PDA

View Full Version : Orton Throwing to Fitzgerald in Minnesota.....



Pages : [1] 2

WARHORSE
06-19-2011, 03:18 AM
This should quiet those Kyle Orton trade rumors.

Orton — the Broncos’ starting quarterback if the season today — has been mentioned as possible trade bait with the quarterback-desperate Arizona Cardinals. He worked out Thursday with Cards star receiver Larry Fitzgerald in Minnesota.

Broncos’ receiver Eric Decker, who starred at the University of Minnesota, also joined Fitzgerald’s famous workouts Thursday.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2011/06/16/orton-throws-to-larry-fitzgerald/7664/



Larry Tweets with photo:

http://lockerz.com/s/111242911

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 03:20 AM
http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255353

WARHORSE
06-19-2011, 05:52 AM
http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255353

I guess Im doing my part on making the mods work......:D

BroncoStud
06-19-2011, 08:43 AM
Maybe Orton will suit up as a Cardinal next season.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 08:49 AM
I guess Im doing my part on making the mods work......:D

That's okay. I couldn't see the other guy's post, anyway. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/wink-2.gif

If Orton is traded, I wouldn't mind his coming out here to AZ. The Cards need a good QB, badly . . .

-----

BroncoStud
06-19-2011, 08:58 AM
That's okay. I couldn't see the other guy's post, anyway. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/wink-2.gif

If Orton is traded, I wouldn't mind his coming out here to AZ. The Cards need a good QB, badly . . .

-----

How does Orton going to Arizona give them a "good QB"...? A game-manager yes, but not a "good QB"...

Crush05
06-19-2011, 10:24 AM
Along as he is not in a Broncos uniform I do not care who he is throwing to. ROFL!!

Tned
06-19-2011, 10:39 AM
I thought Fitzgerald looked a little weak on his short routes (he's dominant on the deep stuff). Probably thought someone like Orton, who can't throw the deep ball well, but can throw 10-20 yard floaters all day long, would be good for him to hone up on his crossing routes, comebacks, out patterns and such.

If they want to work on the deep stuff, I bet they have another QB training with them.

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 10:42 AM
I thought Fitzgerald looked a little weak on his short routes (he's dominant on the deep stuff). Probably thought someone like Orton, who can't throw the deep ball well, but can throw 10-20 yard floaters all day long, would be good for him to hone up on his crossing routes, comebacks, out patterns and such.

If they want to work on the deep stuff, I bet they have another QB training with them.

Them's fightin' words. :laugh:

topscribe
06-19-2011, 11:04 AM
Fitzgerald would love Orton since Orton is especially strong passing deep. I would
think Fitz would love working with a QB who was among the top in the league
at passes over 25 yards and frequently #1 in the league at over 40 last year . . .

-----

BroncoStud
06-19-2011, 11:34 AM
Fitzgerald would love Orton since Orton is especially strong passing deep. I would
think Fitz would love working with a QB who was among the top in the league
at passes over 25 yards and frequently #1 in the league at over 40 last year . . .

-----

You forgot to mention "Orton was on a record-shattering pace..." and the always popular "and there were those ribs injuries..." :laugh::laugh:

chazoe60
06-19-2011, 11:49 AM
Arizona would have to completely disregard his game against them to trade for him. Injury or not, that was one of the worst QB performances I have ever witnessed in which the QB was not benched. It was pitiful.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 11:52 AM
Arizona would have to completely disregard his game against them to trade for him. Injury or not, that was one of the worst QB performances I have ever witnessed in which the QB was not benched. It was pitiful.

If you're going by one single game, then I would think St. Louis would jump for
Orton, Bradford or no Bradford. Same with NE.

I'm sure the Cardinals' game film extends beyond one game . . .

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 11:57 AM
If you're going by one single game, then I would think St. Louis would jump for
Orton, Bradford or no Bradford. Same with NE.

I'm sure the Cardinals' game film extends beyond one game . . .

-----

Except, those are the only two games I can think of where he looked outstanding, and the Arizona game is among numerous games where he was downright terrible.

chazoe60
06-19-2011, 11:58 AM
If you're going by one single game, then I would think St. Louis would jump for
Orton, Bradford or no Bradford. Same with NE.

I'm sure the Cardinals' game film extends beyond one game . . .

-----

Obviously decisions are not made based on one game. But, impressions can be formed. And if their game film includes 3rd downs and 4th quarters I seriously doubt we'll be getting that 2nd rounder.


I just hope Orton is wearing any NFL uniform except a Denver Bronco one the next time he sets foot on an NFL field.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 11:59 AM
Except, those are the only two games I can think of where he looked outstanding, and the Arizona game is among numerous games where he was downright terrible.

Hmmm . . . guess you and I were watching at different times.

I don't know when that would be, though, since I saw most all of them . . .

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:01 PM
Yeah, I have no clue what you've been watching the last two years. He's average. That's what he is.

I don't know why you think he's good at throwing the deep ball. The ball flutters and its usually not on target. Sure, he had a lot of gains this year over 40 yards, but he doesn't throw a good deep ball. He shrivels in game-winning situations. Yes, his stats are OK, but he is just that OK.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:03 PM
Obviously decisions are not made based on one game. But, impressions can be formed. And if their game film includes 3rd downs and 4th quarters I seriously doubt we'll be getting that 2nd rounder.


I just hope Orton is wearing any NFL uniform except a Denver Bronco one the next time he sets foot on an NFL field.

Well, if I were AZ, I would probably ask myself, "Why did Orton all the sudden
tank in the last two games after averaging 306 yards/game with 20 TDs and
6 INTs, with a 62% comp and a 96.0 QBR? What happened?" And then I would
find out why . . .

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:08 PM
Yeah, I have no clue what you've been watching the last two years. He's average. That's what he is.

I don't know why you think he's good at throwing the deep ball. The ball flutters and its usually not on target. Sure, he had a lot of gains this year over 40 yards, but he doesn't throw a good deep ball. He shrivels in game-winning situations. Yes, his stats are OK, but he is just that OK.

I think he is good at throwing the deep ball because I have seen him throw
the deep ball. Simple. And from the fact that he was one of the league
leaders in passing plays more than 25 yards and, as I mentioned, the absolute
leader for a while at 40+ yards. That is why I think he was good at throwing
the deep ball. And, BTW, there was not a whole lot of YAC last year.

But your mixing in arguments about other issues besides the deep ball indicates
to me that you just want to argue that he was bad. I prefer a bit more focus . . .

-----

chazoe60
06-19-2011, 12:14 PM
Well, if I were AZ, I would probably ask myself, "Why did Orton all the sudden
tank in the last two games after averaging 306 yards/game with 20 TDs and
6 INTs, with a 62% comp and a 96.0 QBR? What happened?" And then I would
find out why . . .

-----

And if I were AZ I'd also ask myself with all those pretty stats why did his stats crumble during those most crucial points of games. Why was his QBR so abysmal inthe fourth qtr of close games? Whyare his numbers so bad against the blitz? Why did he play his worst when the rucking game actually worked? Why is he so easily sacked? Why did the rest of the team look so much more energized when the other guy came in? Why did the team look so lethargic with Orton under center? Why has Orton never finished an entire NFL season? Why does he always wilt down the stretch, in seasons, games, and even drives?


Those are some interesting questions to me anyway.

BroncoJoe
06-19-2011, 12:18 PM
Would you all please stop pointing out Orton's ineffectiveness? I'd like to receive a high-round draft pick for him.

tia.

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:18 PM
You're the only person I've heard say he throws a good deep ball. The ONLY one. Internet, talking heads, quarterback experts...the only one.

As far as focus...since you're the only person that focus on a solid argument and all...
Maybe the Cardinals need to ask themselves why this quarterback folds in the second half every season. You're right, they have to ask themselves that. Is it the injuries? If it is, is it because he can't play well through pain (the most likely conclusion), or can his body not hold up to the pounding of a season because of conditioning?

Why does his completion percentage drop, why does his touchdown rate suffer, why does his interception rate go up?

You can argue all of the stats you want (in an offense designed for the quarterback to have gawdy stats), but Orton doesn't get it done when it counts. He struggles in game-winning situations.

In the second half of the season, his Broncos teams have won just three games, yet in the first half of seasons, they've won eight. Why?

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:19 PM
Would you all please stop pointing out Orton's ineffectiveness? I'd like to receive a high-round draft pick for him.

tia.

LOL...the NFL already knows what type of quarterback Orton is. He's just above a replacement NFL quarterback.

Look at his "Advanced Passing" stats from pro-football-reference.

He's average, or just below average...
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/O/OrtoKy00.htm

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:27 PM
You're the only person I've heard say he throws a good deep ball. The ONLY one. Internet, talking heads, quarterback experts...the only one.

As far as focus...since you're the only person that focus on a solid argument and all...
Maybe the Cardinals need to ask themselves why this quarterback folds in the second half every season. You're right, they have to ask themselves that. Is it the injuries? If it is, is it because he can't play well through pain (the most likely conclusion), or can his body not hold up to the pounding of a season because of conditioning?

Why does his completion percentage drop, why does his touchdown rate suffer, why does his interception rate go up?

You can argue all of the stats you want (in an offense designed for the quarterback to have gawdy stats), but Orton doesn't get it done when it counts. He struggles in game-winning situations.

In the second half of the season, his Broncos teams have won just three games, yet in the first half of seasons, they've won eight. Why?

I don't see much "flutter" in these, do you?

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b974c1/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-46-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81bbed13/Orton-to-Lloyd-for-71-yards
(Don't miss the color comment, "That is what Kyle Orton does really well: Throw the long ball.")

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b3840b/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-44-yd-pass-TD

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81a7a282/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-41-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81c7f37e/QB-Orton-to-WR-Decker-38-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b379fa/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-42-yd-pass-TD
(Dave Logan: "What a throw!")

http://search.nfl.com/videos/search-results?&quickSearch=orton&start=50

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81adcb79/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-48-yd-pass-TD


And I am NOT the only person who says Orton is good deep . . . well, that
may come close on this board, but not around the league . . .

And, please, confine your arguments to one issue at a time. This is about the
deep pass. I am not interested in all that other well discussed, worn out stuff.

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:29 PM
Haha...Dan Dierdorff...has that guy ever said a negative thing about a player? I know you have your bookmarked examples of good deep passes by Kyle Orton. I've seen that list before.

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 12:30 PM
I think he is good at throwing the deep ball because I have seen him throw
the deep ball. Simple. And from the fact that he was one of the league
leaders in passing plays more than 25 yards and, as I mentioned, the absolute
leader for a while at 40+ yards. That is why I think he was good at throwing
the deep ball. And, BTW, there was not a whole lot of YAC last year.
When you say stuff like this I just have to wonder if you are watching any of the other top-tier QBs in the game or simply view Denver's possessions on offense.

Orton's stats last season are reflective of the passing offense McDaniels ran, not Orton's skill. Orton has 27 passes of 40+ yards in his entire career. Twenty of them came in the past two years. Two thirds of his passes of 25 yards or more also came in the past two years. Quit trying to distort the obvious truth with stats, dude.

I guess if your standards for being good at something are simply being able to do it, fine by me. Otherwise I don't understand how you could believe it was anything close to one of Orton's strengths. Orton's deep passing game looked good last year because of the offense and because of Brandon Lloyd playing out of his mind.

broncobryce
06-19-2011, 12:31 PM
Well, I agree with both of you. I think Orton is pretty good at the deep ball. I also think he is not very good in the clutch, for whatever reason. There were the exceptions, of course, like NE and St. Louis.
I also think he can be a good QB for the right team. If Arizona can run the ball and protect the QB, Orton can flourish there.
Orton has his strengths and weaknesses like anyone else. I think his weaknesses are when a play doesn't go as planned and he has to improvise, he is not good at all in those situations. I also agree that he wears down as a season goes on. He basically needs to be a QB that backs up a strong running game and a defense.

All that said, I doubt he ever wins a superbowl, unless its a Dilfer-like situation.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:32 PM
Haha...Dan Dierdorff...has that guy ever said a negative thing about a player? I know you have your bookmarked examples of good deep passes by Kyle Orton. I've seen that list before.

I understand. It's called denial . . . :coffee:

/discussion

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:32 PM
When you say stuff like this I just have to wonder if you are watching any of the other top-tier QBs in the game or simply view Denver's possessions on offense.

Orton's stats last season are reflective of the passing offense McDaniels ran, not Orton's skill. Orton has 27 passes of 40+ yards in his entire career. Twenty of them came in the past two years. Two thirds of his passes of 25 yards or more also came in the past two years. Quit trying to distort the obvious truth with stats, dude.

I guess if your standards for being good at something are simply being able to do it, fine by me. Otherwise I don't understand how you could believe it was anything close to one of Orton's strengths. Orton's deep passing game looked good last year because of the offense and because of Brandon Lloyd playing out of his mind.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b974c1/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-46-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81bbed13/Orton-to-Lloyd-for-71-yards
(Don't miss the color comment, "That is what Kyle Orton does really well: Throw the long ball."


http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b3840b/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-44-yd-pass-TD

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81a7a282/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-41-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81c7f37e/QB-Orton-to-WR-Decker-38-yd-pass

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81b379fa/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-42-yd-pass-TD
(Dave Logan: "What a throw!"

http://search.nfl.com/videos/search-results?&quickSearch=orton&start=50

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d81adcb79/QB-Orton-to-WR-Lloyd-48-yd-pass-TD


And I do not try to distort truth. That is a troll's remark. I have not commented
on our posting style. I would appreciate the same courtesy.

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:34 PM
Well, I agree with both of you. I think Orton is pretty good at the deep ball. I also think he is not very good in the clutch, for whatever reason. There were the exceptions, of course, like NE and St. Louis.
I also think he can be a good QB for the right team. If Arizona can run the ball and protect the QB, Orton can flourish there.
Orton has his strengths and weaknesses like anyone else. I think his weaknesses are when a play doesn't go as planned and he has to improvise, he is not good at all in those situations. I also agree that he wears down as a season goes on. He basically needs to be a QB that backs up a strong running game and a defense.

All that said, I doubt he ever wins a superbowl, unless its a Dilfer-like situation.

Thing about it is, throwing the deep ball and "in the clutch" are two different
issues. I don't know why he insisted in throwing that in. Guess he's just in the
bashing mode. As I said to him: one issue at a time, please . . .

-----

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 12:36 PM
I don't see much "flutter" in these, do you?
Are you trying to pretend that you missed all the deep throws in which Lloyd had to stop running wide open ahead of the defender and wait for the ball to get to him so he could out-jump the guy for it?

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:37 PM
I understand. It's called denial . . . :coffee:

/discussion

-----

I can cherry pick stats and plays where I win too.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:38 PM
And if I were AZ I'd also ask myself with all those pretty stats why did his stats crumble during those most crucial points of games. Why was his QBR so abysmal inthe fourth qtr of close games? Whyare his numbers so bad against the blitz? Why did he play his worst when the rucking game actually worked? Why is he so easily sacked? Why did the rest of the team look so much more energized when the other guy came in? Why did the team look so lethargic with Orton under center? Why has Orton never finished an entire NFL season? Why does he always wilt down the stretch, in seasons, games, and even drives?


Those are some interesting questions to me anyway.

All this from the simple deep pass issue. Wow. Just wow. :tsk:

-----

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 12:38 PM
VIDEOS VIDEOS VIDEOS

And I do not try to distort truth. That is a troll's remark.
What are you really trying to accomplish by re-posting something that you just posted minutes ago with nothing added. I saw the videos. Like I said, Orton is capable of throwing the ball deep and completing passes. That doesn't make him good at it.

