Just as the other teams that have young, high round, draft choices aren't going to start some mediocre player over their new young buck. Just doesn't happen. It sounds good, it sounds great, but we all know who has the job "to lose."

FanInAZ
06-09-2011, 02:48 PM
Guys what does it matter if he's game manager or not. He wouldn't be brought in to be the starter.

Because whatever label you put on him, the Broncos would have him on the roster as an act of charity to him, but to have him available to go under center in a worst case situation in which both of the QBs ahead of him have gotten injured. This does happen from time to time. If the 3rd sting QB is an INT machine, then the game is lost right then and there. If he can't move the chains when the opposing D puts 8 & 9 in the box in order to force him to beat them, then we better hope that our D can dominate their O or will lose. Bottom line, we need 3 QBs on the roster who can get the job done if called upon.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 02:52 PM
If he can't move the chains when the opposing D puts 8 & 9 in the box in order to force him to beat them, then we better hope that our D can dominate their O or will lose. Bottom line, we need 3 QBs on the roster who can get the job done if called upon.

Wait.. are you talking about Moore or Orton? :laugh:

FanInAZ
06-09-2011, 02:54 PM
Wait.. are you talking about Moore or Orton? :laugh:

I'm talking about any QB that puts on a Broncos uniform.

RebelRocker
06-09-2011, 02:55 PM
Yeah.. all teams say that, but we know logically that is not the case. They wouldn't bring a guy like Moore in and have him start over Tebow. Just as the other teams that have young, high round, draft choices aren't going to start some mediocre player over their new young buck. Just doesn't happen. It sounds good, it sounds great, but we all know who has the job "to lose."

So it would look pretty sad if Tebow or Quinn couldn't beat out Moore for the starting job. What concerns you about that. Technically, McCoy spent more time with Moore than Tebow/Quinn. McCoy had TWO seasons with Moore. Again, your response really doesn't make a whole lot a sense when you say he doesn't "fit" what the offense would do. He's more knowledgable about the offense than any other QB out there.

Shananahan
06-09-2011, 03:01 PM
The fact that you are making an argument for Moore being Denver's QB is mindboggling to me. What part of his resume are you looking at that?

Shananahan
06-09-2011, 03:04 PM
Wait, I think maybe this whole time I've been thinking of Jake Delhomme.

Please disregard my previous posts.

MOtorboat
06-09-2011, 03:15 PM
Quinn>Moore

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 03:16 PM
I'm talking about any QB that puts on a Broncos uniform.

Yes, I get that. But the reality is yo don't really expect your 3rd string QB to be starter material or really be able to do more than take the snaps more than "get the job done."

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 03:34 PM
So it would look pretty sad if Tebow or Quinn couldn't beat out Moore for the starting job. What concerns you about that. Technically, McCoy spent more time with Moore than Tebow/Quinn. McCoy had TWO seasons with Moore. Again, your response really doesn't make a whole lot a sense when you say he doesn't "fit" what the offense would do. He's more knowledgable about the offense than any other QB out there.

First off, that wasn't the point of the post, and you know it. Don't try to twist things around to fit some strange agenda you seem to have. The point is simple, despite the "FO talk" that every position will have a competition for the best players, we all know that high round draft picks have the position unless they lose it. Especially on a team where they don't have a veteran incumbent in place. To say that Tebow wouldn't be the starter of Matt Moore, despite some "talk" of fair competition, is ludicrous.

The Carolina Panthers offensive coordinator has been Jeff Davidson since the 2007 season, according to the Carolina Panther's website http://www.panthers.com/team/coaches/jeff-davidson/6e7cfaff-c328-4e64-b08c-d3248bea5e13

That being said, Moore has run Jeff Davidson's offense since 2007, the very year he came into the NFL.

Either way, your answer really leaves much to be desired. I asked what Moore could bring to the table over guys like Tebow and Quinn (especially Quinn, since Tebow would be the starter)... your answer is "he's been in the system." Big deal! So what? Who cares? Honestly, who cares how long he's been in the 'system' if he still is lame? What good does that do the team? Why would they bring him aboard? He doesn't have physical skills that exceed Tebow or Quinn, and he's not a veteran to the NFL that could bring experience and mentoring to the young starter..... what would be the benefit? :confused: ITs that easy. He brings NOTHING to the table that we don't already have.

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 04:29 PM
The fact that you are making an argument for Moore being Denver's QB is mindboggling to me. What part of his resume are you looking at that?


Wait, I think maybe this whole time I've been thinking of Jake Delhomme.

Please disregard my previous posts.

The pool of back quarterbacks that could step into a starters role long term is rather shallow.

FanInAZ
06-09-2011, 04:49 PM
Yes, I get that. But the reality is yo don't really expect your 3rd string QB to be starter material or really be able to do more than take the snaps more than "get the job done."

The Cards 3rd string last year proved to be the best of the lot. When you have as much uncertainty at any position, especially at QB, you don't just fill your bench with warm bodies.

TXBRONC
06-09-2011, 05:00 PM
The Cards 3rd string last year proved to be the best of the lot. When you have as much uncertainty at any position, especially at QB, you don't just fill your bench with warm bodies.

The problem is FIA there isn't that many capable back up quarterbacks in the League.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2011, 05:29 PM
The Cards 3rd string last year proved to be the best of the lot. When you have as much uncertainty at any position, especially at QB, you don't just fill your bench with warm bodies.

I'm not sure what you mean. You definitely have uncertainty at the 3rd string QB. Most teams do not have three guys at the QB position they feel "confident" are starter material. You just don't know if they can get the job done. Third string QBs are usually your project QBs, or ones that "might" have potential.

