PDA

View Full Version : Brady Quinn joins Broncos' player-organized workouts



Denver Native (Carol)
06-14-2011, 03:08 PM
All Bronco quarterbacks have now been accounted for.

Brady Quinn showed up this week to attend Camp Landow, otherwise know as the Bronco players organized workouts at the sports bubble.

Kyle Orton and Tim Tebow had previously participated in the team workouts. Quinn had been spending his offseason training in Florida, where he has an offseason home, but said Tuesday it was time to become re-acclimated to the altitude.

He threw to Brandon Lloyd, Matt Willis and Lance Ball , among others Tuesday. Quinn then stayed after and participated in the team's one-hour, football-oriented workout that was supervised by trainer Loren Landow.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18271307?source=rss

MOtorboat
06-14-2011, 03:12 PM
This thread is worthless without pictures.

:coffee:

RebelRocker
06-14-2011, 03:17 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18271307?source=rss

WOOHOO! GO QUINN!:beer:

MOtorboat
06-14-2011, 03:29 PM
WOOHOO! GO QUINN!:beer:

You seem to have a real, genuine hate of Tim Tebow. Just an observation.

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 03:34 PM
You seem to have a real, genuine hate of Tim Tebow. Just an observation.
So unless we kneel down, genuflect in his honor, we're anti TT?

Can we not be Broncos fans without being Tebowmaniacs? At least until he's proven to be as good as many project him to be?

Some of us just want the best 22 on the field....whoever they may be.

MOtorboat
06-14-2011, 03:37 PM
So unless we kneel down, genuflect in his honor, we're anti TT?

Can we not be Broncos fans without being Tebowmaniacs? At least until he's proven to be as good as many project him to be?

Oh for the love of Elway...is that what I said? No. Have you seen me kneeling down before Tebow?

This particular poster does seem to be anti Tim Tebow.

GEM
06-14-2011, 04:13 PM
So unless we kneel down, genuflect in his honor, we're anti TT?

Can we not be Broncos fans without being Tebowmaniacs? At least until he's proven to be as good as many project him to be?

Some of us just want the best 22 on the field....whoever they may be.

And some are negative anytime Tebow is brought up or ecstatic anytime someone not named Tebow is mentioned, just for the pure sake that it isn't Tebow.

And btw.....

Brady Quinn sucks, but he's nice to look at.

Canmore
06-14-2011, 04:18 PM
...And btw.....

Brady Quinn sucks, but he's nice to look at.

He'll be the one holding the clipboard.

nevcraw
06-14-2011, 04:26 PM
nice to here Matt willis is back.. he was last year's Watts..

GEM
06-14-2011, 04:32 PM
nice to here Matt willis is back.. he was Watts of the pre-season last year.

He made some good catches in PS. Looking forward to seeing what he can do. :D

topscribe
06-14-2011, 04:36 PM
"I want to be No. 1," Quinn said. "I feel they (Orton and Tebow) both had a chance last year and I didn't get an opportunity. I'd love to get an opportunity to help us win games and get this team to the playoffs and see what happens from there."

I like Quinn's attitude . . .

-----

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 04:56 PM
Oh for the love of Elway...is that what I said? No. Have you seen me kneeling down before Tebow?

This particular poster does seem to be anti Tim Tebow.
I've explained my position ad nauseum. Look it up if you'd care to be enlightened in the truth.

In the meantime, just know you're wrong.

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 04:58 PM
nice to here Matt willis is back.. he was last year's Watts..

He only has one workable hand?

MOtorboat
06-14-2011, 04:58 PM
I've explained my position ad nauseum. Look it up if you'd care to be enlightened in the truth.

In the meantime, just know you're wrong.

I wasn't even addressing a post of yours, so how do you even fit into this, at all?

slim
06-14-2011, 05:00 PM
:angrymidget:

I want to see it!

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 05:03 PM
I like Quinn's attitude . . .

-----
I bet EFX does as well.

topscribe
06-14-2011, 05:10 PM
I bet EFX does as well.

You bet. I could sit here and say Orton/Tebow/Quinn sucks (and each has been
the recipient of such remarks), but who is behind center in the first regular
season game will be the one who proves to be the best on the field. I know that
appears a "y'think?" statement, but it seems one whose concept has seemed
difficult to grasp around here . . .