And perhaps distorting the truth isn't what you were doing, but the stats you were flashing around in those posts were cherry-picked and do not tell the entire tale. If that's not warping reality to fit your opinion I don't know what is.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:39 PM
I can cherry pick stats and plays where I win too.

You said his passes flutter. I asked you if you saw flutter in those.

If you see flutter in others, how about some videos? I provided them. How about you now?

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 12:41 PM
You said his passes flutter. I asked you if you saw flutter in those.

If you see flutter in others, how about some videos? I provided them. How about you now?

-----

But you're not "defending" Kyle Orton, are you? Hilariousness...

Unfortunately for my argument, they don't post lowlights on NFL.com that I can conveniently bookmark and repeatedly post time and time and time again...

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:42 PM
What are you really trying to accomplish by re-posting something that you just posted minutes ago with nothing added. I saw the videos. Like I said, Orton is capable of throwing the ball deep and completing passes. That doesn't make him good at it.

And perhaps distorting the truth isn't what you were doing, but the stats you were flashing around in those posts were cherry-picked and do not tell the entire tale. If that's not warping reality to fit your opinion I don't know what is.

I guess all the stats you are concerned about are mine.

Very few of the stats provided on this board over the last two years by anybody
have told the entire tale. I have been maintaining that all along, but I haven't
seen anything from you about that. So why are you cherry-picking my stats?

broncobryce
06-19-2011, 12:42 PM
Thing about it is, throwing the deep ball and "in the clutch" are two different
issues. I don't know why he insisted in throwing that in. Guess he's just in the
bashing mode. As I said to him: one issue at a time, please . . .

-----

On the throwing deep issue then; I think he must have worked on it last offseason because he was much better at it this past year. As you said he led the league in 40 plus completions.
And to be honest, I don't remember many with the receivers having to slow down to catch them either. (This past season)
There was one Tebow threw against the Texans where Lloyd had to do that. That's the only one I can remember.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:45 PM
But you're not "defending" Kyle Orton, are you? Hilariousness...

Unfortunately for my argument, they don't post lowlights on NFL.com that I can conveniently bookmark and repeatedly post time and time and time again...

What do I have to do with this? First, you wanted to discuss issues all over the
board. I called you on that. Then, I invited you to provide some documentation.
Instead, you are now launching an ad hominem attack.

Honestly, I never expected that from you this time around.

Some things never change, I guess . . . :coffee:

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:46 PM
On the throwing deep issue then; I think he must have worked on it last offseason because he was much better at it this past year. As you said he led the league in 40 plus completions.
And to be honest, I don't remember many with the receivers having to slow down to catch them either. (This past season)
There was one Tebow threw against the Texans where Lloyd had to do that. That's the only one I can remember.

I'm sure Orton did work on it. I also believe he was doing it on better legs. His
high ankle sprains certainly could not have helped the year before . . .

-----

Juriga72
06-19-2011, 12:52 PM
I'm sure Orton did work on it. I also believe he was doing it on better legs. His
high ankle sprains certainly could not have helped the year before . . .

-----

Ok.... I WON!!!!!

"Topscribe's Kyle Orton Bingo"...

I got:

"High ankel sprain"
"Rocket deep passing"
"Led NFL in passes over 20 yards"
"Record shattering pace"...

And of course.......the hardest one to get

"They have tape of his impressive play"

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 12:54 PM
So why are you cherry-picking my stats?
Seriously? I used the entirety of the numbers you provided and showed where they fit into the larger, more accurate picture of Orton's deep passing. I'm confused as to how that could be cherry-picking.

Tned
06-19-2011, 12:56 PM
Yeah, I have no clue what you've been watching the last two years. He's average. That's what he is.

I don't know why you think he's good at throwing the deep ball. The ball flutters and its usually not on target. Sure, he had a lot of gains this year over 40 yards, but he doesn't throw a good deep ball. He shrivels in game-winning situations. Yes, his stats are OK, but he is just that OK.

Brandon Lloyd having a career year (first in 8 seasons) helped pad Orton's numbers with one acrobatic catch after another. He did an amazing job of hauling in Ortons Camel-ass passes (like a Camel, they're high and stink).

On the bright side, Fitzgerald is a guy, like Moss with Cunningham, that can go up and get the off target, rainbow long balls.

That said, I'm sure he brought Orton in to work on the short routes, where Orton is at least on part with middle of the pack NFL QBs.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:57 PM
Seriously? I used the entirety of the numbers you provided and showed where they fit into the larger, more accurate picture of Orton's deep passing. I'm confused as to how that could be cherry-picking.

MO said Orton's passes fluttered. I provided a few vids and asked him if he saw
flutter.

That is the whole damned issue. Why this idiotic big deal out of it? If that is
"cherry-picking," then YOU provide some more of the story. It is so easy (and
lazy) to sit back and charge "cherry-picking" and then not provide anything to
back it up.

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 12:59 PM
Yup. I get it. Orton is not good at anything at all on this board.

Reference my sig . . .

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 01:00 PM
MO said Orton's passes fluttered. I provided a few vids and asked him if he saw
flutter.

On the five or six (however many of bookmarked passes you have on file), those passes didn't flutter.

Congrats. Kyle Orton is awesome.

chazoe60
06-19-2011, 01:01 PM
All this from the simple deep pass issue. Wow. Just wow. :tsk:

-----

I thought the thread was about Orton and a connection to AZ. I simply posted some legitimate questions I think other teams including AZ should ask themselves before acquiring Orton. *shrugs*

topscribe
06-19-2011, 01:05 PM
I thought the thread was about Orton and a connection to AZ. I simply posted some legitimate questions I think other teams including AZ should ask themselves before acquiring Orton. *shrugs*

You're right. You were just caught in the cross-fire. Your and my discussion was
an entirely different issue. Apologies.

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 01:06 PM
Here's your complete picture of Orton:

13th in completions
10th in attempts
24th in completion percentage
10th in yards
17th in touchdowns
21st in touchdown percentage
24th in interceptions (that's a good thing, though)
7th in interception percentage (:woot: made the top 10 in something!)
21st in long pass
13th in yards per attempt
10th in adjusted yards per attempt
5th in yards per completion
4th in yards per game
15th in quarterback rating
12th in net yards gained per attempt
10th in adjusted net yards gained per attempt
20th in sack percentage.

Average. Average. Average. Average.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 01:09 PM
http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/deadhorse.gif

-----

Tned
06-19-2011, 01:13 PM
Here's your complete picture of Orton:

13th in completions
10th in attempts
24th in completion percentage
10th in yards
17th in touchdowns
21st in touchdown percentage
24th in interceptions (that's a good thing, though)
7th in interception percentage (:woot: made the top 10 in something!)
21st in long pass
13th in yards per attempt
10th in adjusted yards per attempt
5th in yards per completion
4th in yards per game
15th in quarterback rating
12th in net yards gained per attempt
10th in adjusted net yards gained per attempt
20th in sack percentage.

Average. Average. Average. Average.

Where's his 4th quarter QB rating? From what I remember, he was much better in the beginning of games than he was when it counts.

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 01:18 PM
Where's his 4th quarter QB rating? From what I remember, he was much better in the beginning of games than he was when it counts.

He had an 86.3 fourth quarter rating. I don't know where that puts him rank-wise, but that's it...of course, how many games were the Broncos already out of it by then this year?

Here's a more indicative stat of his overall play when his team needed him to be good.

Down by a touchdown or less, 68-128, 812 Yds, 53.1 Comp %, 2 TDs, 6 INTs, 12 sacks, 58.5 passer rating.

Tned
06-19-2011, 01:21 PM
He had an 86.3 fourth quarter rating. I don't know where that puts him rank-wise, but that's it...of course, how many games were the Broncos already out of it by then this year?

Here's a more indicative stat of his overall play when his team needed him to be good.

Down by a touchdown or less, 68-128, 812 Yds, 53.1 Comp %, 2 TDs, 6 INTs, 12 sacks, 58.5 passer rating.

Yep, that's a pretty key stat. In a nutshell, it sums up his couple years in Denver.

Worse, he showed last year that he isn't a team first or class guy, something that surprised me. The way he acted when Tebow was given those last four starts was shameful. In all honesty, I really thought he was a team first guy, kind of like Plummer, and would say all the right things and support Tebow in any way he could -- even if he didn't agree with the decision.

T.K.O.
06-19-2011, 01:22 PM
We hired the only head coach in the league who fielded a team with a worse record than the Broncos had last year.....and you guys are worried about QB ?:confused::laugh:

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 01:24 PM
Trailing by a touchdown or less...

Quarterback A = 64-103, 889 yards, 62.1 %, 4 TDs, 3 INTs, 9 sacks, 90.6 QBR
Quarterback B =106-169, 1,396 yards, 62.7 %, 11 TDs, 6 INTs, 25 sacks, 95.7 QBR
Quarterback C = 45-85, 516 yards, 52.9 %, 3 TDs, 4 INT, 4 sacks, 63.7 QBR

Guess who is who...

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 01:33 PM
MO said Orton's passes fluttered. I provided a few vids and asked him if he saw
flutter.

That is the whole damned issue. Why this idiotic big deal out of it? If that is
"cherry-picking," then YOU provide some more of the story. It is so easy (and
lazy) to sit back and charge "cherry-picking" and then not provide anything to
back it up.
You're getting off track. I only took the examples you used (25+ and 40+ yard passes) and showed how they are not accurately reflective of Orton's career. So I did provide more of the story by listing his career stats. I used 'cherry-picking' in the sense that you selected the portions of his statistics which made him look the best. I wasn't talking about fluttering passes at all in those posts.

I will, however, go back through on YouTube a bit later on and see if there any examples of the 'fluttering' I was talking about with Lloyd's deep balls. I'm sure there are some, as it happened quite often. Some of the deep balls to Lloyd last year reminded me of how infuriating it was to see Plummer underthrow a wide open Lelie back in the day.

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 01:40 PM
You're getting off track. I only took the examples you used (25+ and 40+ yard passes) and showed how they are not accurately reflective of Orton's career. So I did provide more of the story by listing his career stats. I used 'cherry-picking' in the sense that you selected the portions of his statistics which made him look the best. I wasn't talking about fluttering passes at all in those posts.

I will, however, go back through on YouTube a bit later on and see if there any examples of the 'fluttering' I was talking about with Lloyd's deep balls. I'm sure there are some, as it happened quite often. Some of the deep balls to Lloyd last year reminded me of how infuriating it was to see Plummer underthrow a wide open Lelie back in the day.

Like these two wounded ducks to Marshall. (Props to claymore)
cJTUU4tG29o

topscribe
06-19-2011, 02:09 PM
You're getting off track. I only took the examples you used (25+ and 40+ yard passes) and showed how they are not accurately reflective of Orton's career. So I did provide more of the story by listing his career stats. I used 'cherry-picking' in the sense that you selected the portions of his statistics which made him look the best. I wasn't talking about fluttering passes at all in those posts.

I will, however, go back through on YouTube a bit later on and see if there any examples of the 'fluttering' I was talking about with Lloyd's deep balls. I'm sure there are some, as it happened quite often. Some of the deep balls to Lloyd last year reminded me of how infuriating it was to see Plummer underthrow a wide open Lelie back in the day.

No, I am not getting off-track. I am stayng ON track. YOU are getting off
track. There is ONE (1) issue here: DEEP PASSING. MO made the assertion
that Orton was not a good deep passer, that his passes fluttered. I provided
a few examples and asked him if he saw any fluttering in those examples. I
didn't know I was going to have to provide every single pass Orton threw over
the last two years just to placate him or you.

Of course, Orton threw some ducks. As you implied, it happens to everyone.
I was dealing with the general statement that implied alllllll of his passes were
bad, or that generally he was a bad deep passer.

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 02:11 PM
Like these two wounded ducks to Marshall. (Props to claymore)
cJTUU4tG29o

Hmmm . . . I'm having a hard time trying to figure what was wrong with those passes . . . :confused:

-----

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 02:30 PM
No, I am not getting off-track. I am stayng ON track. YOU are getting off
track. There is ONE (1) issue here: DEEP PASSING. MO made the assertion
that Orton was not a good deep passer, that his passes fluttered. I provided
a few examples and asked him if he saw any fluttering in those examples. I
didn't know I was going to have to provide every single pass Orton threw over
the last two years just to placate him or you.
I meant you were getting off track bringing the 'fluttering ball' dispute into the conversation I was having with you about his number of 25+ and 40+ yard passes. I've been sticking to your ONE issue, and wasn't talking to you about fluttered balls at all.

And nobody is asking you to provide every single pass, don't be so melodramatic. All I think people have been saying is that more often than not Orton's deep balls hang in the air more than some of the other proficient deep passers in the league. It isn't as if Orton just 'threw some ducks'.

And I don't really see too much to complain about in those videos either, though the first pass should have been thrown further into the endzone.

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 02:34 PM
Hmmm . . . I'm having a hard time trying to figure what was wrong with those passes . . . :confused:

-----

You mean other than not being tight spirals and the receiver having to wait on them?

They show a close up of the first, and you can see the ball spinning downwards like a punt...

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 02:36 PM
No, I am not getting off-track. I am stayng ON track. YOU are getting off
track. There is ONE (1) issue here: DEEP PASSING. MO made the assertion
that Orton was not a good deep passer, that his passes fluttered. I provided
a few examples and asked him if he saw any fluttering in those examples. I
didn't know I was going to have to provide every single pass Orton threw over
the last two years just to placate him or you.

Of course, Orton threw some ducks. As you implied, it happens to everyone.
I was dealing with the general statement that implied alllllll of his passes were
bad, or that generally he was a bad deep passer.

-----

Wrong, I listed at least three things that were wrong with his game and you hand-picked "Deep Passing" as the topic (ignoring the other two aspects I mentioned) and jumped all over me for bringing up the other aspects of his game which I mentioned originally.

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 02:50 PM
So I just went back through and watched this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNm14n5Da1k of Lloyd's highlights and there are a bunch of good downfield throws by Orton. When he was on his game within the timing of the offense he was very effective, and it's still amazing to me just how crazy good Lloyd was for us. Of course, this is a highlight video, so it really didn't contain too much of what I was talking about with the waited-on balls, but if you jump to 4:05 you'll see exactly what I was referring to.

I like Orton, and this isn't a critique or attack on him. I just never really thought of him as a good deep passer. That said, he produced within an offense which utilized downfield throws and that's all that matters, I guess.

BroncoWave
06-19-2011, 02:56 PM
So I just went back through and watched this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNm14n5Da1k of Lloyd's highlights and there are a bunch of good downfield throws by Orton. When he was on his game within the timing of the offense he was very effective, and it's still amazing to me just how crazy good Lloyd was for us. Of course, this is a highlight video, so it really didn't contain too much of what I was talking about with the waited-on balls, but if you jump to 4:05 you'll see exactly what I was referring to.

I like Orton, and this isn't a critique or attack on him. I just never really thought of him as a good deep passer. That said, he produced within an offense which utilized downfield throws and that's all that matters, I guess.

As mediocre as I think Orton is and as big of a Tebow fan as I am, I sadly have to point out that the pass in question at 4:05 was thrown by Tebow, not Orton.

Shananahan
06-19-2011, 02:59 PM
Oh shit. Nice catch, I got too carried away there.

I will be quiet now until able to find something that supports my previous statements.

Juriga72
06-19-2011, 03:00 PM
So I just went back through and watched this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNm14n5Da1k of Lloyd's highlights and there are a bunch of good downfield throws by Orton. When he was on his game within the timing of the offense he was very effective, and it's still amazing to me just how crazy good Lloyd was for us. Of course, this is a highlight video, so it really didn't contain too much of what I was talking about with the waited-on balls, but if you jump to 4:05 you'll see exactly what I was referring to.