If they are called upon for situations where the first two went down, then you hope he does well, and EXPECT him to do his best. But thats far from going into the season 'knowing' that all three QBs can get the job done.

As you said (not sure its true, but it doesn't matter).. you feel the 3rd QB for the Cardinals was the best of the lot (not exactly saying much with that lot)...but do you think they knew that, or was it uncertain? If they knew it, he would be starting from the get-go. So yeah, they were uncertain and had him on the roster, initially, because of his "potential." The Cardinals were uncertain about EVERY QB on their roster... which is why they kept 4.

There is also room for 3rd string veterans that are meant to be side-line role models and QB mentors. Green Bay brought in McMahon to be Brett Favre's mentor. Not because of his play, not because they thought he could "get it done" but because he was a good locker room guy, and one that could relate with/to Brett Favre.

BroncoStud
06-09-2011, 08:38 PM
Matt Moore is garbage. Bring in a veteran backup (one who doesn't have misconceptions that he's an NFL stater like Orton) and let Tebow / Quinn battle it out, which should favor Tebow.

RebelRocker
06-10-2011, 12:53 AM
First off, that wasn't the point of the post, and you know it. Don't try to twist things around to fit some strange agenda you seem to have. The point is simple, despite the "FO talk" that every position will have a competition for the best players, we all know that high round draft picks have the position unless they lose it. Especially on a team where they don't have a veteran incumbent in place. To say that Tebow wouldn't be the starter of Matt Moore, despite some "talk" of fair competition, is ludicrous.

The Carolina Panthers offensive coordinator has been Jeff Davidson since the 2007 season, according to the Carolina Panther's website http://www.panthers.com/team/coaches/jeff-davidson/6e7cfaff-c328-4e64-b08c-d3248bea5e13

That being said, Moore has run Jeff Davidson's offense since 2007, the very year he came into the NFL.

Either way, your answer really leaves much to be desired. I asked what Moore could bring to the table over guys like Tebow and Quinn (especially Quinn, since Tebow would be the starter)... your answer is "he's been in the system." Big deal! So what? Who cares? Honestly, who cares how long he's been in the 'system' if he still is lame? What good does that do the team? Why would they bring him aboard? He doesn't have physical skills that exceed Tebow or Quinn, and he's not a veteran to the NFL that could bring experience and mentoring to the young starter..... what would be the benefit? :confused: ITs that easy. He brings NOTHING to the table that we don't already have.

Mike McCoy spent TWO years with Moore in that SAME system! How hard is that for you to understand? McCoy worked under Davidson in his offense for two seasons before he came here. He's aware of the kind of offense Davidson ran in CAR and will be bringing some it into the playbook McD left behind.

RebelRocker
06-10-2011, 12:56 AM
Yeah.. all teams say that, but we know logically that is not the case. They wouldn't bring a guy like Moore in and have him start over Tebow. Just as the other teams that have young, high round, draft choices aren't going to start some mediocre player over their new young buck. Just doesn't happen. It sounds good, it sounds great, but we all know who has the job "to lose."

So you're saying you wouldn't bring in somebody because he was a "threat" to beat somebody else out? NOBODY thinks like that in the NFL! Screw Matt Moore! I'm just talking about a veteran QB, in general. If our current QB's can't beat out a veteran FA for the job, then apparently we'll have to seriously re-evaluate our QB position after the season.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 01:26 AM
I don't really understand your argument, though. Who gives a rats ass if they can or can't beat out a veteran FA? If Tebow/whoever sucks on the field this year, the QB position will most likely be addressed. By the time the season is over, the QB depth will have been re-evaluated regardless of what happens in training camp. Your hypothetical is pointless.

RebelRocker
06-10-2011, 11:09 AM
I don't really understand your argument, though. Who gives a rats ass if they can or can't beat out a veteran FA? If Tebow/whoever sucks on the field this year, the QB position will most likely be addressed. By the time the season is over, the QB depth will have been re-evaluated regardless of what happens in training camp. Your hypothetical is pointless.

Not really. You just re-instated my point there. Oh well:beer:

Lonestar
06-10-2011, 11:22 AM
Mike McCoy spent TWO years with Moore in that SAME system! How hard is that for you to understand? McCoy worked under Davidson in his offense for two seasons before he came here. He's aware of the kind of offense Davidson ran in CAR and will be bringing some it into the playbook McD left behind.

But it was not the scheme they are running this year in DEN they kept Joshes playbook and are going to add some more power running plays.

So in effect Moore would be behind everyone else in the scheme and play calling.

Do it know Moore from Adam but odds are if he was behind Jake he can't be very good.

Lonestar
06-10-2011, 11:24 AM
I don't really understand your argument, though. Who gives a rats ass if they can or can't beat out a veteran FA? If Tebow/whoever sucks on the field this year, the QB position will most likely be addressed. By the time the season is over, the QB depth will have been re-evaluated regardless of what happens in training camp. Your hypothetical is pointless.

On this I can agree. Scary thought is it not.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 12:00 PM
Not really. You just re-instated my point there. Oh well:beer:
Yes really. The only purpose your post could have served was to sneak in another veiled 'what if Tebow isn't that good' remark.

Ravage!!!
06-10-2011, 01:40 PM
Mike McCoy spent TWO years with Moore in that SAME system! How hard is that for you to understand? McCoy worked under Davidson in his offense for two seasons before he came here. He's aware of the kind of offense Davidson ran in CAR and will be bringing some it into the playbook McD left behind.

What makes you think its the same system??? Don't tell me you think its the "Fox" system, because Fox doesn't ahve an offensive "system." McCoy was the assistant HC in Carolina. Perhaps they will be running a lot of the same kind of plays that they ran in Carolina, but I'm sure that a lot is going to be more of a spread offense as well, something that both Tebow and Quinn have had experience at by being on the team last year. Moore doesn't bring anything... ANYTHING.. to the table.