-----

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 05:10 PM
Count me among the crowd who just don't really give a rat's ass what Quinn does or says at this point. I was semi-excited about the trade for him when it happened, and liked his potential and youth, etc, but after seeing him in limited action here I just can't get myself too hopeful for the guy. I don't believe he's ever going to pan out to be more than a backup in this league, and I don't believe he'll be given a fair shot to win the starting job here in Denver, for better or for worse (but most likely for better).

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 05:12 PM
who is behind center in the first regular
season game will be the one who proves to be the best on the field. I know that
appears a "y'think?" statement, but it seems one whose concept has seemed
difficult to grasp around here . . .
I'm of the opinion that the argument for trading Orton has nothing to do with Tebow or Quinn being better QBs. I get the sense that's what you're referring to in that post.

GEM
06-14-2011, 05:14 PM
Count me among the crowd who just don't really give a rat's ass what Quinn does or says at this point. I was semi-excited about the trade for him when it happened, and liked his potential and youth, etc, but after seeing him in limited action here I just can't get myself too hopeful for the guy. I don't believe he's ever going to pan out to be more than a backup in this league, and I don't believe he'll be given a fair shot to win the starting job here in Denver, for better or for worse (but most likely for better).

I have seen Quinn live twice. He really is terrible. I mean, scary bad.

But hey....when he went to the sidelines and took off his helmet, I could stomach watching him again. :lol:

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 05:26 PM
I have seen Quinn live twice. He really is terrible. I mean, scary bad.

But hey....when he went to the sidelines and took off his helmet, I could stomach watching him again. :lol:
http://i.imgur.com/XwACi.gif

slim
06-14-2011, 05:27 PM
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

topscribe
06-14-2011, 05:30 PM
I'm of the opinion that the argument for trading Orton has nothing to do with Tebow or Quinn being better QBs. I get the sense that's what you're referring to in that post.


Here is what I'm referring to in that post:



You bet. I could sit here and say Orton/Tebow/Quinn sucks (and each has been
the recipient of such remarks), but who is behind center in the first regular
season game will be the one who proves to be the best on the field. I know that
appears a "y'think?" statement, but it seems one whose concept has seemed
difficult to grasp around here . . .

-----

GEM
06-14-2011, 05:34 PM
http://i.imgur.com/XwACi.gif

Between Quinn's "guns" and Hillis' calves.....I don't know which was better. :D


:lol:


Yum:http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0gCJbFe3s85Zr/610x.jpg


Wow: http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2010/0823/20100823__Bquinn082310a~p1_200.jpg

BroncoJoe
06-14-2011, 05:40 PM
In the major minority here, but I don't think Quinn has ever been given a descent shot. I don't think he's great or anything, but he certainly has the ability to be a middle-of-the-road QB in this league.

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 05:40 PM
Here is what I'm referring to in that post:
So your post was in reference to itself. Neat.

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 05:42 PM
I don't think he's great or anything, but he certainly has the ability to be a middle-of-the-road QB in this league.
The best middle-of-the-road QB in the league is already on Denver's roster, though.

GEM
06-14-2011, 05:45 PM
Do you have a desire to transfer this thread to the Lounge, GEM? :D

-----

No, I'm good now. :D

Phew! *wipes brow*

:laugh:

BroncoJoe
06-14-2011, 06:02 PM
The best middle-of-the-road QB in the league is already on Denver's roster, though.

Not for long... :wink:

topscribe
06-14-2011, 06:04 PM
So your post was in reference to itself. Neat.

You have any suggestions as to how I can break it down further for you?

-----

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 06:14 PM
You have any suggestions as to how I can break it down further for you?
You claimed that the concept of starting the best QB was something which people around here were unable to grasp. I suggested, believing you were referring to the Orton/Tebow debate, that perhaps people grasped the concept just fine, yet still believed it would be better if Orton (the best QB currently) were still traded. You responded by saying that your post was somehow referring to itself. I'm stumped, I guess.

topscribe
06-14-2011, 06:17 PM
You claimed that the concept of starting the best QB was something which people around here were unable to grasp. I suggested, believing you were referring to the Orton/Tebow debate, that perhaps people grasped the concept just fine, yet still believed it would be better if Orton (the best QB currently) were still traded. You responded by saying that your post was somehow referring to itself. I'm stumped, I guess.

In other words, take it for what it is worth. I am a very direct communicator,
not given to implications and innuendo (which is why, I'm sure, some do not like
me). So just accept there aren't any hidden messages in it, and you will be fine . . .