I like Orton, and this isn't a critique or attack on him. I just never really thought of him as a good deep passer. That said, he produced within an offense which utilized downfield throws and that's all that matters, I guess.

Again.... One of the Orton 2010 excuses was that Orton had no time to pass because the O-line was so bad....

"He was running for his life!!!!!"

YET... he led the nfl in passes over 20, and 40 yards.......


SO the O-line could hold blocks for the 4-5 seconds that it took for a 40 yard route.. But his o-line was soo poor at pass blocking he kept getting hurt (yet another Orton excuse)

As Top wants to show by the St Louis game........ "Kyle ALMOST brought us back" ...right up untill that sack, inc , sack, sack final "drive" he led us on

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:03 PM
You mean other than not being tight spirals and the receiver having to wait on them?

They show a close up of the first, and you can see the ball spinning downwards like a punt...

So, as one who has played QB, I'm trying to figure what is wrong with those
passes. The receiver was open by 10 yards in both cases, and he didn't have to
outrun anybody. The TD was a fact if the receiver only had the ball in his hands.
The object was to get the pass to him, not style. I would not have thrown
either in any other way. Just get the ball to him. Period. :whoknows:

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 03:06 PM
So, as one who has played QB, I'm trying to figure what is wrong with those
passes. The receiver was open by 10 yards in both cases, and he didn't have to
outrun anybody. The TD was a fact if the receiver only had the ball in his hands.
The object was to get the pass to him, not style. I would not have thrown
either in any other way. Just get the ball to him. Period. :whoknows:

-----

Well, if that's your thinking about Orton, then I can see why you have no problem with his game. :whoknows:

Davii
06-19-2011, 03:07 PM
Arizona would have to completely disregard his game against them to trade for him. Injury or not, that was one of the worst QB performances I have ever witnessed in which the QB was not benched. It was pitiful.

I was at that game. The only good part of the game was the company I was with. Pre game there were plenty of Bronco fans to tailgate with as well, but the game itself, meh, I enjoyed spending time with a good friend.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:12 PM
Wrong, I listed at least three things that were wrong with his game and you hand-picked "Deep Passing" as the topic (ignoring the other two aspects I mentioned) and jumped all over me for bringing up the other aspects of his game which I mentioned originally.

I didn't "hand pick" anything. I responded specifically to a specific statement
about Orton's deep passing. Then, in response to my specific response, you
came on with this meandering argument about a bunch of other stuff. I am NOT
going to get BAITED into a bunch of crap that has been hashed, rehashed, and
rehashed again. If you want to respond to my posts, then respond to what I
was talking about, not with a wild menagerie of garbage about just anything and
everything . . .

-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:14 PM
Well, if that's your thinking about Orton, then I can see why you have no problem with his game. :whoknows:

:coffee:

-----

MOtorboat
06-19-2011, 03:20 PM
I didn't "hand pick" anything. I responded specifically to a specific statement
about Orton's deep passing. Then, in response to my specific response, you
came on with this meandering argument about a bunch of other stuff.

Because the other stuff is just as important. Its not a meandering argument, it's a the whole picture.

I didn't pay attention to the rest of your meandering post, something about baiting and you getting your panties in a bunch, or something to that effect.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:24 PM
Because the other stuff is just as important. Its not a meandering argument, it's a the whole picture.

I didn't pay attention to the rest of your meandering post, something about baiting and you getting your panties in a bunch, or something to that effect.

You could not answer my challenge, therefore you decided on the ad hominem
approach. It's simple. Provide what I did. You said Orton's deep passes fluttered.
I provided a few vids and asked whether you saw fluttering. Yeah, you admitted
grudgingly that you didn't, but then you decided it was time to launch directly
into me.

If you want to see what I said about the other items, then conduct a search on
my posts. It's all there. But don't try to bait me into anything else. My post was
my topic. If you don't want to stick to the issue, then go talk to yourself. :coffee:

-----

BroncoWave
06-19-2011, 03:25 PM
:lol: Gotta love the self high-five.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:28 PM
I see BTB saluted your post and then added his own post.

If I could see his post (not that I want to, of course), I'll bet it was something
like what prompted me to put him in Iggy in the first place . . . :coffee:

-----

BroncoWave
06-19-2011, 03:35 PM
Funny how top ONLY responds to posters who he has on ignore when they make a post that directly mentions or references him. It's almost like he actually is reading our posts, but knows he isn't able to come up with a legitimate response, so he just pretends that he is ignoring us.

Evidence A: I make a post supporting his side (mentioning how Tebow threw the lame duck pass and not Orton) and top says nothing.

Evidence B: I make a post making fun of top, and he immediately mentions how he has me on ignore and can't read what i posted.

Evidence C: I say "gotta love the self high-five" and top soon removes that high-five

Smells a little fishy to me.

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:37 PM
:eviltongue:



:lol:



-----

topscribe
06-19-2011, 03:41 PM
You know, what is really hilarious is that someone posted recently that Orton
was good deep, but he was not good with the short to medium game.

Last year, he was the "dink and dunk" passer, but he was terrible deep.

ROTF!! http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/BigLaugh.png

-----

Juriga72
06-19-2011, 06:34 PM
You know, what is really hilarious is that someone posted recently that Orton
was good deep, but he was not good with the short to medium game.

Last year, he was the "dink and dunk" passer, but he was terrible deep.

ROTF!! http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/BigLaugh.png

-----

Whats funny is how Orton's win/loss record sucks when he doesnt have a running game/defense to bail him out.....

:beer:

BroncoStud
06-19-2011, 07:01 PM
:lol: Gotta love the self high-five.

He has to high-five himself because nobody else with a brain is going to agree with his ridiculous points and emotional obsession with Kyle Orton.

BroncoStud
06-19-2011, 07:03 PM
Whats funny is how Orton's win/loss record sucks when he doesnt have a running game/defense to bail him out.....

:beer:

He's had a good running game and a great defense and still not produced a playoff appearance for himself... He's an average game-managing QB, not good enough for a longterm position but not bad enough for the CFL. He's simply an NFL backup who THINKS he's a starter. Once a little more humility has set in and he gets benched with yet another team perhaps he will decide to embrace his role as an NFL backup and not do his best to cause a controversy on his NEXT team.

He's done it at 2 stops already. He's just a player you're better off not having on your roster.

FanInAZ
06-19-2011, 07:09 PM
This should quiet those Kyle Orton trade rumors.

Orton — the Broncos’ starting quarterback if the season today — has been mentioned as possible trade bait with the quarterback-desperate Arizona Cardinals. He worked out Thursday with Cards star receiver Larry Fitzgerald in Minnesota.

Broncos’ receiver Eric Decker, who starred at the University of Minnesota, also joined Fitzgerald’s famous workouts Thursday.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2011/06/16/orton-throws-to-larry-fitzgerald/7664/



Larry Tweets with photo:

http://lockerz.com/s/111242911

Before we make too much of this article, read it's last paragraph:


Fitzgerald sent out another tweet saying he’s known Orton for a while so don’t read anything into their meeting. And Decker may have helped arrange the meeting as he has bounced between working out with Orton in Denver and Fitzgerald in Minnesota throughout the offseason.

Keep in mind that Fitz has been hosting WR camps for at least the past 2 or 3 seasons. He usually invites retired greats to help develop the basic fundamentals. He also needs to invite an adequate number of QBs to throw to all of these WRs. If Orton or his agent is looking at this as a chance for him to show case himself to other team, then he would be doing so with every team that had at least one WR participate. This would not only include the Cardinals, but the Broncos as well.

I know Orton doesn't need to do any more to demonstrate his talents to the Broncos. I just want to point out that he was also throwing to at least one Broncos WR which would improve his ability to perform as our starter in 2011.

Tned
06-19-2011, 07:55 PM
Before we make too much of this article, read it's last paragraph:


Even Fitzgerald doesn't want people to think he sees Orton as a starting QB option.

Juriga72
06-19-2011, 07:57 PM
Even Fitzgerald doesn't want people to think he sees Orton as a starting QB option.

But maybe he had a "High Ankle sprain" while he was throwing to him....

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 10:44 AM
Would you all please stop pointing out Orton's ineffectiveness? I'd like to receive a high-round draft pick for him.

tia.

But honesty is still the best policy Joe. :D

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 11:35 AM
Cutler had a shitty record and we still got a pretty good haul for him:behindsofa:
and that was behind a hall of fame coach:shocked:

Tned
06-20-2011, 11:39 AM
Cutler had a shitty record and we still got a pretty good haul for him:behindsofa:
and that was behind a hall of fame coach:shocked:

Cutler was also a young QB with tons of upside, not a journeyman QB that couldn't beat out Rex Grossman.

That's why Orton was a "throw in" in the Cutler trade.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 11:40 AM
4TH QTR, +/-7 PTS, 33-67, 366 yards, 49.3 %, 5.46 YPA, 31 long, 1 TDs, 2 INTs, 5 sacks, 58.4 QBR

DECEMBER, 28-69, 283 yards, 40.6 %, 4.10 YPA, 28 long, 0 TD, 3 INTs, 5 sacks, 34.9 QBR

INDOORS, 19-41, 166 yards, 46.3 %, 4.05 YPA, 20 long, 0 TDs, 3 INTs, 1 sack, 27.1 QBR

Outdoor Temp <40 F, 9-28, 117 yards, 32.1 %, 4.18 YPA, 28 long, 0 TD, 0 INTs, 4 sacks, 46.3 QBR

DOWN = 3 OVERALL, 60-120, 670 yards, 50.0 %, 5.58 YPA, 34 long, 3 TDs, 5 INTs, 16 sacks, 58.0 QBR

DOWN = 3 TO GO <6, 23-48, 238 yards, 47.9 %, 4.96 YPA, 2 TDs, 3 INTs, 5 sacks, 50.5 QBR

DOWN = 3 TO GO 6+, 37-72, 432 yards, 51.4 %, 6.00 YPA, 1 TD, 2 INTs, 11 sacks, 63.0 QBR

Correct thread, this time...

:drinking:

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 11:40 AM
That's okay. I couldn't see the other guy's post, anyway. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/wink-2.gif

If Orton is traded, I wouldn't mind his coming out here to AZ. The Cards need a good QB, badly . . .

-----

That is why you shouldn't randomly block people who stand up to you........O wait i am making a thread about you again.....gang it better step back

Tned
06-20-2011, 11:41 AM
4TH QTR, +/-7 PTS, 33-67, 366 yards, 49.3 %, 5.46 YPA, 31 long, 1 TDs, 2 INTs, 5 sacks, 58.4 QBR

DECEMBER, 28-69, 283 yards, 40.6 %, 4.10 YPA, 28 long, 0 TD, 3 INTs, 5 sacks, 34.9 QBR

INDOORS, 19-41, 166 yards, 46.3 %, 4.05 YPA, 20 long, 0 TDs, 3 INTs, 1 sack, 27.1 QBR

Outdoor Temp <40 F, 9-28, 117 yards, 32.1 %, 4.18 YPA, 28 long, 0 TD, 0 INTs, 4 sacks, 46.3 QBR

DOWN = 3 OVERALL, 60-120, 670 yards, 50.0 %, 5.58 YPA, 34 long, 3 TDs, 5 INTs, 16 sacks, 58.0 QBR

DOWN = 3 TO GO <6, 23-48, 238 yards, 47.9 %, 4.96 YPA, 2 TDs, 3 INTs, 5 sacks, 50.5 QBR

DOWN = 3 TO GO 6+, 37-72, 432 yards, 51.4 %, 6.00 YPA, 1 TD, 2 INTs, 11 sacks, 63.0 QBR

Correct thread, this time...

:drinking:

Those aren't so bad. They are on par with his sub 60 QB rating his rookie year.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 11:48 AM
Cutler was also a young QB with tons of upside, not a journeyman QB that couldn't beat out Rex Grossman.

That's why Orton was a "throw in" in the Cutler trade.

how do you know he was a "throw in" ?
did you see other offers that were similar ?
maybe getting Orton was considered a fairly large part of the deal at the time ?
i'm not implying their trade value is/was anywhere close,just saying there are probably several teams that consider orton a viable back up and possible starter. that means the broncos should get a player & a 3-4th or a 2nd straight up for orton in a trade.
no matter how much a fan may dislike the guy,the facts are that he has proven he can play at the nfl level....thats more than can be said for 99% of the guys who have ever tried:salute:
it would not surprise me to see him do well in min,sf or even denver with the right defense and run game

Tned
06-20-2011, 11:55 AM
how do you know he was a "throw in" ?
did you see other offers that were similar ?
maybe getting Orton was considered a fairly large part of the deal at the time ?
i'm not implying their trade value is/was anywhere close,just saying there are probably several teams that consider orton a viable back up and possible starter. that means the broncos should get a player & a 3-4th or a 2nd straight up for orton in a trade.
no matter how much a fan may dislike the guy,the facts are that he has proven he can play at the nfl level....thats more than can be said for 99% of the guys who have ever tried:salute:
it would not surprise me to see him do well in min,sf or even denver with the right defense and run game

Two points.

First, I don't dislike him, I just don't try and claim he's something he's not, just because he's the Broncos QB.

Second, if you try and make the assertion that he was more than a throw in, and was a significant part of the trade, then that's also saying that Cutler brought FAR in excess of the two first round picks the Bears gave up. As that was already nearly unprecedented, it's hard to imagine that Orton had much 'value' in the trade.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 11:56 AM
Two points.

First, I don't dislike him, I just don't try and claim he's something he's not, just because he's the Broncos QB.

Second, if you try and make the assertion that he was more than a throw in, and was a significant part of the trade, then that's also saying that Cutler brought FAR in excess of the two first round picks the Bears gave up. As that was already nearly unprecedented, it's hard to imagine that Orton had much 'value' in the trade.

Or the Bears front office sucks...(just throwing that out there :laugh:)

topscribe
06-20-2011, 11:58 AM
how do you know he was a "throw in" ?
did you see other offers that were similar ?
maybe getting Orton was considered a fairly large part of the deal at the time ?
i'm not implying their trade value is/was anywhere close,just saying there are probably several teams that consider orton a viable back up and possible starter. that means the broncos should get a player & a 3-4th or a 2nd straight up for orton in a trade.
no matter how much a fan may dislike the guy,the facts are that he has proven he can play at the nfl level....thats more than can be said for 99% of the guys who have ever tried:salute:
it would not surprise me to see him do well in min,sf or even denver with the right defense and run game

Right. One of the major factors in the trade, as I understand, was Orton. It
happened with Chicago largely because McDaniels preferred Orton over
Campbell, IIRC.

You are also correct in your final sentence, IMO. Orton needs to improve two
things: 3rd down conversions and staying healthy. If he gets those two fixed,
then, going along with his YPA, TD:Int ratio, and QBR, that will make him a hell
of a quarterback, IMO . . .

-----

claymore
06-20-2011, 11:59 AM
Right. One of the major factors in the trade, as I understand, was Orton. It
happened with Chicago because McDaniels preferred Orton over Campbell, IIRC.

You are also correct in your final sentence, IMO. Orton needs to improve two
things: 3rd down conversions and staying healthy. If he gets those two fixed,
he will be a hell of a quarterback . . .

-----

Incorrect.

Tned
06-20-2011, 12:03 PM
Another way to look at it was that Orton was traded for Cutler and two "throw in" first round picks. Yea, that sounds more realistic...

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 12:05 PM
Two points.