So you're saying you wouldn't bring in somebody because he was a "threat" to beat somebody else out? NOBODY thinks like that in the NFL! Screw Matt Moore! I'm just talking about a veteran QB, in general. If our current QB's can't beat out a veteran FA for the job, then apparently we'll have to seriously re-evaluate our QB position after the season.

What are you talking about? You are just making posts to attack Tebow. That's not what I said at all, and again, you are just making crap up as you go. Perhaps, what you should try doing, is actually reading what someone has typed out in blue-n-white for you.

I don't care if the coaches use the "coach speak" and say that they will have a fair and open competition for every spot on the field. We know, in reality, that's not true. The coaches, right now, know who their starter is. They know who they want to be the starter.

Do you think teams draft QBs in the first round, and expect to sit them instead of getting on the field and learn? Elway himself, said that the fastest way to learn is to be "thrown into the wolves." What GAIN do you get by putting a Matt Moore on the field as your starter? Nothing. You GAIN nothing. Who would want their young future to learn sitting behind Orton and Matt Moore???? God, no one.

If Tebow is the starter, you GAIN experience to the young QB. You GAIN knowledge as to whether or not he's your guy for 2012. You GAIN. We already KNOW what we have with Orton and Matt Moore.... nothing. We have place-holders.

The Broncos are not going to bring in a Matt Moore (:lol: that the name was even mentioned) or any other QB of that same caliber. We have Quinn, he's better than Matt Moore, anyway. If we bring someone in, it will be has the experience and veteran knowledge that can be TAUGHT to the younger QBs on the roster. Thats a GAIN.

Here's another hint for you. Of COURSE veterans would have an upper hand on the young QBs. But you don't draft and acquire young QBs becuase you think they will be better NOW.. you expect them to be better in the future. The only way they get the experience to get better, is to PLAY. It makes NO sense.. None.. zero.. ZILCH.... to bring in "a" Matt Moore and start simply because he "knows the system." Thats probably the biggest WASTE I've ever heard.

RebelRocker
06-10-2011, 01:45 PM
Yes really. The only purpose your post could have served was to sneak in another veiled 'what if Tebow isn't that good' remark.

Now you're completely twisting what I posted. That goes for all 3 QB's, not just Tebow. I guess I'm an ******* because I don't honestly feel like he's ready to be a starting QB, yet. Last time I checked, this was a forum and I believe forums are places where people go to be able to post how they feel, within limits. Maybe if you realized for a second that nobody hates the kid, but a lot of us just think he has work to do before he can be our starting QB. Acting like he's the "real deal" and is going to light it up this year is just unrealistic and stupid.

Dude, you need to be realistic about his ability. A second year player that was a PROJECT to begin with is expected to start this year and "light it up"? Get real, dude!

For the sake of the team, hopefully he can do that, but he probably won't put up great stats in his first year as a starter. If he starts all of the games this year, I think his stats will resemble my prediction

3250 yards
16tds/11 ints
58% completion percentage

That's not bad for a first year starter. Some of the Tebow homers are so un-realistic about his projected stats this year, though. They think he's going to have an all-pro type year(or that's atleast how they act.).

If Tebow can have the type of year that I predict for him and wins us 8-10 games, then I will be completely sold on him as our QBOTF. But until then, the jury WILL be out on him and rightfully so. How many times have we heard that EFX are going to have an open competition and are not going to hand it to anybody. I don't think they would lie to the fanbase and blow smoke up our asses. Whoever wins the competition needs our entire support. I want to win this year and whoever QB gives us the best chance to do that, I'm going to support!

GO BRONCOS!:defense:

Ravage!!!
06-10-2011, 01:54 PM
I don't think Tebow is ready, nor do I think he'll be the kind of passing QB we need in the NFL. I just know I would much rather watch him than have more of the Orton's in the lineup. At least with Tebow, it gives us something entertainng to watch. If nothing else, we can see if he's ready for 2012. If not, then I can see us moving on quickly.

broncohead
06-10-2011, 05:13 PM
I don't think Tebow is ready, nor do I think he'll be the kind of passing QB we need in the NFL. I just know I would much rather watch him than have more of the Orton's in the lineup. At least with Tebow, it gives us something entertainng to watch. If nothing else, we can see if he's ready for 2012. If not, then I can see us moving on quickly.

imo we know Orton is not the answer or the future so i'd like to see Tebow get a shot. Next season would be perfect to move on with Tebow. If he is not the answer we have the draft if he is great. A full season in his 2nd year will tell a lot.

NightTerror218
06-10-2011, 05:18 PM
Now you're completely twisting what I posted. That goes for all 3 QB's, not just Tebow. I guess I'm an ******* because I don't honestly feel like he's ready to be a starting QB, yet. Last time I checked, this was a forum and I believe forums are places where people go to be able to post how they feel, within limits. Maybe if you realized for a second that nobody hates the kid, but a lot of us just think he has work to do before he can be our starting QB. Acting like he's the "real deal" and is going to light it up this year is just unrealistic and stupid.

Dude, you need to be realistic about his ability. A second year player that was a PROJECT to begin with is expected to start this year and "light it up"? Get real, dude!

For the sake of the team, hopefully he can do that, but he probably won't put up great stats in his first year as a starter. If he starts all of the games this year, I think his stats will resemble my prediction

3250 yards
16tds/11 ints
58% completion percentage

That's not bad for a first year starter. Some of the Tebow homers are so un-realistic about his projected stats this year, though. They think he's going to have an all-pro type year(or that's atleast how they act.).