-----

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 06:21 PM
Right.... so what were you referring to when you said that playing the best QB was a concept people around here couldn't grasp?

topscribe
06-14-2011, 06:22 PM
Right.... so what were you referring to when you said that playing the best QB was a concept people around here couldn't grasp?

Once again:


You bet. I could sit here and say Orton/Tebow/Quinn sucks (and each has been
the recipient of such remarks), but who is behind center in the first regular
season game will be the one who proves to be the best on the field. I know that
appears a "y'think?" statement, but it seems one whose concept has seemed
difficult to grasp around here . . .

-----

Notice the words "appears" and "seemed."

/discussion

-----

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 06:30 PM
I'm confused as to how those words have anything to do with what I was asking.

topscribe
06-14-2011, 06:43 PM
I'm confused as to how those words have anything to do with what I was asking.

I'm confused as to how what you were asking has anything to do with those words . . .

-----

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 07:20 PM
I feel I just watched a set of tennis. :dizzy:

Shananahan
06-14-2011, 07:23 PM
I feel I just watched a set of tennis. :dizzy:
He took the ball and ran home before the set could begin.

topscribe
06-14-2011, 07:26 PM
He took the ball and ran home before the set could begin.

I'm still here. Just playing with someone who understands the game . . .

-----

rcsodak
06-14-2011, 08:01 PM
:giggles: to self

RebelRocker
06-15-2011, 12:29 AM
Oh for the love of Elway...is that what I said? No. Have you seen me kneeling down before Tebow?

This particular poster does seem to be anti Tim Tebow.

How am I "anti-Tebow"? I just stated the facts about his game. Besides, I was on his bandwagon when we drafted him, but we need to see a lot more from him if he's going to be the Franchise QB.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 11:15 AM
BroncoJoe 04:40 PM Yesterday
In the major minority here, but I don't think Quinn has ever been given a descent shot. I don't think he's great or anything, but he certainly has the ability to be a middle-of-the-road QB in this league.
[Reply] [!!]
Add mention that list. He had crap for support in cle. He had 12 seconds after learning a new scheme (if he had even disgested it yet) surrounded be new players and receivers.

Not so sure he did not just wind up a casualty of the lust for the new toy TEbow and the drastic improvement in Ortons game.

Would guess he will get a good look see during TC if that happens.

topscribe
06-15-2011, 11:17 AM
Dare I say anything at all about quarterbacks?

-----

Shananahan
06-15-2011, 11:36 AM
Not so sure he did not just wind up a casualty of the lust for the new toy TEbow and the drastic improvement in Ortons game.
Probably because that's exactly what happened. Usually when a guy shows so little at his position that the team invests a first round pick into it, followed by the returning starter improving his game and the rookie outplaying the guy in training camp and preseason, that guy is going to be a 'casualty'. It's a fancy way of saying that he wasn't good enough to be higher on the depth chart.

topscribe
06-15-2011, 11:40 AM
Brady sucks.

-----

NightTerror218
06-15-2011, 12:02 PM
I think Quinn has a higher ceiling then Orton, I think Orton is at his peak, and we all can agree Tebow has a high ceiling too, but the debate is whether his kind of play can be the QB we need. I believe Orton is in no way our franchise QB, and I think Tebow can be and I think he needs this season to show whether he can be or not. Quinn has not been given the chance to show much, he was in Cleveland with no receivers and no running game, and not line. I think he could be better given the chance, but I dont know if he would be franchise QB, I think Tebow could be. I think Quinn given some chances could a solid backup QB. He showed some glimpses of being a good QB during preseason and showed signs of being a bust in some Cleveland games too and during preseason.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 01:11 PM
Lots of teams win without that "FQB" that everyone so desires.

You have to have a great QB but if uou had to count the real FQB on the NFL it would probably be less than 8.

You know the true guy you picked in the first round mostly in the top 15 picks. And you had high hopes for day one.

That is my true definition of a FQB.

slim
06-15-2011, 01:15 PM
I have been asking for years for a definition of franchise QB.

I have found that the definition changes based on the current argument.

MOtorboat
06-15-2011, 01:22 PM
I have been asking for years for a definition of franchise QB.

I have found that the definition changes based on the current argument.

I'll give you that slim. The definition is hard to track down...

But here's my list of current Franchise quarterbacks...

Tom Brady
Peyton Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Drew Brees
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers

Everybody else is chasing one.