First, I don't dislike him, I just don't try and claim he's something he's not, just because he's the Broncos QB.

Second, if you try and make the assertion that he was more than a throw in, and was a significant part of the trade, then that's also saying that Cutler brought FAR in excess of the two first round picks the Bears gave up. As that was already nearly unprecedented, it's hard to imagine that Orton had much 'value' in the trade.

being the deciding factor in accepting a trade and being a "throw in" are definately 2 different things.
i am not saying ortons value was the biggest part of the trade but that his inclusion was said to be the deciding factor.
now in retrospect...at least so far ,he is the only player we have gotten any decent production out of in the deal:shocked:
how's that for scary:salute:

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 12:06 PM
Yeah, the real trade was Orton for Cutler straight up and their two 1st round picks for our 5th. It makes perfect sense.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:07 PM
Right. One of the major factors in the trade, as I understand, was Orton. It
happened with Chicago largely because McDaniels preferred Orton over
Campbell, IIRC.

You are also correct in your final sentence, IMO. Orton needs to improve two
things: 3rd down conversions and staying healthy. If he gets those two fixed,
then, going along with his YPA, TD:Int ratio, and QBR, that will make him a hell
of a quarterback, IMO . . .

-----

Perhaps I should qualify this a little bit. The major factor in the trade, of course,
composed the two first-round draft choices. Orton, of course, was a secondary
factor, but his involvement was pivotal in the consummation of the deal . . .

-----

Tned
06-20-2011, 12:08 PM
being the deciding factor in accepting a trade and being a "throw in" are definately 2 different things.
i am not saying ortons value was the biggest part of the trade but that his inclusion was said to be the deciding factor.
now in retrospect...at least so far ,he is the only player we have gotten any decent production out of in the deal:shocked:
how's that for scary:salute:

Well, unfortunately, that's an indictment of McDaniels' drafting prowess.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:08 PM
being the deciding factor in accepting a trade and being a "throw in" are definately 2 different things.
i am not saying ortons value was the biggest part of the trade but that his inclusion was said to be the deciding factor.
now in retrospect...at least so far ,he is the only player we have gotten any decent production out of in the deal:shocked:
how's that for scary:salute:

Why do I have this sudden loss of appetite? :tsk:

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 12:10 PM
Cutler had a shitty record and we still got a pretty good haul for him:behindsofa:
and that was behind a hall of fame coach:shocked:

Cutler didn't have that bad of a record, it was certainly better than Orton's record with Denver, and his defenses were just as bad, and our offense is a LOT worse with Orton.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 12:12 PM
Right. One of the major factors in the trade, as I understand, was Orton. It
happened with Chicago largely because McDaniels preferred Orton over
Campbell, IIRC.

You are also correct in your final sentence, IMO. Orton needs to improve two
things: 3rd down conversions and staying healthy. If he gets those two fixed,
then, going along with his YPA, TD:Int ratio, and QBR, that will make him a hell
of a quarterback, IMO . . .

-----

Orton was an afterthought, nothing else. The Bears were estatic to take Cutler from us, they would have thrown in all of their QBs if we asked them to.

Saying "Orton was a one of the major factors in this trade" just goes to show how emotionally attached you are to him, for whatever reason. :lol:

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 12:13 PM
Another way to look at it was that Orton was traded for Cutler and two "throw in" first round picks. Yea, that sounds more realistic...

in terms of production.....you are right !

Tned
06-20-2011, 12:14 PM
in terms of production.....you are right !

So, is that what you think happened? Cutler for Orton, and the Bears threw in two first rounders just to close the deal?

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 12:15 PM
in terms of production.....you are right !

In terms of WINNING, Cutler started the NFC Championship his 2nd year with the Bears and Orton led our Broncos to 3 wins and the 2nd overall draft pick.

And don't forget that Cutler is throwing to 2nd rate WRs while Orton has a solid group and a pass-happy spread offense.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:15 PM
in terms of production.....you are right !

Until last year. We can't overlook the fact the Bears reached the championship
game with Cutler at the helm. And, much as I hate to say it (as a Pack fan),
Cutler's absence in that game was a major factor in the Bears' loss, IMO . . .

-----

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 12:32 PM
Another way to look at it was that Orton was traded for Cutler and two "throw in" first round picks. Yea, that sounds more realistic...

in terms of production....orton was the big part of the deal:shocked:

Shananahan
06-20-2011, 12:37 PM
You're trying way too hard, dude.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 12:39 PM
Someone remind me how that all technically went down...

Cutler
Earl Bennett

for
Orton
Robert Ayers
DeMaryius Thomas
Gronkowski

?

That's where it stands right now, no?

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:40 PM
Someone remind me how that all technically went down...

Cutler
Earl Bennett

for
Orton
Robert Ayers
DeMaryius Thomas
Gronkowski

?

That's where it stands right now, no?

Plus Johnny Knox, IIRC. He was the Bears' choice for that 5th rounder.

But it isn't over for Ayers and Thomas, IMO . . .

-----

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 12:41 PM
Someone remind me how that all technically went down...

Cutler
Earl Bennett

for
Orton
Robert Ayers
DeMaryius Thomas
Gronkowski

?

That's where it stands right now, no?


Llyod came from the Bears, what did we trade for him? Or was he part of the deal?

Tned
06-20-2011, 12:43 PM
Llyod came from the Bears, what did we trade for him? Or was he part of the deal?

Lloyd was signed as a free agent.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 12:46 PM
In terms of WINNING, Cutler started the NFC Championship his 2nd year with the Bears and Orton led our Broncos to 3 wins and the 2nd overall draft pick.

And don't forget that Cutler is throwing to 2nd rate WRs while Orton has a solid group and a pass-happy spread offense.

i'm talking about production on the Broncos....phonsi is gone and DT has been hurt too much to tell.
orton was the biggest impact player we got in the cutler trade thus far

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 12:47 PM
So the point to be taken fromthis is essentially we traded a guy with franchise QB potential for some wasted draft picks and a fatally flawed QB? McDaniels couldnt have ****** up this franchise more if that was what he was actually paid to do.

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 12:48 PM
Lloyd was signed as a free agent.

ok, thanks

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 12:49 PM
So the point to be taken fromthis is essentially we traded a guy with franchise QB potential for some wasted draft picks and a fatally flawed QB? McDaniels couldnt have ****** up this franchise more if that was what he was actually paid to do.


Culter wanted out and asked for the trade.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:49 PM
i'm talking about production on the Broncos....phonsi is gone and DT has been hurt too much to tell.
orton was the biggest impact player we got in the cutler trade thus far

That's right: McD threw one of them after Phonz, didn't he? :mad:



So the point to be taken fromthis is essentially we traded a guy with franchise QB potential for some wasted draft picks and a fatally flawed QB? McDaniels couldnt have ****** up this franchise more if that was what he was actually paid to do.

"Fatally" flawed in your mind. Nonetheless, I'm still pissed over the deal . . .

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 12:49 PM
i'm talking about production on the Broncos....phonsi is gone and DT has been hurt too much to tell.
orton was the biggest impact player we got in the cutler trade thus far

Orton plays QB in a pass-happy offense and his numbers are STILL mediocre... How is that major production? Of course he has production, he's the starting QB, there is no one else to manufacture stats if he is the one playing.

"Our head comes from the Sun." Of course it does. "The sky is blue." Of course it is. "Orton has production." Of course he does, he's the starting QB. :laugh: If the Bears had given us Rex Grossman and he was our started he too would have production.

Tned
06-20-2011, 12:51 PM
Culter wanted out and asked for the trade.

Not quite, try again.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 12:51 PM
Until last year. We can't overlook the fact the Bears reached the championship
game with Cutler at the helm. And, much as I hate to say it (as a Pack fan),
Cutler's absence in that game was a major factor in the Bears' loss, IMO . . .

-----

yeah,i was'nt trying to diminish Cutler's value.
i think he definately has the potential to be great some day.
ever since i saw him "flick" that 60+ yarder from his knees i knew he had mad skills.
it was a shame how things went down and he left Denver.
But i tend to look ahead rather than behind and focus on what we need to do NOW and what is best for the team going forward.
right now i would say if Orton cant get us more than a 2nd ( or a 3rd and a needed player) it would be in the teams best interest to keep him for one more year in case Tebow gets hurt or chokes :beer:

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 12:54 PM
yeah,i was'nt trying to diminish Cutler's value.
i think he definately has the potential to be great some day.
ever since i saw him "flick" that 60+ yarder from his knees i knew he had mad skills.
it was a shame how things went down and he left Denver.
But i tend to look ahead rather than behind and focus on what we need to do NOW and what is best for the team going forward.
right now i would say if Orton cant get us more than a 2nd ( or a 3rd and a needed player) it would be in the teams best interest to keep him for one more year in case Tebow gets hurt or chokes :beer:

If Orton can fetch a 5th rounder we should pull the trigger. He's going to WALK for free next offseason and starting him THIS year only means we STILL don't know what we have in Tebow and we can't prepare for the future of the QB position for another season.

Keeping Orton makes ZERO, absolutely ZERO sense from ANY standpoint. We pay good money for Tebow and Quinn, and there free agent market has plenty of veteran QBs we could sign to mentor both. Orton has NO interest in mentoring either.

Shopping Orton makes all the sense in the world, keeping him makes none.

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 12:54 PM
That's right: McD threw one of them after Phonz, didn't he? :mad:




"Fatally" flawed in your mind. Nonetheless, I'm still pissed over the deal . . .

-----

Bad on 3rd downs, against the blitz, in the RZ, and in crunch time. Any one or two of those are fatal flaws for a QB and for all them to be true about a guy is absolutely pathetic.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:55 PM
yeah,i was'nt trying to diminish Cutler's value.
i think he definately has the potential to be great some day.
ever since i saw him "flick" that 60+ yarder from his knees i knew he had mad skills.
it was a shame how things went down and he left Denver.
But i tend to look ahead rather than behind and focus on what we need to do NOW and what is best for the team going forward.
right now i would say if Orton cant get us more than a 2nd ( or a 3rd and a needed player) it would be in the teams best interest to keep him for one more year in case Tebow gets hurt or chokes :beer:

The minute I learned that Cutler wanted to be traded because of McDaniels, I
wanted McDaniels fired . . . right then, right there. And, were I Bowlen, I would
have done it.

On his way out the door, I would have told McDaniels, "I can find another
good coach. But we were lucky to get a QB with Cutler's skills, and we could
possibly never find another."

That would have been that . . .

-----

topscribe
06-20-2011, 12:57 PM
Bad on 3rd downs, against the blitz, in the RZ, and in crunch time. Any one or two of those are fatal flaws for a QB and for all them to be true about a guy is absolutely pathetic.

Sorry, but my evaluation goes a little deeper than that . . . much deeper, actually.

But let's not get into that again . . .

-----

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 01:02 PM
Orton plays QB in a pass-happy offense and his numbers are STILL mediocre... How is that major production? Of course he has production, he's the starting QB, there is no one else to manufacture stats if he is the one playing.

"Our head comes from the Sun." Of course it does. "The sky is blue." Of course it is. "Orton has production." Of course he does, he's the starting QB. :laugh: If the Bears had given us Rex Grossman and he was our started he too would have production.

your missing my point...again.
what i am saying is that in the trade....the most productive player we recieved (so far anyway) was Orton.
therefore he was not a "throw in" he was the best part of the deal.
does that make the deal shitty ? hell yes !
would it have been worse without getting Orton ? hell yes !
see ?:confused:

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 01:03 PM
Alphonso Smith was actually acquired with the Broncos own pick...

And it was Johnny Knox, not Bennett they selected with the fifth round pick. Top was right that it was Knox, but Bennett wasn't involved.

Tned
06-20-2011, 01:07 PM
your missing my point...again.
what i am saying is that in the trade....the most productive player we recieved (so far anyway) was Orton.
therefore he was not a "throw in" he was the best part of the deal.
does that make the deal shitty ? hell yes !
would it have been worse without getting Orton ? hell yes !
see ?:confused:

You can't use that logic (Orton outplayed the players we got with the two first round picks) to re-write history and claim Orton was a major part of the trade.

silkamilkamonico
06-20-2011, 01:14 PM
But i tend to look ahead rather than behind and focus on what we need to do NOW and what is best for the team going forward.
right now i would say if Orton cant get us more than a 2nd ( or a 3rd and a needed player) it would be in the teams best interest to keep him for one more year in case Tebow gets hurt or chokes :beer:

Best thing for the organiation in going forward is moving on without Orton. He's not the future of this organization, that much has been established. If Tebow chokes or gets hurt, chances are we could be in a good shot in the Luck sweepstakes.

Even if Luck isn't an option for Denver, Orton is out of the picture, Denver is rebuilding regardless of who the QB is.

IMHO, if Tebow plays next year, we're seeing where we need to go, and yea, there's a possibility we finish horrible.

If Orton plays, best case scenario IMHO is something like an 8-8 record. SO the following year we will be going into a season coming off another average year, a mid level first round draft pick, and questions surrounding the QB position.

IMHO the direction of this organization is being held hostage by Orton's presence. It's not Orton's fault at all, we need to move on, and he needs to move on.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 01:15 PM
your missing my point...again.
what i am saying is that in the trade....the most productive player we recieved (so far anyway) was Orton.
therefore he was not a "throw in" he was the best part of the deal.
does that make the deal shitty ? hell yes !
would it have been worse without getting Orton ? hell yes !
see ?:confused:

I get the point you're trying to make but it's not a good point. Orton has production and numbers because he was the QB that got thrown in the trade.

How quickly we forget that McDaniels was talked out of trading Orton last offseason by Xanders.

It is just common sense that ANY QB who was thrown in that trade and started games for us would have production.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 01:17 PM
Best thing for the organiation in going forward is moving on without Orton. He's not the future of this organization, that much has been established. If Tebow chokes or gets hurt, chances are we could be in a good shot in the Luck sweepstakes.

Even if Luck isn't an option for Denver, Orton is out of the picture, Denver is rebuilding regardless of who the QB is.

IMHO, if Tebow plays next year, we're seeing where we need to go, and yea, there's a possibility we finish horrible.

If Orton plays, best case scenario IMHO is something like an 8-8 record. SO the following year we will be going into a season coming off another average year, a mid level first round draft pick, and questions surrounding the QB position.

IMHO the direction of this organization is being held hostage by Orton's presence. It's not Orton's fault at all, we need to move on, and he needs to move on.

so if we are say.....9-4 with tebow at the helm and he gets hurt...you are saying there is no value in having the starter for the last 2 years who knows the players and system ?
even if he could win 1 game in 3 it could get us to the playoffs....how is that a bad thing ?

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 01:18 PM
Alphonso Smith was actually acquired with the Broncos own pick...

And it was Johnny Knox, not Bennett they selected with the fifth round pick. Top was right that it was Knox, but Bennett wasn't involved.

Lets also not forget Knox MADE a Pro bowl as a 5th round pick too....

P/R... just like Royal did

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 01:20 PM
Through various channels, the Broncos received Kyle Orton, Robert Ayers, Richard Quinn, Seth Olsen, Demaryius Thomas, Eric Decker and Tim Tebow for Jay Cutler and Johnny Knox.

Tned
06-20-2011, 01:24 PM
Through various channels, the Broncos received Kyle Orton, Robert Ayers, Richard Quinn, Seth Olsen, Demaryius Thomas, Eric Decker and Tim Tebow for Jay Cutler and Johnny Knox.

To clarify, the picks the Broncos got were 'tied' to those players. Those two first round picks (and I think a third) didn't get us all those players scott free, but instead might have contributed to those players.