If Tebow can have the type of year that I predict for him and wins us 8-10 games, then I will be completely sold on him as our QBOTF. But until then, the jury WILL be out on him and rightfully so. How many times have we heard that EFX are going to have an open competition and are not going to hand it to anybody. I don't think they would lie to the fanbase and blow smoke up our asses. Whoever wins the competition needs our entire support. I want to win this year and whoever QB gives us the best chance to do that, I'm going to support!

GO BRONCOS!:defense:


The only reason he is a project is because he does not have the "perfect QB form" that is it. By the same standard Rivers is still a project. They say open competition because Orton will become unruly and hard to work with. He already knows Tebow is a threat and wont even talk to him. Hell Orton would not even talk with Elway after arriving in Denver and Quinn and Tebow both had dinner with Elway after arriving in Denver. Not to mention the moral boost Tebow would get for officially beating out the starter. Not to mention if you say Orton is done, he loses some of his value. Are you going to trade for someone thrown to the curb for a QB who people say is a project? What does that say about you?

Fox said as of right now Orton is starter, but for week 1 he does not know. Fox is also a huge Tebow fan, met with him several times prior to the last draft and was said to be going after Tebow the beginning of the 2nd.

Saying all that, I will back whoever starts, and whoever is wearing Orange and Blue. But I will put my money on Tebow as the starter, he has the vets support and is actually putting forth the effort to to improve. Has Orton done anything besides the few Dawkins camps? Tebow has been to those and has flown out receivers to work with in Flordia. He has also been working out (Denver HOF Little said he would see Tebow riding bike past his house and seeing the women outside watching him go by) and working on his form and taking snaps from center. He is putting forth a lot of work. My money is Orton is in the clubs.

broncohead
06-10-2011, 05:29 PM
Now you're completely twisting what I posted. That goes for all 3 QB's, not just Tebow. I guess I'm an ******* because I don't honestly feel like he's ready to be a starting QB, yet. Last time I checked, this was a forum and I believe forums are places where people go to be able to post how they feel, within limits. Maybe if you realized for a second that nobody hates the kid, but a lot of us just think he has work to do before he can be our starting QB. Acting like he's the "real deal" and is going to light it up this year is just unrealistic and stupid.

Dude, you need to be realistic about his ability. A second year player that was a PROJECT to begin with is expected to start this year and "light it up"? Get real, dude!

For the sake of the team, hopefully he can do that, but he probably won't put up great stats in his first year as a starter. If he starts all of the games this year, I think his stats will resemble my prediction

3250 yards
16tds/11 ints
58% completion percentage

That's not bad for a first year starter. Some of the Tebow homers are so un-realistic about his projected stats this year, though. They think he's going to have an all-pro type year(or that's atleast how they act.).

If Tebow can have the type of year that I predict for him and wins us 8-10 games, then I will be completely sold on him as our QBOTF. But until then, the jury WILL be out on him and rightfully so. How many times have we heard that EFX are going to have an open competition and are not going to hand it to anybody. I don't think they would lie to the fanbase and blow smoke up our asses. Whoever wins the competition needs our entire support. I want to win this year and whoever QB gives us the best chance to do that, I'm going to support!

GO BRONCOS!:defense:

Happens all the time a player is labeled a "project" or any other label you can think of comes out and proves people wrong. Tebow is probably one of the hardest working players in the league so whos to say he won't? With that said its not right calling people stupid cause they believe he can or will tear it up. Sorry if its not within your limits

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 05:36 PM
Now you're completely twisting what I posted. That goes for all 3 QB's, not just Tebow. I guess I'm an ******* because I don't honestly feel like he's ready to be a starting QB, yet. Last time I checked, this was a forum and I believe forums are places where people go to be able to post how they feel, within limits. Maybe if you realized for a second that nobody hates the kid, but a lot of us just think he has work to do before he can be our starting QB. Acting like he's the "real deal" and is going to light it up this year is just unrealistic and stupid.
Acting like he's anything but the best hope we'll have next season, provided Quinn doesn't become possessed by Elway, is also unrealistic and stupid. I'm completely toned down about his ability and don't know if he'll make it or not, but it blows my mind how people claiming to be Bronco fans can almost root against him and find reasons why he shouldn't just be the guy right now. I was never a fan until he got drafted, but it shouldn't really be that hard to get excited about a physically talented first-round QB with a work ethic as good as anyone's.

I mean basically the point you were trying and failing to make earlier with bringing in veteran QBs and the QB depth on the roster might as well have just been, 'WHAT IF TEBOW SUCKS HE COULD SUCK MAYBE HE'LL SUCK THERE IS A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY THAT HE WILL SUCK IN WHICH CASE WE WILL HAVE TO RE-EVALUATE THINGS'. You basically said nothing while reminding people of the obvious. You say you don't hate the guy, but you keep finding ways to slip a little dirt onto his name and image. You're not the only one around here that subtly does, either.

NightTerror218
06-10-2011, 05:40 PM
Acting like he's anything but the best hope we'll have next season, provided Quinn doesn't become possessed by Elway, is also unrealistic and stupid. I'm completely toned down about his ability and don't know if he'll make it or not, but it blows my mind how people claiming to be Bronco fans can almost root against him and find reasons why he shouldn't just be the guy right now. I was never a fan until he got drafted, but it shouldn't really be that hard to get excited about a physically talented first-round QB with a work ethic as good as anyone's.