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 01:34 PM
I have been asking for years for a definition of franchise QB.

I have found that the definition changes based on the current argument.

do you really need a definition? I think you know what a franchise QB is when you see him. You might have a disagreement as to a name that you might not feel should be on the list, but generally speaking, I'm betting if you tried to make a list you could and it would be very similar to everyone else's.

You know as well as everyone else, there is no "definition" to the word other than just KNOWING what it is. Everyone has their OWN definition. If you try to write out a definition, everyone just tries their best to rip it apart.

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 01:35 PM
I'll give you that slim. The definition is hard to track down...

But here's my list of current Franchise quarterbacks...

Tom Brady
Peyton Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Drew Brees
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers

Everybody else is chasing one.

I'd throw in Matt Ryan

slim
06-15-2011, 01:35 PM
I'll give you that slim. The definition is hard to track down...

But here's my list of current Franchise quarterbacks...

Tom Brady
Peyton Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Drew Brees
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers

Everybody else is chasing one.

That is a pretty good list. I'm not sure how I feel about Philip...but I agree with the rest.

slim
06-15-2011, 01:39 PM
do you really need a definition? I think you know what a franchise QB is when you see him. You might have a disagreement as to a name that you might not feel should be on the list, but generally speaking, I'm betting if you tried to make a list you could and it would be very similar to everyone else's.

You know as well as everyone else, there is no "definition" to the word other than just KNOWING what it is. Everyone has their OWN definition. If you try to write out a definition, everyone just tries their best to rip it apart.

I bet not. I mean, people seem to throw that term around pretty loosely...again, depending on the current argument.

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 01:43 PM
I bet not. I mean, people seem to throw that term around pretty loosely...again, depending on the current argument.

I guess. I think every team in the NFL is looking for their FQB, and if they don't feel they have him, they move on to try and get him.

I don't think the term is used loosely if you had everyone simply list out the QBs they feel simply fit into the category. I think the list is pretty small, and everyone knows the list. As I said, I'm sure there will always be discussions about certain QBs on whether or not they make the list. I think that Eli Manning makes the list as a "franchise" QB. That doesn't mean I think he's as elite as Peyton, Brady, or Roth..but he's definitely MUCH MUCH better than what most around here give him credit for.

But I just don't think there is a single definition that would fit everyone. Its simply not ever going to be defined with a definition that would satisfy you because everyone will be able to poke holes in any/every definition given.

At least you aren't asking for the definition of "average."

slim
06-15-2011, 01:44 PM
:laugh:

Check out this link. It is kind of old, but I think it illustrates my point.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/2005/10/27/gallery.10franchiseqbsfinal/content.4.html

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 01:50 PM
:laugh:

Check out this link. It is kind of old, but I think it illustrates my point.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/2005/10/27/gallery.10franchiseqbsfinal/content.4.html

:lol: :laugh:

Well, some writers just put words on the page to get a reaction.

But I don't find it shocking that lists change. Players change, and the perception of those players change. Culpepper at that time, WAS a franchise QB. Just as Palmer was. Both Palmer and Culpepper completely changed after their knee injuries.

But I don't know how ANYOn every put Quinn on the list. I mean, he wasn't even considered at the top when he was drafted.

slim
06-15-2011, 01:55 PM
:lol: :laugh:

Well, some writers just put words on the page to get a reaction.

But I don't find it shocking that lists change. Players change, and the perception of those players change. Culpepper at that time, WAS a franchise QB. Just as Palmer was. Both Palmer and Culpepper completely changed after their knee injuries.

But I don't know how ANYOn every put Quinn on the list. I mean, he wasn't even considered at the top when he was drafted.

Well, now we are back to the definition.

I wouldn't put Culpepper or Palmer into that catagory, personally.

:laugh: Byron Leftwitch

MOtorboat
06-15-2011, 02:07 PM
Well, now we are back to the definition.

I wouldn't put Culpepper or Palmer into that catagory, personally.

:laugh: Byron Leftwitch

OK...now I have to click on this...

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 02:10 PM
Well, now we are back to the definition.

I wouldn't put Culpepper or Palmer into that catagory, personally.

:laugh: Byron Leftwitch

At the time they were. I mean, they are the guy you are building around. Culpepper, at the time, was up for NFL MVP. To this day, Palmer is one of the guys that I consider one of the biggest surprises as far as how quickly he fell off the earth. I mean, he just completely fell and hasn't come close to rising back up.