For instance, I think Quinn was two thirds (we had to trade up to get him) and wound up using the 3rd from Chicago, plus our 3rd (going by memory), which means 'half' of Quinn can be attributed to the trade.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 01:25 PM
Through various channels, the Broncos received Kyle Orton, Robert Ayers, Richard Quinn, Seth Olsen, Demaryius Thomas, Eric Decker and Tim Tebow for Jay Cutler and Johnny Knox.

And Cutler just may end up worth more than all of them put together . . .

-----

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 01:26 PM
To clarify, the picks the Broncos got were 'tied' to those players. Those two first round picks (and I think a third) didn't get us all those players scott free, but instead might have contributed to those players.

For instance, I think Quinn was two thirds (we had to trade up to get him) and wound up using the 3rd from Chicago, plus our 3rd (going by memory), which means 'half' of Quinn can be attributed to the trade.

Well, sort of, they traded two picks for two picks in that particular deal. The Broncos ended up with Richard Quinn and Seth Olsen, the Steelers ended up with Kraig Urbik and Mike Wallace.

The 2010 No. 1 is where it gets really complicated.

Tned
06-20-2011, 01:28 PM
Well, sort of, they traded two picks for two picks in that particular deal. The Broncos ended up with Richard Quinn and Seth Olsen, the Steelers ended up with Kraig Urbik and Mike Wallace.

The 2010 No. 1 is where it gets really complicated.

Agreed it's complicated, I just wanted to clarify that we didn't get all those players just with the Bears' three picks.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 01:36 PM
Agreed it's complicated, I just wanted to clarify that we didn't get all those players just with the Bears' three picks.

I would say, Ayers, Decker and Thomas were acquired only with those picks. McDaniels parlayed that initial 2010 No. 1 into Tebow by sending an extra second and fourth to the Ravens, along with a third acquired through that No. 1.

I, personally, think when evaluating that trade you have to include Ayers, Decker, Thomas and Tebow.

BroncoWave
06-20-2011, 01:38 PM
I would say, Ayers, Decker and Thomas were acquired only with those picks. McDaniels parlayed that initial 2010 No. 1 into Tebow by sending an extra second and fourth to the Ravens, along with a third acquired through that No. 1.

I, personally, think when evaluating that trade you have to include Ayers, Decker, Thomas and Tebow.

Then you can't just include Cutler and our 5th when evaluating what we gave up. Gotta include all the other picks we gave up to acquire those players.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 01:43 PM
Then you can't just include Cutler and our 5th when evaluating what we gave up. Gotta include all the other picks we gave up to acquire those players.

Well, the Bears only took Cutler and Knox. They didn't trade the No. 5.

Are you saying we have to evaluate the 49ers taking Anthony Davis vs. No. 13 and No. 113 we received for the No. 11?

No. 113 and No. 24 were turned into No. 22 and Demaryius Thomas. No. 113 was used to pick Aaron Hernandez. No. 24 was parlayed into, of some note both Devin McCourty and Dez Bryant.

slim
06-20-2011, 01:48 PM
My head hurts.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 01:53 PM
Nice discussion. It helped to clarify what came down in the trade . . .

-----

LawDog
06-20-2011, 03:05 PM
Fitzgerald would love Orton since Orton is especially strong passing deep. I would
think Fitz would love working with a QB who was among the top in the league
at passes over 25 yards and frequently #1 in the league at over 40 last year . . .

-----

Okay Top, you've gone over the top with the "especially strong passing deep" nonsense. To prove my point:

In 2010, Orton threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing only 3 of them for a completion percentage of 33.3%. He threw 11 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing 5 of them for a completion percentage of 45.4%.

The same year, Orton threw 434 times where the ball was thrown 20 or less yards (including behind the line of scrimmage) and completed 267 of them for an average of 61.5%.

In 2009, Orton also threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing 4 of them for a completion percentage of 44.4%. And he threw just 6 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing ONLY 1 of them for a completion percentage of a whopping 16.7%.

That year, Orton threw 483 balls that carried 20 yards or less in the air and completed 313 of them for an average of 64.8%.

So, to review, Orton has thrown 17 deep balls (truly deep where the ball was in the air for more than 40 yards) and has connected with the receiver only 6 times or 35.2%.

Looking around the league over the past two years, Orton compares with Matt Schaub and Matt Ryan (both at 4/11, 36.4%). The top tier includes Matt Cassell (5/12, 41.6%), Phillip Rivers (12/29, 41.4%), Ben Roethlisberger (8/19, 42.1%), and Donovan McNabb (11/26, 42.3%). A bit behind Orton is a group that includes Eli Manning (3/11, 27.3%), Carson Palmer (5/21, 23.8%), Aaron Rodgers (6/27, 22.2%), and Joe Flacco (5/23, 21.7%).

Matt Hasselback and Peyton Manning don't go deep very often, but when they do bet on Matt (3/5, 60%) and not Peyton (1/4, 25%). Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Mark Sanchez aren't afraid to go deep often but are not that successful (Brees 3/22, 13.6%; Brady 3/23, 13.0%; Sanchez 4/26, 15.4%). Derek Andersen stinks at it (0/5, 0.0%). Also of note, Jay Cutler struggles at the deep ball (3/15, 20%).

So, Top, ol buddy ol pal, Orton is okay at the deep ball (better compared to the field than I would have thought, and much improved in 2010 vs. 2009), but he certainly does not rise to the level of "especially strong." I'd reserve that comment for Rivers and McNabb, at least based on the past two years.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 03:38 PM
Okay Top, you've gone over the top with the "especially strong passing deep" nonsense. To prove my point:

In 2010, Orton threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing only 3 of them for a completion percentage of 33.3%. He threw 11 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing 5 of them for a completion percentage of 45.4%.

The same year, Orton threw 434 times where the ball was thrown 20 or less yards (including behind the line of scrimmage) and completed 267 of them for an average of 61.5%.

In 2009, Orton also threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing 4 of them for a completion percentage of 44.4%. And he threw just 6 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing ONLY 1 of them for a completion percentage of a whopping 16.7%.

That year, Orton threw 483 balls that carried 20 yards or less in the air and completed 313 of them for an average of 64.8%.

So, to review, Orton has thrown 17 deep balls (truly deep where the ball was in the air for more than 40 yards) and has connected with the receiver only 6 times or 35.2%.

Looking around the league over the past two years, Orton compares with Matt Schaub and Matt Ryan (both at 4/11, 36.4%). The top tier includes Matt Cassell (5/12, 41.6%), Phillip Rivers (12/29, 41.4%), Ben Roethlisberger (8/19, 42.1%), and Donovan McNabb (11/26, 42.3%). A bit behind Orton is a group that includes Eli Manning (3/11, 27.3%), Carson Palmer (5/21, 23.8%), Aaron Rodgers (6/27, 22.2%), and Joe Flacco (5/23, 21.7%).

Matt Hasselback and Peyton Manning don't go deep very often, but when they do bet on Matt (3/5, 60%) and not Peyton (1/4, 25%). Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Mark Sanchez aren't afraid to go deep often but are not that successful (Brees 3/22, 13.6%; Brady 3/23, 13.0%; Sanchez 4/26, 15.4%). Derek Andersen stinks at it (0/5, 0.0%). Also of note, Jay Cutler struggles at the deep ball (3/15, 20%).

So, Top, ol buddy ol pal, Orton is okay at the deep ball (better compared to the field than I would have thought, and much improved in 2010 vs. 2009), but he certainly does not rise to the level of "especially strong." I'd reserve that comment for Rivers and McNabb, at least based on the past two years.

so your saying tha about 4 quality starters are better at the deep ball ......so top was wrong ?:confused:
and Orton is better than most ....but not good ?
got it !

topscribe
06-20-2011, 03:39 PM
Okay Top, you've gone over the top with the "especially strong passing deep" nonsense. To prove my point:

In 2010, Orton threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing only 3 of them for a completion percentage of 33.3%. He threw 11 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing 5 of them for a completion percentage of 45.4%.

The same year, Orton threw 434 times where the ball was thrown 20 or less yards (including behind the line of scrimmage) and completed 267 of them for an average of 61.5%.

In 2009, Orton also threw 9 times where the ball was in the air from 31-40 yards completing 4 of them for a completion percentage of 44.4%. And he threw just 6 times where the ball was in the air for 41+ plus yards completing ONLY 1 of them for a completion percentage of a whopping 16.7%.

That year, Orton threw 483 balls that carried 20 yards or less in the air and completed 313 of them for an average of 64.8%.

So, to review, Orton has thrown 17 deep balls (truly deep where the ball was in the air for more than 40 yards) and has connected with the receiver only 6 times or 35.2%.

Looking around the league over the past two years, Orton compares with Matt Schaub and Matt Ryan (both at 4/11, 36.4%). The top tier includes Matt Cassell (5/12, 41.6%), Phillip Rivers (12/29, 41.4%), Ben Roethlisberger (8/19, 42.1%), and Donovan McNabb (11/26, 42.3%). A bit behind Orton is a group that includes Eli Manning (3/11, 27.3%), Carson Palmer (5/21, 23.8%), Aaron Rodgers (6/27, 22.2%), and Joe Flacco (5/23, 21.7%).

Matt Hasselback and Peyton Manning don't go deep very often, but when they do bet on Matt (3/5, 60%) and not Peyton (1/4, 25%). Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Mark Sanchez aren't afraid to go deep often but are not that successful (Brees 3/22, 13.6%; Brady 3/23, 13.0%; Sanchez 4/26, 15.4%). Derek Andersen stinks at it (0/5, 0.0%). Also of note, Jay Cutler struggles at the deep ball (3/15, 20%).

So, Top, ol buddy ol pal, Orton is okay at the deep ball (better compared to the field than I would have thought, and much improved in 2010 vs. 2009), but he certainly does not rise to the level of "especially strong." I'd reserve that comment for Rivers and McNabb, at least based on the past two years.

So perhaps "especially" strong was a bit hyperbolic (love that word). Just
"strong" probably would have done the job. Go back, however, and see the
post to which I was responding. (I didn't quote it, but it was just a couple
posts prior.) It was just as extreme the other way, in an apparent attempt to
label Orton as especially bad at passing deep. So I performed a bit of a knee-
jerk reaction, I guess.

But, once again, of course, my post was singled out . . .

Anyway, what you are actually telling me is that Orton is pretty good passing
deep. But you do understand - don't you? - that when such small samples as
you provided (6/17, 8/19, 3/5, etc.) that one pass here and there can make a
significant difference in percentages? For instance, had Orton completed just
one more of those 17 passes, he would have logged a 41% comp ratio. Going
the other way, had he completed one less, his comp would have been a paltry
29%. So just throwing out statistics with such small samples can be very
misleading, despite the other persons who saluted your post.

One needs to look at game film. I can show you at least four (off the top,
perhaps more) where Orton's accuracy was so precise that he lofted it over
the outstretched fingers of defenders, softly into the hands of the receiver.
Two of them were to Lloyd, another to Gaffney, and the fourth to Decker.
Another was a deep out to Lloyd, that was into a narrow window between a
corner and a safety.

But understand, 40 yards in the air is a good long distance. Step out onto a
football field and take a look at it, if you haven't already. 35% at 40+ yards in
the air is a pretty good percentage.

-----

LawDog
06-20-2011, 03:48 PM
so your saying tha about 4 quality starters are better at the deep ball ......so top was wrong ?:confused:
and Orton is better than most ....but not good ?
got it !

The ones I pointed out throw the ball significantly more with a better completion percentage. Two of those are particularly successful at it. If you read carefully, I said Orton was good (even stating that he was better than I suspected), yet the abundantly clear point of my post was that Top was claiming especially strong when in fact that it not accurate. Got it now?

topscribe
06-20-2011, 03:49 PM
The ones I pointed out throw the ball significantly more with a better completion percentage. Two of those are particularly successful at it. If you read carefully, I said Orton was good (even stating that he was better than I suspected), yet the abundantly clear point of my post was that Top was claiming especially strong when in fact that it not accurate. Got it now?

And I readily admitted to that.

Still, be sure you catch my response to you . . .

-----

LawDog
06-20-2011, 03:56 PM
Top, I won't bother quoting your response post (and my previous was a response to TKO, this is to you), and I singled out your post because you were the one I'd rather have the conversation with. Anyway, yes small sample sizes do carry some pitfalls, however, I was pretty careful to group QB's with similar sample sizes. And if you notice, Rivers and McNabb throw 41+ a lot - Rivers nearly twice as many times as Orton over the past two years. Both with a significantly better completion rate.

Orton did quite well in 2010 at that distance, was horrible in 2009 which is maybe what sticks in my mind more when thinking about him throwing deep. Was 2010 the anomaly (another cool word) or is that going to be the new norm for Orton? Time shall tell. EDIT - I went and looked, 2008 0/3, 2007 1/5, 2006 N/A, 2005 0/6. To date, 2010 is a significant outlier, both in attempts and completion percentage. I still say he is not a reliable deep ball chucker...

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 03:57 PM
i always thought a 35 yd fg was a "chip shot" til i got out on the field and tried a few:laugh:

LawDog
06-20-2011, 04:05 PM
i always thought a 35 yd fg was a "chip shot" til i got out on the field and tried a few:laugh:

Try one at 63...

topscribe
06-20-2011, 04:08 PM
Top, I won't bother quoting your response post (and my previous was a response to TKO, this is to you), and I singled out your post because you were the one I'd rather have the conversation with. Anyway, yes small sample sizes do carry some pitfalls, however, I was pretty careful to group QB's with similar sample sizes. And if you notice, Rivers and McNabb throw 41+ a lot - Rivers nearly twice as many times as Orton over the past two years. Both with a significantly better completion rate.

Orton did quite well in 2010 at that distance, was horrible in 2009 which is maybe what sticks in my mind more when thinking about him throwing deep. Was 2010 the anomaly (another cool word) or is that going to be the new norm for Orton? Time shall tell.

Well, thank you for the compliment.

Anyway, in citing Rivers, you are citing perhaps the best deep passer in the
league at present (rivaled by McNabb, but I fear McNabb has seen his better
days), so he is a good standard to go by. But, as you seemed to imply, he has
proven it over a longer time. Again, as you seemed to acknowledge, such small
samples are not really good indicators. As I mentioned, I was going mostly by
game film.

Regarding the difference between 2009 and 2010, I believe it was in the legs.
Orton played all of 2009 on high ankle sprains. Drew Brees gave a little talk
one day on how important the legs are in throwing a ball with velocity and
accuracy. The process of a pass begins at the feet and progresses through
the legs, then the torso, the shoulders, and finally the arm and wrist. That, I
believe, was what was behind the day-and-night difference between the two
years in Orton's velocity and deep accuracy.

("And then there were those rib injuries." As a side remark, I hope Orton finally
shows he can stay healthy for a season.)

EDIT: Had to withdraw my salute. Once again, broad, superficial statistics are
presented without any accompanying analysis. First of all, I will disregard 2005
because Orton was a rookie that year. Outside of Marino and maybe one or
two others, even the superstars typically stink up the joint in their rookie
years (reference John Elway).

In 2007 Orton played all of three games. He was 1/5, yes, but, again, 2/5
would have represented 40%. I would not be inclined to accept either figure.
In 2009, as I mentioned, Orton played the entire year on high ankle sprains --
the last half on two high ankle sprains. Even in 2008, Orton played the last
half on a high ankle sprain. As you saw, I allowed Drew Brees to provide the
implications of those situations. (And please, let nobody come back with that
tired old "everybody plays hurt" mantra. I'm talking about how specific injuries
affect specific athletic functions -- and I am talking about it as someone who
played [at] QB and who studied health psychology on a postgraduate level.
Not bragging, just providing some credentials to help to back what I am saying.)