I mean basically the point you were trying and failing to make earlier with bringing in veteran QBs and the QB depth on the roster might as well have just been, 'WHAT IF TEBOW SUCKS HE COULD SUCK MAYBE HE'LL SUCK THERE IS A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY THAT HE WILL SUCK IN WHICH CASE WE WILL HAVE TO RE-EVALUATE THINGS'. You basically said nothing while reminding people of the obvious. You say you don't hate the guy, but you keep finding ways to slip a little dirt onto his name and image. You're not the only one around here that subtly does, either.



If Tebow sucks be prepared to see us to trade a lot of draft picks to reach #1 for Luck next year.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 05:46 PM
Hey, if that happens then we'll ride it out and it will be exciting as hell.

broncohead
06-10-2011, 05:55 PM
If Tebow sucks be prepared to see us to trade a lot of draft picks to reach #1 for Luck next year.

If he sucks we won't have to trade that many. We'll be towards the bottom again

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 06:00 PM
If he sucks we won't have to trade that many. We'll be towards the bottom again
I'm thinking that unless you have the clear #1, its going to take a lot of picks to get Luck. I'm also thinking that unless the Panthers or some other team which just drafted a QB in the top 15 picks gets #1, it will just be impossible to even trade for the pick.

FanInAZ
06-10-2011, 06:20 PM
I'm not sure what you mean. You definitely have uncertainty at the 3rd string QB. Most teams do not have three guys at the QB position they feel "confident" are starter material. You just don't know if they can get the job done. Third string QBs are usually your project QBs, or ones that "might" have potential.

If they are called upon for situations where the first two went down, then you hope he does well, and EXPECT him to do his best. But thats far from going into the season 'knowing' that all three QBs can get the job done.

As you said (not sure its true, but it doesn't matter).. you feel the 3rd QB for the Cardinals was the best of the lot (not exactly saying much with that lot)...but do you think they knew that, or was it uncertain? If they knew it, he would be starting from the get-go. So yeah, they were uncertain and had him on the roster, initially, because of his "potential." The Cardinals were uncertain about EVERY QB on their roster... which is why they kept 4.

There is also room for 3rd string veterans that are meant to be side-line role models and QB mentors. Green Bay brought in McMahon to be Brett Favre's mentor. Not because of his play, not because they thought he could "get it done" but because he was a good locker room guy, and one that could relate with/to Brett Favre.

1) I'm a Broncos fan 1st & foremost. I do have some sympathy towards the Cards because I live in Phoenix, but they will never supplant the Broncos as my #1 team.

2) The QB that started the season as the Cards 3rd string, John Skelton, is a QB is better than the QB who started the season as their 1st string, Derek Anderson. John Hall, who started the season as the 2nd string, also performed better than Anderson. Skelton & Hall are both rookies & show some reasons to give at least one of them as chance to develop. Nevertheless, Just about everyone in Phoenix agrees that the Cards starting QB is not yet on their roster. Assuming that there is an abbreviated FA period prior to the start of what may be a shorted 2011 season; I expect the Cards will pay too much to sign a mediocre veteran QB ASAP. I also expect Anderson will be the one looking for a new team, again.

NightTerror218
06-10-2011, 06:23 PM
If he sucks we won't have to trade that many. We'll be towards the bottom again


Luck will be a hot commodity after a somewhat weak QB class. Most of them were not seen as starting QBs. I could see several teams aiming for Luck and whoever has #1 auctioning off Luck if they dont take him.

NightTerror218
06-10-2011, 06:30 PM
Here is a list of FA and it could be the complete list depending on how FA and UFA work out.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81fe597d/article/unofficial-list-of-potential-fas-including-four-and-fiveyear-vets?module=HP_cp2

I wonder about Chad Pennington as a Vet who mentor knowing he does not have much time, as a 3rd string. Kerry Collins from Titans was not bad last season as Young replacement and could mentor also. This would be as replacement to Orton.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 07:14 PM
Pennington has more or less retired. Not an option. Kerry Collins is also a very poor choice. I'd rather just roll with Quinn and hope that if he actually does come in he shows enough promise that we could either a) keep him as a long-term backup or b) somehow trade him away for something else.

I'm really not understanding all this outcry for a veteran QB. As far as I'm concerned Orton will be traded and this team will live and die by Tebow, for better or for worse. I feel no need to bring somebody like Matt Moore in just because he supposedly knows a system, or another older vet just for experience. Tebow has all the experience he could ever hope to learn from in Elway already. I don't think the QB position on the team is complicated at all right now.

NightTerror218
06-10-2011, 07:22 PM
Pennington has more or less retired. Not an option. Kerry Collins is also a very poor choice. I'd rather just roll with Quinn and hope that if he actually does come in he shows enough promise that we could either a) keep him as a long-term backup or b) somehow trade him away for something else.

I'm really not understanding all this outcry for a veteran QB. As far as I'm concerned Orton will be traded and this team will live and die by Tebow, for better or for worse. I feel no need to bring somebody like Matt Moore in just because he supposedly knows a system, or another older vet just for experience. Tebow has all the experience he could ever hope to learn from in Elway already. I don't think the QB position on the team is complicated at all right now.

As long as Elway is going to be active with advice then we wont need a vet for experience, but that is reasoning behind a Vet is that Tebow is young and so is Quinn and a vet can always help as the 3rd stringer as advice. I figured Pennininton and Collins because they been around (11 yrs and 16 yrs) and could give him some points and advice for a couple years.

FanInAZ
06-10-2011, 07:28 PM
Here is a list of FA and it could be the complete list depending on how FA and UFA work out.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81fe597d/article/unofficial-list-of-potential-fas-including-four-and-fiveyear-vets?module=HP_cp2

I wonder about Chad Pennington as a Vet who mentor knowing he does not have much time, as a 3rd string. Kerry Collins from Titans was not bad last season as Young replacement and could mentor also. This would be as replacement to Orton.