:lol: and you are right.... this writer was just... wacko to involve Leftwich and Quinn, and Schaub.... wasn't Schaub a back-up in Atlanta at the time? :confused:

slim
06-15-2011, 02:17 PM
At the time they were. I mean, they are the guy you are building around. Culpepper, at the time, was up for NFL MVP. To this day, Palmer is one of the guys that I consider one of the biggest surprises as far as how quickly he fell off the earth. I mean, he just completely fell and hasn't come close to rising back up.

:lol: and you are right.... this writer was just... wacko to involve Leftwich and Quinn, and Schaub.... wasn't Schaub a back-up in Atlanta at the time? :confused:

So, if the definition is simply a QB that you are comfortable with and feel you can build around...then don't we have to include around 1/2 of the starting QB's in the league? And if so, then doesn't the designation of FQB become fairly meaningless?

This is what I struggle with, but maybe it's just me.

rcsodak
06-15-2011, 02:22 PM
Dare I say anything at all about quarterbacks?

-----

Not if it doesn't include TT and lots of slobber.

rcsodak
06-15-2011, 02:22 PM
Brady sucks.

-----
Tom? :confused:

rcsodak
06-15-2011, 02:24 PM
I have been asking for years for a definition of franchise QB.

I have found that the definition changes based on the current argument.
Good luck with that....

rcsodak
06-15-2011, 02:27 PM
Long-term contract. $8+Million/yr

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 02:33 PM
So, if the definition is simply a QB that you are comfortable with and feel you can build around...then don't we have to include around 1/2 of the starting QB's in the league? And if so, then doesn't the designation of FQB become fairly meaningless?

This is what I struggle with, but maybe it's just me.

no. But as I said, players and perceptions change. At the time this was written, MOST considered Culpepper and Palmer to be franchise QBs. Culpepper was playing well enough to be a front-runner for the NFL MVP. Hard to say that's not someone at the level that could be your franchise guy.

But I agree, there are a number of teams that are still HOPING the QB on their roster steps up to move into that upper level.

Detroit MIGHT have their guy if he can stay healthy. When Stafford is healthy, he REALLY looks like tthe real deal. But there lies the problem. He gets THIS season to prove himself, or that team moves on. Tampa Bay, they feel they MIGHT have their guy, but won't know for a couple years. Is he considered franchise yet? no way. NYJ, we can go round and round about Sanchez (I personally don't think much of him). Baltimore, a guy that they drafted TO BE their franchise QB, but hasn't yet proved to be in that upper echelon of QBs. Cutler. Still on that border line. He absolutely has not really been consistent enough, but he's absolutely shown flashes as to why teams trade FOR him. Dallas has a guy they absolutely love, but needs to win something to make that step forward.

None of these guys above are considered FQB's yet, but it wouldn't take much for them to win something before that label can be put on them.

Hell, people were questioning Rodgers until this last season. He won a Super Bowl and now there are articles that say he's on his way to the HoF after the last two seasons of play (which is absolutely absurd to me.. I heard the same thing about Brees after he won the Super Bowl and I dont' think he's a HoF QB either).

I simply think that people associate FQB with the upper echelon of QBs in the NFL. Those that are considered to be "elite" at the NFL level and those that are the faces of the franchise.

I just don't know if its possible to put a definition to the term. But its a term that is pretty well understood, even if people have different perceptions as to what QBs belong on the list.

MOtorboat
06-15-2011, 02:35 PM
no. But as I said, players and perceptions change. At the time this was written, MOST considered Culpepper and Palmer to be franchise QBs. Culpepper was playing well enough to be a front-runner for the NFL MVP. Hard to say that's not someone at the level that could be your franchise guy.

But I agree, there are a number of teams that are still HOPING the QB on their roster steps up to move into that upper level.

Detroit MIGHT have their guy if he can stay healthy. When Stafford is healthy, he REALLY looks like tthe real deal. But there lies the problem. He gets THIS season to prove himself, or that team moves on. Tampa Bay, they feel they MIGHT have their guy, but won't know for a couple years. Is he considered franchise yet? no way. NYJ, we can go round and round about Sanchez (I personally don't think much of him). Baltimore, a guy that they drafted TO BE their franchise QB, but hasn't yet proved to be in that upper echelon of QBs. Cutler. Still on that border line. He absolutely has not really been consistent enough, but he's absolutely shown flashes as to why teams trade FOR him. Dallas has a guy they absolutely love, but needs to win something to make that step forward.