I don't remember now how many deep passes Orton attempted in his first
seven games of 2008, when he played healthy, or specifically how many deep
passes (if any) he attempted in his last two games of 2010. In other words,
I would like to know how he performed when he was running on all 8 cylinders.
(To those who will now fire back, shouting "excuses! excuses!," I am not
saying this to prove anything to you. I don't really give a rat's derriere about
that. I would just like to know for myself.)

-----

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 04:08 PM
i always thought a 35 yd fg was a "chip shot" til i got out on the field and tried a few:laugh:

Lol, they are chip shots.:D

topscribe
06-20-2011, 04:10 PM
Try one at 63...

Or at 80. I provided a vid in another thread showing Elway throwing the ball 80
yards in the air as a high school player! :shocked:

-----

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 04:11 PM
Well, thank you for the compliment.

Anyway, in citing Rivers, you are citing perhaps the best deep passer in the
league at present (rivaled by McNabb, but I fear McNabb has seen his better
days), so he is a good standard to go by. But, as you seemed to imply, he has
proven it over a longer time. Again as you seemed to acknowledge, such small
samples are not really good indicators. As I mentioned, I was going mostly by
game film.

Regarding the difference between 2009 and 2010, I believe it was in the legs.
Orton played all of 2009 on high ankle sprains. Drew Brees gave a little talk
one day on how important the legs are in throwing a ball with velocity and
accuracy. The process of a pass begins at the feet and progresses through
the legs, then the torso, the shoulders, and finally the arm and wrist. That, I
believe, was what was behind the day-and-night difference between the two
years in Orton's velocity and deep accuracy.

("And then there were those rib injuries." As a side remark, I hope Orton finally
shows he can stay healthy for a season.)

-----

Once again the high ankle sprain, and Brees had a good year on same injury Culter received in the playoffs. You cant blame everything on the ankle. "I only had 10 beers and puked, must have been the high ankle sprain. "

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 04:14 PM
Lol, they are chip shots.:D

not if you don't know what the hell you are doing !....like myself:laugh:

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 04:17 PM
"I only had 10 beers and puked, must have been the high ankle sprain. "

:pound:

Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 04:27 PM
Once again the high ankle sprain, and Brees had a good year on same injury Culter received in the playoffs. You cant blame everything on the ankle. "I only had 10 beers and puked, must have been the high ankle sprain. "

Those pesky ankles and ribs... :laugh:

silkamilkamonico
06-20-2011, 05:15 PM
so if we are say.....9-4 with tebow at the helm and he gets hurt...you are saying there is no value in having the starter for the last 2 years who knows the players and system ?
even if he could win 1 game in 3 it could get us to the playoffs....how is that a bad thing ?

Well, I could be wrong, but IMHO we aren't anywhere near a 9-4 type team. I think we will have to compete like hell this year just to stay out of the cellar of the AFCWorst.

LawDog
06-20-2011, 05:16 PM
Or at 80. I provided a vid in another thread showing Elway throwing the ball 80
yards in the air as a high school player! :shocked:

-----

63 referred to Jason Elam's record-tying field goal from '98...

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 05:33 PM
how do you know he was a "throw in" ?
did you see other offers that were similar ?
maybe getting Orton was considered a fairly large part of the deal at the time ?
i'm not implying their trade value is/was anywhere close,just saying there are probably several teams that consider orton a viable back up and possible starter. that means the broncos should get a player & a 3-4th or a 2nd straight up for orton in a trade.
no matter how much a fan may dislike the guy,the facts are that he has proven he can play at the nfl level....thats more than can be said for 99% of the guys who have ever tried:salute:
it would not surprise me to see him do well in min,sf or even denver with the right defense and run game

A fairly large portion of the deal? No. Cutler by himself netted the two first round picks. They gave us Orton for a 5th rounder. So honestly TKO I think it is very hard to make the case that Orton was a fairly big part of the deal. Will he do well with a different team like the Vikings? If he's gone I wont care.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 05:38 PM
A fairly large portion of the deal? No. Cutler by himself netted the two first round picks. They gave us Orton for a 5th rounder. So honestly TKO I think it is very hard to make the case that Orton was a fairly big part of the deal. Will he do well with a different team like the Vikings? If he's gone I wont care.

just saying that we needed a servicable qb to go along with any trade and we got one....so orton was a pretty big part of the reason we traded with chicago instead of another team.
also ortons #'s are strikingly similar to cutlers since the trade:salute:

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 05:43 PM
just saying that we needed a servicable qb to go along with any trade and we got one....so orton was a pretty big part of the reason we traded with chicago instead of another team.
also ortons #'s are strikingly similar to cutlers since the trade:salute:

exempt for the category that means the most.....the # of wins category. I know you say you cant blame him. But you cant just blame the defense either, if you had to be on the field all the time because your QB kept have 3 and outs, you would wear down too.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 05:47 PM
exempt for the category that means the most.....the # of wins category. I know you say you cant blame him. But you cant just blame the defense either, if you had to be on the field all the time because your QB kept have 3 and outs, you would wear down too.

you could also make a pretty strong case that chicago won a few games despite cutler's play....unfortunately we did'nt have the players to overcome when orton faultered

Tned
06-20-2011, 05:50 PM
just saying that we needed a servicable qb to go along with any trade and we got one....so orton was a pretty big part of the reason we traded with chicago instead of another team.
also ortons #'s are strikingly similar to cutlers since the trade:salute:

Even if Orton outplayed Cutler beyond any shadow of a doubt, you still can't make any legitimate case that Orton was a major part of the trade AT THE TIME OF THE TRADE and it wasn't the two first rounders being the primary compensation for Cutler.

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 05:52 PM
you could also make a pretty strong case that chicago won a few games despite cutler's play....unfortunately we did'nt have the players to overcome when orton faultered

You could also argue that play calling could have had a part in it too. Terrell Davis talked about McDaniels wrong approach to using the RB, put let him run once and then a couple series later let him run again. Never gave any of our RBs a chance to get into a grove. We may have run the ball several times but it was always spaced out between several RB and never the same back back to back.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 06:03 PM
just saying that we needed a servicable qb to go along with any trade and we got one....so orton was a pretty big part of the reason we traded with chicago instead of another team.
also ortons #'s are strikingly similar to cutlers since the trade:salute:

In terms of compensation no way. We gave up a fifth rounder for him period.

I really don't care that Orton's numbers are strikingly similar we haven't won with him at quarterback. When Orton got here he said something to the effect "My job is to win games."

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 06:45 PM
In terms of compensation no way. We gave up a fifth rounder for him period.

I really don't care that Orton's numbers are strikingly similar we haven't won with him at quarterback. When Orton got here he said something to the effect "My job is to win games."

if i recall we did'nt win very many B.O. either :laugh: (before Orton)

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 06:51 PM
So, at great length, it has been proven that Kyle Orton was OK in the long-pass department.

But, only 4 percent of Kyle Orton's pass attempts came over 31 yards. Similarly 20 percent of his passes were behind the line. He was pretty good on those too, 67-83 for 584 (80 percent completion percentage, if you're keeping track), with a touchdown, for a 102.7 rating.

So where's the problem?

Passes from 1-20 yards.

Of the top 25-rated passers in the NFL, Orton ranks dead last in completion percentage on passes from 1-20 yards, at 57 percent completed.

He was 200-351, a 57-percent completion percentage, with 2,224 yards, 12 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

His quarterback rating? 79.1, good for 21st among those 25 passers at that distance.

His 6.3 average yards per play from that distance? 23rd.

Tops in completion percentage from that distance? Drew Brees at 68 percent, Peyton Manning at 67.5 percent, Philip Rivers at 66.8 percent and Aaron Rodgers at 66 percent.

Want a better statistical comparison to a player that overall had similar numbers to Orton throughout the year? Jay Cutler, 62.6 percent completion percentage, 2,393 yards, 17 touchdowns and 11 interceptions with an 89 quarterback rating at that distance.

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 06:57 PM
I've said for a while now that another problem I have with Orton is his accuracy. He seems to be just off most of the time. He leads a lot of wide open WRs to the ground and throws a lot of balls out of bounds that I don't think are throw aways.

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 07:00 PM
I've said for a while now that another problem I have with Orton is his accuracy. He seems to be just off most of the time. He leads a lot of wide open WRs to the ground and throws a lot of balls out of bounds that I don't think are throw aways.

I think Lloyd saved him on a lot of throws. He had a lot of diving catches for big plays. I remember 1 big one in the end zone where he barely made it inbounds. Whether they were just off or Orton intended for the WR to dive I am not sure.

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 07:08 PM
So, at great length, it has been proven that Kyle Orton was OK in the long-pass department.

But, only 4 percent of Kyle Orton's pass attempts came over 31 yards. Similarly 20 percent of his passes were behind the line. He was pretty good on those too, 67-83 for 584 (80 percent completion percentage, if you're keeping track), with a touchdown, for a 102.7 rating.

So where's the problem?

Passes from 1-20 yards.

Of the top 25-rated passers in the NFL, Orton ranks dead last in completion percentage on passes from 1-20 yards, at 57 percent completed.

He was 200-351, a 57-percent completion percentage, with 2,224 yards, 12 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

His quarterback rating? 79.1, good for 21st among those 25 passers at that distance.

His 6.3 average yards per play from that distance? 23rd.

Tops in completion percentage from that distance? Drew Brees at 68 percent, Peyton Manning at 67.5 percent, Philip Rivers at 66.8 percent and Aaron Rodgers at 66 percent.

Want a better statistical comparison to a player that overall had similar numbers to Orton throughout the year? Jay Cutler, 62.6 percent completion percentage, 2,393 yards, 17 touchdowns and 11 interceptions with an 89 quarterback rating at that distance.

"A high ankle sprain will effect a shorter pass more than a deep pass"...

Just wanted to be the first person to post that "fact"....

Tned
06-20-2011, 07:12 PM
So, at great length, it has been proven that Kyle Orton was OK in the long-pass department.

But, only 4 percent of Kyle Orton's pass attempts came over 31 yards. Similarly 20 percent of his passes were behind the line. He was pretty good on those too, 67-83 for 584 (80 percent completion percentage, if you're keeping track), with a touchdown, for a 102.7 rating.

So where's the problem?

Passes from 1-20 yards.

Of the top 25-rated passers in the NFL, Orton ranks dead last in completion percentage on passes from 1-20 yards, at 57 percent completed.

He was 200-351, a 57-percent completion percentage, with 2,224 yards, 12 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

His quarterback rating? 79.1, good for 21st among those 25 passers at that distance.

His 6.3 average yards per play from that distance? 23rd.

Tops in completion percentage from that distance? Drew Brees at 68 percent, Peyton Manning at 67.5 percent, Philip Rivers at 66.8 percent and Aaron Rodgers at 66 percent.

Want a better statistical comparison to a player that overall had similar numbers to Orton throughout the year? Jay Cutler, 62.6 percent completion percentage, 2,393 yards, 17 touchdowns and 11 interceptions with an 89 quarterback rating at that distance.

Wow! That is scary bad.

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 07:19 PM
Wow! That is scary bad.

Top coming to Orton's defense soon?

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 07:21 PM
Top coming to Orton's defense soon?

#1- Oline was bad
#2-Sun in his eyes
#3 Cramps
#4 Broke up with Gf.....wife found out
#5 Kept placing bets on other teams
#6 Ribs hurt from cashing checks at Safeway.....

Tned
06-20-2011, 07:21 PM
Top coming to Orton's defense soon?

Just the "rest of the story"...

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 07:24 PM
Just the "rest of the story"...

"Stats don't teell the TRUE story of how good he was playing before his injuries"

"As he was on a record pace for yards..... injuries took its toll"

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 07:28 PM
More?

He was 10th in attempts in that distance, and 12th in total completions. He had the same number of completions as Joe Flacco, of course Flacco threw 37 less pass attempts (in three more games).

He did throw a touchdown every 29 passes at that distance, of course, only Donovan McNabb was worse (way worse).

He DID have the 10th best interception rate, throwing one every 50.14 attempts. So, he DOES have that going for him.

Nine of those 25 passers had more attempts behind the line than Orton and nine of those 25 had a better completion percentage behind the line than Orton (not the same nine).

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 07:31 PM
For the real stat geeks (this isn't necessarily a bad thing for Orton, just a base for people to understand the data)...

Passes 1-20 Yards...

Brees - 71.2 percent of his completions, 71.5 percent of his attempts and 70.4 percent of his yards.

Manning - 75.6 percent of his completions, 74.3 percent of his attempts and 73 percent of his yards.

Rivers - 73 percent of his completions, 72.3 percent of his attempts and 71.7 percent of his yards.

Rodgers - 68.9 percent of his completions, 68.6 percent of his attempts and 62.7 percent of his yards.

Brady - 78.3 percent of his completions, 78.2 percent of his attempts and 73.1 percent of his yards.

Kitna - 69.9 percent of his completions, 71.7 percent of his attempts and 71.4 percent of his yards.

Garrard - 67.8 percent of his completions, 68.3 percent of his attempts and 61.2 percent of his yards.

Flacco - 65.4 percent of his completions, 64.7 percent of his attempts and 61.7 percent of his yards.

Ryan - 82.5 percent of his completions, 81.5 percent of his attempts and 83.7 percent of his yards.

Schaub - 77.5 percent of his completions, 78.1 percent of his attempts and 73.9 percent of his yards.

Orton - 68.3 percent of his completions, 70.6 percent of his attempts and 60.9 percent of his yards.

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 07:33 PM
Finally, some posting I can respect. I've been calling for documentation!

Welcome back, Mo! :welcome:

I only hope the coaches and Orton are taking note of it to get to the bottom of it . . .

There may be other factors involved, but I'll just leave it like that. Orton has
his strengths, and he has his weaknesses. I hope he's working on both of
them. I understand he's working out.

-----

Lifting the beer stein doesn't count. But he has been out a few times to throw the pig skin around though. I have heard of 2 times, with Dawkins and with Minneapolis. Dont know how many days he showed up with Dawkins though.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 07:40 PM
So, at great length, it has been proven that Kyle Orton was OK in the long-pass department.

But, only 4 percent of Kyle Orton's pass attempts came over 31 yards. Similarly 20 percent of his passes were behind the line. He was pretty good on those too, 67-83 for 584 (80 percent completion percentage, if you're keeping track), with a touchdown, for a 102.7 rating.

So where's the problem?

Passes from 1-20 yards.

Of the top 25-rated passers in the NFL, Orton ranks dead last in completion percentage on passes from 1-20 yards, at 57 percent completed.

He was 200-351, a 57-percent completion percentage, with 2,224 yards, 12 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

His quarterback rating? 79.1, good for 21st among those 25 passers at that distance.

His 6.3 average yards per play from that distance? 23rd.

Tops in completion percentage from that distance? Drew Brees at 68 percent, Peyton Manning at 67.5 percent, Philip Rivers at 66.8 percent and Aaron Rodgers at 66 percent.

Want a better statistical comparison to a player that overall had similar numbers to Orton throughout the year? Jay Cutler, 62.6 percent completion percentage, 2,393 yards, 17 touchdowns and 11 interceptions with an 89 quarterback rating at that distance.

I still don't think the long ball is a strength. I agree with you he's ok on the long ball but I don't we would him make it a bigger part of his game.

The other stats you brought up are very interesting. I was surprised see he struggles with passes in the 1-20 yard range. Maybe that's part of the reason he's not very good in clutch situations.