Billy Volek is still in the league?

All 3 QBs for the Raiders, Panthers & Vikings are without a contract?

HORSEPOWER 56
06-10-2011, 07:31 PM
Anyone who is banking on Andrew Luck might want to wait and see how he turns out after one more season. Has any QB gone back to college for his senior year and actually ever maintained his draft stock when he already was the consensus #1 overall pick?

It will be extremely interesting to see how Luck does without Harbaugh this year. I've got a sneaking suspicion that he's not going to be the #1 overall pick next year. Remember last year when Jake Locker and Ryan "3rd round" Mallett were the two potential #1 overall picks? Nobody was talking about Luck or Gabbert as potential 1st round picks and nobody even knew who Cam Newton was.

If Luck shows any chinks in the armor this year, his stock will fall and some other one-year-wonder QB will take his place. He was stupid to return to school, IMO. He could be getting what Cam Newton is going to make. Instead, he's more than likely going to fall out of the top 10.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 07:32 PM
As long as Elway is going to be active with advice then we wont need a vet for experience, but that is reasoning behind a Vet is that Tebow is young and so is Quinn and a vet can always help as the 3rd stringer as advice. I figured Pennininton and Collins because they been around (11 yrs and 16 yrs) and could give him some points and advice for a couple years.
I'm pretty sure Pennington re-injured himself. His arm is sadly toast.

I also agree with your point about a vet with experience being useful on the roster, that's always a plus. This season, however, I don't see a tremendous need for it. We don't know for sure what we have in Tebow and this is the year we find out. I'll have more of a desire for an old, steady hand behind the guy once he shows that he's our QB moving forward. This year I'd rather just roll with Tebow and Quinn, let the chips fall where they may, and save the 3rd string spot for some other young player on the defense. If the worst case scenario of both of them being injured comes about and we have to sign somebody off the street, then the season is already a wash and we'll just have to deal with it.

Shananahan
06-10-2011, 07:35 PM
Anyone who is banking on Andrew Luck might want to wait and see how he turns out after one more season. Has any QB gone back to college for his senior year and actually ever maintained his draft stock when he already was the consensus #1 overall pick?
Carson Palmer would be the only one I could think of, but I don't really believe he was the consensus #1 the year he decided to return.


If Luck shows any chinks in the armor this year, his stock will fall and some other one-year-wonder QB will take his place. He was stupid to return to school, IMO. He could be getting what Cam Newton is going to make. Instead, he's more than likely going to fall out of the top 10.
I think that 'more than likely' is a little ridiculous for you to say at this point, given you're already admitting we don't know what will happen. Also given that guys like Ponder and Gabbert basically went in the top 10, I think it's safe to say that, barring injury, is where Luck has already put himself.

Dzone
06-10-2011, 07:41 PM
Big article on Andrew Luck in this weeks sports illustrated. Impressive dude, thats for sure

BroncoStud
06-10-2011, 11:05 PM
Big article on Andrew Luck in this weeks sports illustrated. Impressive dude, thats for sure

Getting Andrew Luck here in Denver would be freaking fantastic. It's unlikely, but if Orton starts all year we have at least a shot at the Luck Lottery. 3 wins this year might get us there.

Canmore
06-10-2011, 11:14 PM
Getting Andrew Luck here in Denver would be freaking fantastic. It's unlikely, but if Orton starts all year we have at least a shot at the Luck Lottery. 3 wins this year might get us there.

Starting Tim is no slam dunk at an improvement in the win loss department.

BroncoStud
06-10-2011, 11:22 PM
Starting Tim is no slam dunk at an improvement in the win loss department.

So I like our chances either way, just a little better with Kyle in there.

nevcraw
06-11-2011, 12:27 AM
Starting Tim is no slam dunk at an improvement in the win loss department.

but atleast we won't know what will happen.

broncohead
06-11-2011, 12:48 AM
What about Landry Jones?

Npba900
06-11-2011, 06:43 AM
Anyone who is banking on Andrew Luck might want to wait and see how he turns out after one more season. Has any QB gone back to college for his senior year and actually ever maintained his draft stock when he already was the consensus #1 overall pick?

It will be extremely interesting to see how Luck does without Harbaugh this year. I've got a sneaking suspicion that he's not going to be the #1 overall pick next year. Remember last year when Jake Locker and Ryan "3rd round" Mallett were the two potential #1 overall picks? Nobody was talking about Luck or Gabbert as potential ST round picks and nobody even knew who Cam Newton was.

If Luck shows any chinks in the armor this year, his stock will fall and some other one-year-wonder QB will take his place. He was stupid to return to school, IMO. He could be getting what Cam Newton is going to make. Instead, he's more than likely going to fall out of the top 10.

Luck having a drop off in his senior year really is better for the Broncos from the stand point that he's fundamentally sound, will still have a high QB acumen, plays in a pro style offense and can make all the NFL throws. Believe me, I'll trust Elway's evaluation of whether a college QB is ready to make the transition to the NFL. Denver needs a legit Franchise QB if we are to get back into contention and winning football games. I don't see Tebow as that Franchise QB because if Tim was the Franchise QB Elway would have already so. Elway has said that Tebow should not have been drafted No 1 and Tebows skill set coming out of college just wasn't up to NFL standards for a QB to be successful in the NFL. More importantly, Tebow had 4 years of College to address his unorthodox throwing mechanics and somehow failed to do this. Tebow isn't going to be able to fool Elway nor we fans should have to endure 3 or 4 years waiting to see of Tebow can improve enough to become a Franchise NFL QB.....he's either going to have to prove that he's listening and has made strides or he's going to get benched.