None of these guys above are considered FQB's yet, but it wouldn't take much for them to win something before that label can be put on them.

Hell, people were questioning Rodgers until this last season. He won a Super Bowl and now there are articles that say he's on his way to the HoF after the last two seasons of play (which is absolutely absurd to me.. I heard the same thing about Brees after he won the Super Bowl and I dont' think he's a HoF QB either).

I simply think that people associate FQB with the upper echelon of QBs in the NFL. Those that are considered to be "elite" at the NFL level and those that are the faces of the franchise.

I just don't know if its possible to put a definition to the term. But its a term that is pretty well understood, even if people have different perceptions as to what QBs belong on the list.

Things can definitely change quickly. Say the Chargers miss the playoffs this year, go one and done next year, and miss the playoffs three years from now. No one is calling Philip Rivers a franchise quarterback at that point, despite all the 300-yard games...

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 02:44 PM
Things can definitely change quickly. Say the Chargers miss the playoffs this year, go one and done next year, and miss the playoffs three years from now. No one is calling Philip Rivers a franchise quarterback at that point, despite all the 300-yard games...

Possibly so. Although, I won't be one that simply judges wins and not by how well he plays. I mean, I think its safe to say that Marino would have been considered a franchise QB had that term been used, even if he didn't take his team to the Super Bowl after his rookie season.

To me, most has to do with the play on the field. But, that leaves a lot of room for people to disagree based on their definition.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 06:04 PM
I'll give you that slim. The definition is hard to track down...
But here's my list of current Franchise quarterbacks...
Tom Brady
Peyton Manning Ben Roethlisberger Drew Brees Aaron Rodgers Philip Rivers

Everybody else is chasing one.

Yep that is about it. Kinda funny the SAN drafted two I'd them. Almost would have three of them had indy not taken manning.
That is just how bad they were back then.

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 06:05 PM
They wouldn't have drafted Brees had they drafted Manning, and they officially drafted Eli and did not draft Rivers.

NightTerror218
06-15-2011, 06:20 PM
I think I might have to throw Rodgers in the mix as a franchise QB. I see a franchise QB as there permanent QB till that person retires unless its Farve.

Ravage!!!
06-15-2011, 07:10 PM
I think I might have to throw Rodgers in the mix as a franchise QB. I see a franchise QB as there permanent QB till that person retires unless its Farve.

PRoblem with that is, you don't know until they are there that long.. thus... unable to use that label until that player retires.

NightTerror218
06-15-2011, 07:46 PM
PRoblem with that is, you don't know until they are there that long.. thus... unable to use that label until that player retires.

Well with some QBs you can tell if they are going to be there long term. Brady, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, Mannings, Roethlisburger, and Ryan all fit that bill. Ones who are yet to be seen would be Staffard, Sanchez, Bradford, Culter, Shaub, Romo and Flacco.

They are all seen as the final answer at the QB position, that is how I see a franchise QB, the ones who the team do not want to let go.

Shananahan
06-15-2011, 07:54 PM
I don't think Ryan is in that group yet. A couple more years of what he's been doing and he won't be any different from Flacco. Ryan really hasn't done much outside of a nice rookie season.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 10:21 PM
Probably because that's exactly what happened. Usually when a guy shows so little at his position that the team invests a first round pick into it, followed by the returning starter improving his game and the rookie outplaying the guy in training camp and preseason, that guy is going to be a 'casualty'. It's a fancy way of saying that he wasn't good enough to be higher on the depth chart.

Actually in Ortons case it meant he healed up (ankles) had an off Eason to study the playbook and finally had a burner that could get behind coverage.
Not to mention different plays coming in from the OC. And last but not least the trouble making head case was
Not ball hogging. Actually had someone that was above average in completions to throw to.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 10:26 PM
I bet not. I mean, people seem to throw that term around pretty loosely...again, depending on the current argument.

Depending whom they have man crushes on.

Some folks invest in a player from way before the draft and once taken that player can do no wrong in their eyes.

IMHO that is an immature person/fan infatuated with him/her.

What is the old saying "love is blind". Way to Much of that going on around here.

Lonestar
06-15-2011, 10:32 PM
I think I might have to throw Rodgers in the mix as a franchise QB. I see a franchise QB as there permanent QB till that person retires unless its Farve.