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 07:41 PM
I still don't think the long ball is a strength. I agree with you he's ok on the long ball but I don't we would him make it a bigger part of his game.

The other stats you brought up are very interesting. I was surprised see he struggles with passes in the 1-20 yard range. Maybe that's part of the reason he's not very good in clutch situations.

I don't think its a strength, either, but I'll concede the point.

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 07:47 PM
IMO his only real streangth is his low INT percentage. Everything else is either average or very, very below average.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 07:49 PM
IMO his only real streangth is his low INT percentage. Everything else is either average or very, very below average.

And so you have provided your exaggerated counter to "exceptionally strong."

We're even now . . . :D

-----

NightTerror218
06-20-2011, 07:51 PM
IMO his only real streangth is his low INT percentage. Everything else is either average or very, very below average.

I think the only reason for that, is because he wont take chances. He wont try to throw into really tight spaces. Not very confident.

Shananahan
06-20-2011, 07:53 PM
IMO his only real streangth is his low INT percentage. Everything else is either average or very, very below average.
I don't know. Orton last year seemed almost like night and day to the year before. I think some of that was due to his famous ankle being healthy, but I think much more of it was time with the playbook and practice. I think one of his strengths is just running an offense and operating within it (timing, safe reads, etc). He might not have the physical skills or the mental fortitude to ever do so at an elite level, but he can be effective enough (until 3rd and long, etc).


I think the only reason for that, is because he wont take chances. He wont try to throw into really tight spaces. Not very confident.
I mostly agree with this 100% regarding his safe passing, as well as him not having the zip on his passes to sneak it into risky spots successfully. He did drop quite a few nice passes into spots surrounded by defenders successfully, though. That may or may not have had more to do with passing to a location rather than a guy, but whatever.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 07:54 PM
One thing that seems evident is that Fox likes a methodical ball control,clock eating offense and veteren leadership at QB.
this is bad news for any bronco fan who feels it is a "given" that Orton is gone.
i would not be surprised if Fox wants Orton in the mix and possibly starting so he can focus his attention on beefing up our dreadfull :defense:

as boring as it may be....He seems to favor feilding a stout D and letting the offense win by making fewer mistakes than the other guys....that and a badass run game !!!!
i just hope it works better in denver than it did in carolina:shocked:

Tned
06-20-2011, 07:54 PM
I think the only reason for that, is because he wont take chances. He wont try to throw into really tight spaces. Not very confident.

With his lack of arm strength and accuracy, do you blame him?

Shananahan
06-20-2011, 07:57 PM
One thing that seems evident is that Fox likes a methodical ball control,clock eating offense and veteren leadership at QB.
this is bad news for any bronco fan who feels it is a "given" that Orton is gone.
I don't think so. Two out of three ain't bad, and I think Tebow gives the team that. I don't think it's a given that Orton is gone, but I do think it is a given that the team wants to move on without him and whether or not that happens will depend on the offer.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 07:58 PM
One thing that seems evident is that Fox likes a methodical ball control,clock eating offense and veteren leadership at QB.
this is bad news for any bronco fan who feels it is a "given" that Orton is gone.
i would not be surprised if Fox wants Orton in the mix and possibly starting so he can focus his attention on beefing up our dreadfull :defense:

as boring as it may be....He seems to favor feilding a stout D and letting the offense win by making fewer mistakes than the other guys....that and a badass run game !!!!
i just hope it works better in denver than it did in carolina:shocked:

As long as we can look up to the scoreboard at the end of the game and the
number beside Denver is larger than that beside the other team, it won't be
boring.

And If Fox can lift the defense to at least in the middle of the pack, then the
Broncos will do that more often than not, IMO. Therein, we can take heart:
Foxy has done it before . . .

-----

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 08:01 PM
I don't know. Orton last year seemed almost like night and day to the year before. I think some of that was due to his famous ankle being healthy, but I think much more of it was time with the playbook and practice. I think one of his strengths is just running an offense and operating within it (timing, safe reads, etc). He might not have the physical skills or the mental fortitude to ever do so at an elite level, but he can be effective enough (until 3rd and long, etc).


I mostly agree with this 100% regarding his safe passing, as well as him not having the zip on his passes to sneak it into risky spots successfully. He did drop quite a few nice passes into spots surrounded by defenders successfully, though. That may or may not have had more to do with passing to a location rather than a guy, but whatever.

Let me clarify a little. What I meant was that the only thing Orton does at an elite or special level is his lack of INTs. Everything else is average or worse compared to the rest of the starting QBs in the NFL. Just how I see it.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 08:17 PM
So, at great length, it has been proven that Kyle Orton was OK in the long-pass department.

But, only 4 percent of Kyle Orton's pass attempts came over 31 yards. Similarly 20 percent of his passes were behind the line. He was pretty good on those too, 67-83 for 584 (80 percent completion percentage, if you're keeping track), with a touchdown, for a 102.7 rating.

So where's the problem?

Passes from 1-20 yards.

Of the top 25-rated passers in the NFL, Orton ranks dead last in completion percentage on passes from 1-20 yards, at 57 percent completed.

He was 200-351, a 57-percent completion percentage, with 2,224 yards, 12 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

His quarterback rating? 79.1, good for 21st among those 25 passers at that distance.

His 6.3 average yards per play from that distance? 23rd.

Tops in completion percentage from that distance? Drew Brees at 68 percent, Peyton Manning at 67.5 percent, Philip Rivers at 66.8 percent and Aaron Rodgers at 66 percent.

Want a better statistical comparison to a player that overall had similar numbers to Orton throughout the year? Jay Cutler, 62.6 percent completion percentage, 2,393 yards, 17 touchdowns and 11 interceptions with an 89 quarterback rating at that distance.

Pretty tough to refute, good work dude. :beer:

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 08:19 PM
One thing that seems evident is that Fox likes a methodical ball control,clock eating offense and veteren leadership at QB.
this is bad news for any bronco fan who feels it is a "given" that Orton is gone.
i would not be surprised if Fox wants Orton in the mix and possibly starting so he can focus his attention on beefing up our dreadfull :defense:

as boring as it may be....He seems to favor feilding a stout D and letting the offense win by making fewer mistakes than the other guys....that and a badass run game !!!!
i just hope it works better in denver than it did in carolina:shocked:

And his offense has been run the way it has in the past because he's NEVER had a franchise quarterback. :noidea:

topscribe
06-20-2011, 08:22 PM
And his offense has been run the way it has in the past because he's NEVER had a franchise quarterback. :noidea:

Hmmm . . . I would imagine it would also be because Fox believes in a strong defense and running game?

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 08:23 PM
Finally, some posting I can respect. I've been calling for documentation!

Welcome back, Mo! :welcome:

I only hope the coaches and Orton are taking note of it to get to the bottom of it . . .

There may be other factors involved, but I'll just leave it like that. Orton has
his strengths, and he has his weaknesses. I hope he's working on both of
them. I understand he's working out.

-----

You could only wish. Hopefully our coaches and front office are thinking of the ways we can get a deal done for him as soon as an agreement is done between the league and the players. You can watch him "work on his game" in Arizona and I will happily watch another QB take snaps here in Denver.

Orton is done in Denver, you're holding on to an obsession that he isn't, there is NO WAY that Elway is going to let Tebow waste away on the bench in the season before Andrew Luck comes out of college. Either way sitting Tebow another year makes ZERO sense. You have a lot invested in the kid and you need to know if he's your guy or not, Orton simply isn't part of the equation going forward. If you think he is you're not being realistic.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 08:24 PM
Hmmm . . . I would imagine it would also be because Fox believes in a strong defense and running game?

-----

So both things couldn't be true?

topscribe
06-20-2011, 08:26 PM
So both things couldn't be true?

Well, I did use the term "also," right?

Nonetheless, I wonder if Fox gives a lot of weight to the term "Franchise Quarterback"?

-----

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 08:35 PM
Well, I did use the term "also," right?

Nonetheless, I wonder if Fox gives a lot of weight to the term "Franchise Quarterback"?

-----

Why? Elway said after the draft that reason they paid so much attention to this year's crop of quarterbacks was because they had to see if that franchise guy was there. Also Elway said they would looking at next year's crop as well.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 08:42 PM
Well, I did use the term "also," right?

Nonetheless, I wonder if Fox gives a lot of weight to the term "Franchise Quarterback"?

-----

I bet he does... His only Super Bowl appearence as a Head Coach he got to watch one beat him and hoist the trophy.

He got to watch Terry Bradshaw up close and personal in Pittsburgh. He got to watch the Giants struggle without one in the late 1990's up close and personal. He got to watch his Carolina teams get beat because they lacked elite QB play despite good running games and defenses...

Even more, he works for arguably the greatest "franchise QB" in history and he knows it. I am thinking that Fox had better wake up to the idea of having an elite QB in Denver because I assure you that John Elway knows how important it is.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 08:45 PM
Why? Elway said after the draft that reason they paid so much attention to this year's crop of quarterbacks was because they had to see if that franchise guy was there. Also Elway said they would looking at next year's crop as well.

That was Elway. I wonder how Fox privately feels about it.

But I don't blame Elway if he sees strengths and weaknesses throughout this
present QB corps. Because that is what there are. Which seems largely what
you were getting at?

-----

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 08:46 PM
So the newest defense of Orton is "he has a good shot of starting because Fox doesn't care about franchise QBs anyway"? :laugh: come on man!

topscribe
06-20-2011, 08:48 PM
So the newest defense of Orton is "he has a good shot of starting because Fox doesn't care about franchise QBs anyway"? :laugh: come on man!

And then there is the occasional bash...er...contribution by Chaz . . . :D

-----

chazoe60
06-20-2011, 08:51 PM
And then there is the occasional bash...er...contribution by Chaz . . . :D

-----

I'm not bashing I'm just asking. It seems like that's the way the thread turned. People are now saying Fox doesn't need a franchise QB anyway and that is somehow a defense of Orton. Seems more like a concession to me.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 08:53 PM
I bet he does... His only Super Bowl appearence as a Head Coach he got to watch one beat him and hoist the trophy.

He got to watch Terry Bradshaw up close and personal in Pittsburgh. He got to watch the Giants struggle without one in the late 1990's up close and personal. He got to watch his Carolina teams get beat because they lacked elite QB play despite good running games and defenses...

Even more, he works for arguably the greatest "franchise QB" in history and he knows it. I am thinking that Fox had better wake up to the idea of having an elite QB in Denver because I assure you that John Elway knows how important it is.

I can't see why he wouldn't. It's a proven fact most of the teams that have won the Super Bowl have done so with a franchise quarterback.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 08:55 PM
That was Elway. I wonder how Fox privately feels about it.

But I don't blame Elway if he sees strengths and weaknesses throughout this
present QB corps. Because that is what there are. Which seems largely what
you were getting at?

-----

And Fox wasn't on board? I doubt it.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 09:02 PM
I'm not bashing I'm just asking. It seems like that's the way the thread turned. People are now saying Fox doesn't need a franchise QB anyway and that is somehow a defense of Orton. Seems more like a concession to me.

Well, I'm not "people." If I said anything to that effect, I don't remember it.

I was just wondering how Fox privately felt about the term "Franchise." Just
because he is on board with Elway doesn't mean he doesn't have his own
private opinions.

But I didn't intend to imply that Fox doesn't need a "Franchise" QB, whatever
that is, although I will say that his primary emphasis, before anything,
including QB, should be the defense. He can win with a strong defense and a
"good" QB, but he won't win with a "Franchise" QB and a last-place defense.
That just won't happen . . .

-----

Shananahan
06-20-2011, 09:04 PM
Who cares what he thinks about the term as it is argued about and discussed in the media and on message boards? The guy is no stranger to the NFL. He knows he needs a QB to win games, and I promise you he wants the best one he can get.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 09:24 PM
Who cares what he thinks about the term as it is argued about and discussed in the media and on message boards? The guy is no stranger to the NFL. He knows he needs a QB to win games, and I promise you he wants the best one he can get.

Yeah, after watching Aaron Rodgers do it this year without a running game and a line that was shaky early on, and looking back at all the Super Bowl winning teams that had great QB play, one would think that getting an elite QB would be goal #1 for almost any franchise.

T.K.O.
06-20-2011, 09:27 PM
Who cares what he thinks about the term as it is argued about and discussed in the media and on message boards? The guy is no stranger to the NFL. He knows he needs a QB to win games, and I promise you he wants the best one he can get.

to run HIS style of offense

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 09:31 PM
Yeah, after watching Aaron Rodgers do it this year without a running game and a line that was shaky early on, and looking back at all the Super Bowl winning teams that had great QB play, one would think that getting an elite QB would be goal #1 for almost any franchise.

That's actually a misconception about the Packers. They averaged 132 rushing yards per game in the final three regular season games and the four playoff games. That, had it lasted the entire season, would have been good enough for seventh overall in the league. One of the reasons their game improved and they won six in a row at the end of the season was the development of that run game.

That new, balanced attack got them to the Super Bowl and then Aaron Rodgers won them that Super Bowl. They were a truly balanced team.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 09:35 PM
Who cares what he thinks about the term as it is argued about and discussed in the media and on message boards? The guy is no stranger to the NFL. He knows he needs a QB to win games, and I promise you he wants the best one he can get.

Y'think?

-----

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 09:44 PM
That's actually a misconception about the Packers. They averaged 132 rushing yards per game in the final three regular season games and the four playoff games. That, had it lasted the entire season, would have been good enough for seventh overall in the league. One of the reasons their game improved and they won six in a row at the end of the season was the development of that run game.

That new, balanced attack got them to the Super Bowl and then Aaron Rodgers won them that Super Bowl. They were a truly balanced team.

As you said it wasn't until the end of the year. Rogers and the defense carried the team for most of the year. He was the second leading rusher on his team, was tied for first in rushing tds with four, and lead the team in ypc. Maybe things turn out differently if the running game doesn't catch fire at the end of the year.

Agent of Orange
06-20-2011, 09:48 PM
And then there is the occasional bash...er...contribution by Chaz . . . :D

-----

No, it was a quality comment which I enjoyed quite a lot.

Shananahan
06-20-2011, 09:48 PM
to run HIS style of offense
Well, obviously. You think that's Orton?

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 09:49 PM
As you said it wasn't until the end of the year. Rogers and the defense carried the team for most of the year. He was the second leading rusher on his team, was tied for first in rushing tds with four, and lead the team in ypc. Maybe things turn out differently if the running game doesn't catch fire at the end of the year?

Absolutely. They don't find their running game and Clay Matthews doesn't go nuts, and someone else is hoisting the trophy.

Now...ONCE THEY GOT THERE, Rodgers talent took over and he said, "hop on boys, I'm winning this."

Elways problem was he had to say that for every damn game, and when he got there his team was outclassed. The Packers' team wasn't outclassed, they were about on par with the Steelers. That's where Aaron Rodgers took over. He had that luxury.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 09:56 PM
Well, obviously. You think that's Orton?

As you implied, it's what Fox thinks that will count . . .

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 10:21 PM
That's actually a misconception about the Packers. They averaged 132 rushing yards per game in the final three regular season games and the four playoff games. That, had it lasted the entire season, would have been good enough for seventh overall in the league. One of the reasons their game improved and they won six in a row at the end of the season was the development of that run game.

That new, balanced attack got them to the Super Bowl and then Aaron Rodgers won them that Super Bowl. They were a truly balanced team.

They did get a LOT better towards the end of the year and in the playoffs, and without a true #1 RB, but they still finished the regular season ranked 24th in the NFL in rushing.