TXBRONC
06-11-2011, 09:16 AM
Anyone who is banking on Andrew Luck might want to wait and see how he turns out after one more season. Has any QB gone back to college for his senior year and actually ever maintained his draft stock when he already was the consensus #1 overall pick?

It will be extremely interesting to see how Luck does without Harbaugh this year. I've got a sneaking suspicion that he's not going to be the #1 overall pick next year. Remember last year when Jake Locker and Ryan "3rd round" Mallett were the two potential #1 overall picks? Nobody was talking about Luck or Gabbert as potential 1st round picks and nobody even knew who Cam Newton was.

If Luck shows any chinks in the armor this year, his stock will fall and some other one-year-wonder QB will take his place. He was stupid to return to school, IMO. He could be getting what Cam Newton is going to make. Instead, he's more than likely going to fall out of the top 10.

Sure it's a very real possibility that he has drop off from last season. But I don't think it will be because of a new offensive scheme or new personnel. I think only injuries are the thing that could come back and bit him.

Peyton Manning stayed in school and lot of people thought he was stupid for doing it but panned out pretty good for him.

Ravage!!!
06-11-2011, 10:34 AM
I think he's already the #1 pick...even if he gets hurt and doesn't play. People think that the scouts are rating this kid on his season's numbers? Come on, they aren't your couch potato coaches judging how good a kid is based on the passing/rushing totals he puts up.

You don't get labeled the best since Elway... based purely on one good season. Why is it so hard for people to give credit to the player instead of immediately wanting to chop them down?

BroncoStud
06-11-2011, 02:00 PM
Someone would have to look amazing this season to get consideration for the #1 pick over Andrew Luck. He's pretty much a sure thing as long as he doesn't blow a knee or a shoulder, which even then he might still be the consensus #1.

Bad Intentions
06-12-2011, 09:03 AM
If Orton is in camp when we start training camp, it will be hard for Tebow to unseat him if he does not show marked improvement in passing accuracy, drops, footwork, mechanics, etc.

He was plenty accurate last year. Probably more accurate than Kyle Orton with a stronger ball to boot. Drops and footwork need work but not b/c they are sloppy but b/c they make it more difficult to get the proper timing. If you watch Tebow last year, his gaffs came from a lack of timing. He made proper reads, and delivered the ball to the right receiver, but it was often a second off of when the receiver was open (before or after). Consistency in his drops b/c of good footwork and mechanics will help to hone the timing. Timing is the key here. Philip Rivers is very sloppy with his mechanics but he has almost perfect timing. You can overcome mechanics, but you can't overcome poor timing. Timing by the way is improved through repetition. If Kyle Orton is back and taking 1st team snaps you won't see Tebow make that big jump.

His playmaking ability will not be as visible, and as soon as he decides to run with a red jersey on, first guy to touch him kills the play.

With that being said, I totally believe Tebow will be on a different level this year.

The man has been working, and that wont be stopping any time soon.

Now, that being said, would we want Orton sitting behind Tebow?

Not really.

Denver needs to deal a QB, and it wont be Tebow.

I dont at all pass on Quinn in a different offense than McDaniels, and believe he will get a fairer shake with Fox calling the shots.

Brady Quinn will get a fair shot, true... but that will last all of about three days when Fox realizes that there is nothing there. I watched Quinn a lot last year during camp. He throws a very nice ball, but his accuracy is horrible. Forget timing, he would have to accidentally throw it in the right spot to be accurate.

At this point, Quinn is a better backup for what we want if Tebow is the starter.


First team to drop a QB to injury this offseason or preseason is going to come calling with flowers and a dinner date with EFX.

Why is everyone still so fixated on mechanics? Tebow had a three hundred yard passing game in his second start. He also had over 10 TDs, as a rookie with minimal playing time. Brady Quinn has perfect mechanics. Clausen, some of the best scouts had ever seen. You could go on and on about players with perfect mechanics that never amounted to squat. Then you go in and look at guys like Rivers, Favre, and Vick. I wish people would quit overvaluing mechanics like it's some end all be all.

Bad Intentions
06-12-2011, 09:05 AM
Someone would have to look amazing this season to get consideration for the #1 pick over Andrew Luck. He's pretty much a sure thing as long as he doesn't blow a knee or a shoulder, which even then he might still be the consensus #1.

Unless you're the Panthers picking #1.

BTW, I can remember having this same exact discussion on Matt Leinart a few years ago. Hell, I can remember having it about Jake Locker last year.

hamrob
06-12-2011, 10:35 AM
I want to see Tebow start.

However, unless or until someone gives us a 2nd rounder, Kyle Orton will remain in Denver and he'll be the starter. I just don't see Tebow unseating him. Tebow needs to get on the field to gain that experience. That will take some blind faith...and I don't believe Fox will give him that.

If Orton stays, it's another year of study for Tebow. Orton will be gone next season and so too will be Brady. It will be Tebow's job then, and we'll need to bring in another QB or two to back him up.

I'm crossing my fingers for someone to fall in love with kyle.

hamrob
06-12-2011, 10:41 AM
Why is everyone still so fixated on mechanics? Tebow had a three hundred yard passing game in his second start. He also had over 10 TDs, as a rookie with minimal playing time. Brady Quinn has perfect mechanics. Clausen, some of the best scouts had ever seen. You could go on and on about players with perfect mechanics that never amounted to squat. Then you go in and look at guys like Rivers, Favre, and Vick. I wish people would quit overvaluing mechanics like it's some end all be all.I agree with this post. However, I do believe that they are important...just not as important as instinct, desire and talent.

Tebow should continue to refine his mechanics, because it will eventually help him. He needs to be able to get the ball out quicker. That's where he's going to have problems. Will his instincts, desire and talent carry him....you bet, but he still needs to work on the little things. He doesn't have to be perfect with him mechanics, just learn how to shorten the wind up and get the ball out quicker...when needed.