Actually as I said before it is a QB that is drafted high with expectations that they will be that special one.

Rarely is a guy like TD thought of as a FRB until he proves himself.

There are zero expectations of guys drafted after say #100. Great if they make it but nomone is holding their breath.

Those on MB s list are prime examples of that.

Shananahan
06-15-2011, 11:13 PM
Actually in Ortons case it meant he healed up (ankles) had an off Eason to study the playbook and finally had a burner that could get behind coverage.
Not to mention different plays coming in from the OC. And last but not least the trouble making head case was
Not ball hogging. Actually had someone that was above average in completions to throw to.
So you're saying Orton's game improved?

Shananahan
06-15-2011, 11:15 PM
Actually as I said before it is a QB that is drafted high with expectations that they will be that special one.

Rarely is a guy like TD thought of as a FRB until he proves himself.
This is pretty silly. Draft position does not determine who is a franchise player, it merely determines who has been drafted to be a franchise player.

Expectations don't make a franchise QB, proven talent and success does.

Lonestar
06-16-2011, 05:31 AM
So you're saying Orton's game improved?

I guess you failed to notice his improvement. Everyone in the league did at one point before the rib injury (that John Elway confirmed) there was talk about him being the league MVP. He was leading the league in most passing stats. His long game was greatly improved last year.

If you did nit notice that then you just blind hate for the guy.
If all you were rating him on was wins and loses then I guess that is your issue.

Lonestar
06-16-2011, 05:40 AM
This is pretty silly. Draft position does not determine who is a franchise player, it merely determines who has been drafted to be a franchise player.

Expectations don't make a franchise QB, proven talent and success does.

So you are saying that the fan base has no expectation when they draft a QB in the top ten that this will be their future FQB?
For that matter the FO bs coaching staff.

What they Turn out to be like Eli M. Is another story.

I'll bet that 90% of their fan base believes he is a FQB. Same goes for flacko and sanchez.

To me a FQB is the face of the franchise someone that leads the team who is a top ten stat guy. Not just a HOF QB like John was but someone that leads the team to wins.

sneakers
06-16-2011, 07:29 AM
Loren Landow Calrissian is the Broncos trainer?

Ravage!!!
06-16-2011, 09:58 AM
This is pretty silly. Draft position does not determine who is a franchise player, it merely determines who has been drafted to be a franchise player.

Expectations don't make a franchise QB, proven talent and success does.]


So you are saying that the fan base has no expectation when they draft a QB in the top ten that this will be their future FQB?
For that matter the FO bs coaching staff.



.....

Shananahan
06-16-2011, 01:19 PM
Yeah seriously, reading comprehension is so hard sometimes.


Probably because that's exactly what happened. Usually when a guy shows so little at his position that the team invests a first round pick into it, followed by the returning starter improving his game and the rookie outplaying the guy in training camp and preseason, that guy is going to be a 'casualty'. It's a fancy way of saying that he wasn't good enough to be higher on the depth chart.


Actually in Ortons case it meant he healed up (ankles) had an off Eason to study the playbook and finally had a burner that could get behind coverage.
Not to mention different plays coming in from the OC. And last but not least the trouble making head case was
Not ball hogging. Actually had someone that was above average in completions to throw to.


So you're saying Orton's game improved?
(For future reference, this was sarcasm in response to your completely missing my point and reinforcing my statement)


I guess you failed to notice his improvement. Everyone in the league did at one point before the rib injury (that John Elway confirmed) there was talk about him being the league MVP. He was leading the league in most passing stats. His long game was greatly improved last year.

If you did nit notice that then you just blind hate for the guy.
If all you were rating him on was wins and loses then I guess that is your issue.
I'm kinda baffled by this whole exchange, dude. Maybe you should start slowly reading posts multiple times before replying.

T.K.O.
06-16-2011, 03:27 PM
No, I'm good now. :D

Phew! *wipes brow*

:laugh:

pics or it did'nt happen:shocked:

T.K.O.
06-16-2011, 03:44 PM
Loren Landow Calrissian is the Broncos trainer?

the "broncos trainer" is not allowed to train the broncos.... i'm sure this loren person will get discount parking at games and a spiffy grab bag of broncos merchandise from the team store for his efforts though;)

Ravage!!!
06-16-2011, 03:50 PM
So wait.. is this circumventing the rules?