There aren't many teams in NFL history to rank that low in rushing and still win a Super Bowl.

The line really progressed this season for them but early on Rodgers was under a LOT of pressure and had no rushing attack to speak of to assist him, he literally carried that team on his shoulders offensively for MOST of the season.

Lonestar
06-20-2011, 10:22 PM
so your saying tha about 4 quality starters are better at the deep ball ......so top was wrong ?:confused:
and Orton is better than most ....but not good ?
got it !

Amazing concept unless your the top dog your not good enough for the broncos.
Not even John was the leader in all catagories.

Just not sure what is expected from our players.

In the past unless someone on the oline had help like three other guys they could not block for runs or pass protect.

But since it was zbs it was ok to be a weak sister one on one.

If the RB got a thousand yards between the 20s they were God.
If the qb made the pro bowl even if other QBs were better he was forever revered.

Now Orton until he was hurt lead the league in lots of stats including long balls. And he is a bum bec ause he did not finish the years as the leader.

Wow the hypocrisy.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 10:26 PM
As you implied, it's what Fox thinks that will count . . .

-----

Elway's opinion matters every bit as much.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 10:28 PM
Elway's opinion matters every bit as much.

Fox will name the starter. Period. Even Elway indicated that, and I am sure that
Fox is too old and experienced not to walk if the Elway decided to pull an
Al Davis/Jerry Jones on him - which I am sure Elway will not do . . .

-----

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 10:29 PM
Amazing concept unless your the top dog your not good enough for the broncos.
Not even John was the leader in all catagories.

Just not sure what is expected from our players.

In the past unless someone on the oline had help like three other guys they could not block for runs or pass protect.

But since it was zbs it was ok to be a weak sister one on one.

If the RB got a thousand yards between the 20s they were God.
If the qb made the pro bowl even if other QBs were better he was forever revered.

Now Orton until he was hurt lead the league in lots of stats including long balls. And he is a bum bec ause he did not finish the years as the leader.

Wow the hypocrisy.

I wet myself laughing......:D

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 10:32 PM
Fox will name the starter. Period. Even Elway indicated that, and I am sure that
Fox is too old and experienced not to walk if the Elway decided to pull an
Al Davis/Jerry Jones on him - which I am sure Elway will not do . . .

-----

I didn't say Elway would pull an Al Davis/Jerry Jones on Fox. Elway has final say on personnel matters from there Fox can set roster as he chooses.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 10:34 PM
If Orton is on the roster. It's Elway's preogative to trade him if wants to.

And you can bet your bottom dollar that if Elway trades him, it will be with Fox's blessing . . .

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 10:35 PM
Amazing concept unless your the top dog your not good enough for the broncos.
Not even John was the leader in all catagories.

Just not sure what is expected from our players.

In the past unless someone on the oline had help like three other guys they could not block for runs or pass protect.

But since it was zbs it was ok to be a weak sister one on one.

If the RB got a thousand yards between the 20s they were God.
If the qb made the pro bowl even if other QBs were better he was forever revered.

Now Orton until he was hurt lead the league in lots of stats including long balls. And he is a bum bec ause he did not finish the years as the leader.

Wow the hypocrisy.

Another EPIC post... You're on a roll LS, I'm almost convinced you were watching Boise State this year thinking it was Denver...

:laugh:

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 10:37 PM
And you can bet your bottom dollar that if Elway trades him, it will be with Fox's blessing . . .

-----

Probably but not necessarily.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 10:40 PM
Probably but not necessarily.

TOP is clinging to anything he can to convince himself that Kyle will be the starter next year... Anything...

Juriga72
06-20-2011, 10:42 PM
TOP is clinging to anything he can to convince himself that Kyle will be the starter next year... Anything...

IMHO....Top IS Kyle Orton......

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 10:44 PM
IMHO....Top IS Kyle Orton......

Yeah it's starting to look like that. I almost hope he is because that would be much less disturbing.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 10:50 PM
TOP is clinging to anything he can to convince himself that Kyle will be the starter next year... Anything...

If Orton is here he does have a very good chance of remaining starter. I don't think it's given he'll win out but he will have a chance.


IMHO....Top IS Kyle Orton......

Nah Top is tougher.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 10:59 PM
Probably but not necessarily.

C'mon, TX. Now, a successful franchise provides the coach with the players the
coach wants and needs. That is a part of being HC, knowing what personnel he
needs to achieve his purpose. You know that.

Elway is going to do everything he can to provide Fox with the personnel Fox
wants, and he is not going to take away anybody Fox doesn't want him to. That
is a no-brainer.

Orton might be traded, and he might be kept. We don't know which, for sure, of
course. But whatever they do, they will be in lockstep on it. You can be sure of
that because they said so. Elway is the boss, to be sure, but it begins with
what the coach believes he needs . . .

-----

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 11:07 PM
C'mon, TX. Now, a successful franchise provides the coach with the players the
coach wants and needs. That is a part of being HC, knowing what personnel he
needs to achieve his purpose. You know that.

Elway is going to do everything he can to provide Fox with the personnel Fox
wants, and he is not going to take away anybody Fox doesn't want him to. That
is a no-brainer.

Orton might be traded, and he might be kept. We don't know which, for sure, of
course. But whatever they do, they will be in lockstep on it. You can be sure of
that because they said so. Elway is the boss, to be sure, but it begins with
what the coach believes he needs . . .

-----

I'm not going to assume that Fox is convinced that Orton should be on the team. Fox was on board for in depth evaluation of this year's quarterback class. That action speaks volumes.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 11:13 PM
I'm not going to assume that Fox is convinced that Orton should be on the team. Fox was on board for in depth evaluation of this year's quarterback class. That action speaks volumes.

Well, of course not. I'm not sure he knows right now, or that Elway does. That is
something they will have to do together. My point is, when it comes to what Fox
wants, I am certain Elway will follow Fox's wishes as the Head Coach.

I'm not arguing for Orton by any stretch. I have maintained all along that I want
the best QB behind center, regardless of who that QB is, and regardless of what
some others used to say about me (I say "used to" because most of them are
on Ignore now).

-----

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 11:20 PM
Well, of course not. I'm not sure he knows right now, or that Elway does. That is
something they will have to do together. My point is, when it comes to what Fox
wants, I am certain Elway will follow Fox's wishes as the Head Coach.

I'm not arguing for Orton by any stretch. I have maintained all along that I want
the best QB behind center, regardless of who that QB is, and regardless of what
some others used to say about me (I say "used to" because most of them are
on Ignore now).

-----

The red indicates total and utter BS... :laugh:

You spend your time on here arguing the merits of Kyle Orton and doing nothing to support either Tebow or Quinn. It is painfully obvious you want Orton to start no matter what takes place.

As for the "ignore"... Oh no'z... Anything but that. :elefant::laugh:

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 11:39 PM
Well, of course not. I'm not sure he knows right now, or that Elway does. That is
something they will have to do together. My point is, when it comes to what Fox
wants, I am certain Elway will follow Fox's wishes as the Head Coach.

I'm not arguing for Orton by any stretch. I have maintained all along that I want
the best QB behind center, regardless of who that QB is, and regardless of what
some others used to say about me (I say "used to" because most of them are
on Ignore now).

-----

I agree with you that Elway and Fox work together but I don't think means Fox will get everything he wants. As far Orton is concerned there is way much tape on him for Elway and Fox not to know what kind of quarterback Kyle Orton is or isn't as the case may be. Besides that there hasn't been any change in the offensive coordinator who has seen Orton up close and personal for the last two years.

TXBRONC
06-20-2011, 11:42 PM
The red indicates total and utter BS... :laugh:

You spend your time on here arguing the merits of Kyle Orton and doing nothing to support either Tebow or Quinn. It is painfully obvious you want Orton to start no matter what takes place.

As for the "ignore"... Oh no'z... Anything but that. :elefant::laugh:

I sure hope a new CBA is done by early July so we can see how this thing is going to shake out.

BroncoStud
06-20-2011, 11:49 PM
Well, of course not. I'm not sure he knows right now, or that Elway does. That is
something they will have to do together. My point is, when it comes to what Fox
wants, I am certain Elway will follow Fox's wishes as the Head Coach.

I'm not arguing for Orton by any stretch. I have maintained all along that I want
the best QB behind center, regardless of who that QB is, and regardless of what
some others used to say about me (I say "used to" because most of them are
on Ignore now).

-----


I sure hope a new CBA is done by early July so we can see how this thing is going to shake out.

Me too.

topscribe
06-20-2011, 11:50 PM
I agree with you that Elway and Fox work together but I don't think means Fox will get everything he wants. As far Orton is concerned there is way much tape on him for Elway and Fox not to know what kind of quarterback Kyle Orton is or isn't as the case may be. Besides that there hasn't been any change in offensive coordinator who has seen Orton up close and personal for the last two years.

Let me repeat myself: This is not about Orton. Orton is only an example here.
This is about personnel. The Head Coach largely decides the personnel. Then the
FO goes out and gets it for him.

Now, they have said the QBs (and every other position) are going to compete
for the job. And the winner will start. That is what they said. Anything else is
something you have heard or read on a board such as this.

So let's stop making as if I am arguing for Orton. I am not arguing for Orton. It
is about how the starting personnel is decided at QB, RB, WR, TE, O-line, D-line,
LB, and DB. Fox will decide that. He is the Head Coach.

-----

MOtorboat
06-20-2011, 11:55 PM
Let me repeat myself: This is not about Orton. Orton is only an example here.
This is about personnel. The Head Coach largely decides the personnel. Then the
FO goes out and gets it for him.

Now, they have said the QBs (and every other position) are going to compete
for the job. And the winner will start. That is what they said. Anything else is
something you have heard or read on a board such as this.

So let's stop making as if I am arguing for Orton. I am not arguing for Orton. It
is about how the starting personnel is decided at QB, RB, WR, TE, O-line, D-line,
LB, and DB. Fox will decide that. He is the Head Coach.

-----

Well, you may not like it, and you may call it personal, but your posting history doesn't support this conclusion.

Shananahan
06-21-2011, 12:02 AM
C'mon, TX. Now, a successful franchise provides the coach with the players the
coach wants and needs. That is a part of being HC, knowing what personnel he
needs to achieve his purpose. You know that.

Elway is going to do everything he can to provide Fox with the personnel Fox
wants, and he is not going to take away anybody Fox doesn't want him to. That
is a no-brainer.

The Head Coach largely decides the personnel. Then the
FO goes out and gets it for him.
Coaches don't always make the final personnel decisions in successful franchises. I don't follow the Packers that closely, but my understanding is Ted Thompson builds the roster there, similar to A.J. Smith in San Diego, and has total control over it. I agree that a good coach should be the one whose opinion is valued more in the matter, but we've seen first-hand how a coach with that kind of power can fail in doing so. While people are speculating about what kind of a QB Fox wants, I would say that if he does indeed favor a safe, ball-control type of game manager then I do not want him in charge of picking his guy.

I went looking for some examples and found this (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=yasinskas_pat&id=3387219) article, which covers the relationship of coach and GM, and features parts about Fox and the Broncos. Kinda interesting in retrospect.

topscribe
06-21-2011, 12:09 AM
Coaches don't always make the final personnel decisions in successful franchises. I don't follow the Packers that closely, but my understanding is Ted Thompson builds the roster there, similar to A.J. Smith in San Diego, and has total control over it. I agree that a good coach should be the one whose opinion is valued more in the matter, but we've seen first-hand how a coach with that kind of power can fail in doing so. While people are speculating about what kind of a QB Fox wants, I would say that if he does indeed favor a safe, ball-control type of game manager then I do not want him in charge of picking his guy.

I went looking for some examples and found this (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=yasinskas_pat&id=3387219) article, which covers the relationship of coach and GM, and features parts about Fox and the Broncos. Kinda interesting in retrospect.

I don't think they are very interested in what you want. And neither am I,
frankly. I will take Fox's 18 years in coaching anytime.

But you have not made any point that contradicts mine. The GM makes the
final decisions on what personnel to obtain, but it is commensurate with what
the coach is trying to do on the field. In my 50+ years of watching and playing
football, that is the way it has been. When you see something different, you
will see chaos and a failed franchise. It's a no-brainer, really.

-----

topscribe
06-21-2011, 12:10 AM
Well, you may not like it, and you may call it personal, but your posting history doesn't support this conclusion.

And I don't give a shit what you think of my posting history. Not one little tiny shit.

-----

sneakers
06-21-2011, 12:11 AM
This should quiet those Kyle Orton trade rumors.

Orton — the Broncos’ starting quarterback if the season today — has been mentioned as possible trade bait with the quarterback-desperate Arizona Cardinals. He worked out Thursday with Cards star receiver Larry Fitzgerald in Minnesota.

Broncos’ receiver Eric Decker, who starred at the University of Minnesota, also joined Fitzgerald’s famous workouts Thursday.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2011/06/16/orton-throws-to-larry-fitzgerald/7664/



Larry Tweets with photo:

http://lockerz.com/s/111242911

It could be that people are looking waaay to much into things.

MOtorboat
06-21-2011, 12:18 AM
And I don't give a shit what you think of my posting history. Not one little tiny shit.

-----

Clearly.

Keep on keepin' on defending Orton and denying it...

topscribe
06-21-2011, 12:20 AM
Clearly.

Keep on keepin' on defending Orton and denying it...

And keep on stalking, flaming, and baiting me.

That seems to be what you enjoy . . .

----

MOtorboat
06-21-2011, 12:21 AM
And keep on stalking, flaming, and baiting me.

That seems to be what you enjoy . . .

----

You make it about you more than anyone else.

topscribe
06-21-2011, 12:23 AM
You make it about you more than anyone else.

No, YOU made it about me. I was discussing the issue. Then YOU appeared and made it about me.

Unless my name is Fox or Elway . . .

-----

MOtorboat
06-21-2011, 12:26 AM
No, YOU made it about me. I was discussing the issue. Then YOU appeared and made it about me.

Unless my name is Fox or Elway . . .

-----

Nope, if you read the thread correctly, you made your argument about you by stating "So let's stop making as if I am arguing for Orton. I am not arguing for Orton."

Its pretty par for the course...you take way too much time defending Orton. You're called on it. You claim you're not defending Orton. You're called on it.

And then you make it personal, by directing the spotlight on yourself.

You make it about you. Over and over and over.

topscribe
06-21-2011, 12:27 AM
Nope, if you read the thread correctly, you made your argument about you by stating "So let's stop making as if I am arguing for Orton. I am not arguing for Orton."

Its pretty par for the course...you take way too much time defending Orton. You're called on it. You claim you're not defending Orton. You're called on it.

And then you make it personal, by directing the spotlight on yourself.

You make it about you. Over and over and over.

Welcome to Ignore.

Now you can talk about me all you want, and I won't even give you an argument.
That's an advantage I have now, over when I was mod and I had to weather
your rage-driven, often drunken attacks.

(Some things just never change.)

-----

MOtorboat
06-21-2011, 12:28 AM
Welcome to Ignore.

-----

Tell us more about YOUR ignore list...

You make it about you more than anyone on this board...

Lonestar
06-21-2011, 01:22 AM
You can't use that logic (Orton outplayed the players we got with the two first round picks) to re-write history and claim Orton was a major part of the trade.

And you can't rewrite it and say that Orton was not a big part of the trade. Josh was looking for the best deal that included a potential starting QB. Even with Simms in the wings Josh tried to find the best value for the whinny bitch.

Lonestar
06-21-2011, 01:26 AM
How quickly we forget that McDaniels was talked out of trading Orton last offseason by Xanders.

n.

I must have missed that commentary by Joshina anderson.

It a link?