BroncoStud
06-12-2011, 11:10 AM
Unless you're the Panthers picking #1.

BTW, I can remember having this same exact discussion on Matt Leinart a few years ago. Hell, I can remember having it about Jake Locker last year.

Luck is already a MUCH more polished passer than Locker ever became in college and Leinart was ALWAYS limited by his physical inability to stretch the field. Luck has the legs, the arm, and the passing that rarely comes along in one player. Unless a team who has a franchise QB in place is picking, Luck will go #1. He's too good to pass on.

LTC Pain
06-12-2011, 11:35 AM
Why is everyone still so fixated on mechanics? Tebow had a three hundred yard passing game in his second start. He also had over 10 TDs, as a rookie with minimal playing time. Brady Quinn has perfect mechanics. Clausen, some of the best scouts had ever seen. You could go on and on about players with perfect mechanics that never amounted to squat. Then you go in and look at guys like Rivers, Favre, and Vick. I wish people would quit overvaluing mechanics like it's some end all be all.

Word!

Bad Intentions
06-12-2011, 11:47 AM
I agree with this post. However, I do believe that they are important...just not as important as instinct, desire and talent.

Tebow should continue to refine his mechanics, because it will eventually help him. He needs to be able to get the ball out quicker. That's where he's going to have problems. Will his instincts, desire and talent carry him....you bet, but he still needs to work on the little things. He doesn't have to be perfect with him mechanics, just learn how to shorten the wind up and get the ball out quicker...when needed.

Repeatable mechanics is the key. Sure a Marino like release is better than a Favre like wind up, but both were exceptional QBs. If Tebow can be repeatable in his mechanics the timing will come. Once the timing comes everything will click!

Bad Intentions
06-12-2011, 11:50 AM
Luck is already a MUCH more polished passer than Locker ever became in college and Leinart was ALWAYS limited by his physical inability to stretch the field. Luck has the legs, the arm, and the passing that rarely comes along in one player. Unless a team who has a franchise QB in place is picking, Luck will go #1. He's too good to pass on.

I agree that he is a better athlete than Leinart and a better pure passer than Locker... but the point is, both were in the same conversation that Luck was. Returning for their Sr. year cost both of them in the draft. You never know, there could be another Cam Newton out there that comes in an lights it up next year, and Luck could have a subpar season... then there will at least be conversations. Can't sleep on USC's Barkley either. Next year will likely be a very strong QB class.

MOtorboat
06-12-2011, 11:54 AM
Andrew Luck won't be a Bronco.

Bad Intentions
06-12-2011, 11:57 AM
Andrew Luck won't be a Bronco.

Hmmm, what does that have to do with this conversation?:screwy:

MOtorboat
06-12-2011, 12:06 PM
Hmmm, what does that have to do with this conversation?:screwy:

I'll try to connect the dots for you. I know its hard.

Thread discussion: Orton being traded to Seattle.
Thread development No. 1: Discussion on the future of Broncos quarterbacks.
Thread development No. 2: Discussion about Andrew Luck's talent.
Thread development No. 3: Conclusion that Andrew Luck probably won't be a Bronco.

:coffee:

BroncoJoe
06-12-2011, 12:08 PM
Repeatable mechanics is the key. Sure a Marino like release is better than a Favre like wind up, but both were exceptional QBs. If Tebow can be repeatable in his mechanics the timing will come. Once the timing comes everything will click!

Having the practice time with his receivers is equally - if not more - important. Hopefully Fox runs his practices as the polar opposite as McD.

TXBRONC
06-12-2011, 05:14 PM
Why is everyone still so fixated on mechanics? Tebow had a three hundred yard passing game in his second start. He also had over 10 TDs, as a rookie with minimal playing time. Brady Quinn has perfect mechanics. Clausen, some of the best scouts had ever seen. You could go on and on about players with perfect mechanics that never amounted to squat. Then you go in and look at guys like Rivers, Favre, and Vick. I wish people would quit overvaluing mechanics like it's some end all be all.


I agree with this post. However, I do believe that they are important...just not as important as instinct, desire and talent.

Tebow should continue to refine his mechanics, because it will eventually help him. He needs to be able to get the ball out quicker. That's where he's going to have problems. Will his instincts, desire and talent carry him....you bet, but he still needs to work on the little things. He doesn't have to be perfect with him mechanics, just learn how to shorten the wind up and get the ball out quicker...when needed.

Completing just 50% of his passes wont cut it. Rivers, Favre, and Vick (up until this past season) didn't/don't have perfect mechanics but they're accurate. The same goes for Tebow. If he's able to improve his his accuracy imho he stands a very good chance of unseating Orton.

BroncoStud
06-12-2011, 06:46 PM
I agree that he is a better athlete than Leinart and a better pure passer than Locker... but the point is, both were in the same conversation that Luck was. Returning for their Sr. year cost both of them in the draft. You never know, there could be another Cam Newton out there that comes in an lights it up next year, and Luck could have a subpar season... then there will at least be conversations. Can't sleep on USC's Barkley either. Next year will likely be a very strong QB class.

Yeah, it looks like next year's class will be very solid.

TXBRONC
06-12-2011, 07:22 PM
Yeah, it looks like next year's class will be very solid.

Matt Barkley might be a good one.

BroncoStud
06-12-2011, 07:36 PM
Matt Barkley might be a good one.

Yep. Barkley, Luck, Lindley (guy's a STUD), K. Moore... There are plenty of other prospects who are promising as well. Griffin III is a hell of an athlete who shows sparks of being a really good QB as well.