Cutler and the Jets

[Shazam!]

There is all kinds of talk going on here in NY in the papers and on sports talk radio, how 'The Jets are monitoring the deteriorating Cutler situation in Denver closely' and was reported in both local papers. Cutler is on the backpage of the NY Daily News and the entire back cover of the Post is Jay. I think NY is a pipe dream as they don't have the picks (#1, 17) as St. Loo or Detroit, or the personnel to offer as would say a Cleveland.

I thought this article was an interesting take from an obvious Jets fan, who normally would be desperate for a QB.



WHINY CUTLER WOULD BE BAD CALL
By Mark Cannizarro
The New York Post
March 17, 2009

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03172009/photos/sports057.jpg
FORGET IT! Disgruntled Bronco QB Jay Cutler has asked out of Denver - but bringing him to the Jets would be too costly, and he doesn't have the resume or mindset to make a trade worthwhile.

Be careful what you wish for, Jet fans.

The moment news of Bronco quarterback Jay Cutler demanding a trade out of Denver surfaced yesterday, Jet fans everywhere surely began dreaming of a Cutler trade to New York.

Is that a great idea?

Not really - unless the Jets could wrest Cutler from the Broncos for a very reasonable price, because Cutler is hardly a guarantee to bring the Jets to the Super Bowl.

The Jets, who do have serious questions at the quarterback position with three inexperienced and unproven starting candidates in Kellen Clemens, Brett Ratliff and Erik Ainge, should not mortgage their future for Cutler.

Granted, Cutler - who's only 25, is entering his fourth season (third as a starter) and has a cannon for an arm - has excellent upside.

But there are warts, too.

Cutler is inconsistent, and he has yet to lead the Broncos to the playoffs in his two full seasons as the starter - Denver went 7-9 in 2007 and 8-8 last season.

His mental makeup also has to be questioned after the ridiculous and immature way he handled the current situation in Denver.

When Cutler learned that new Denver head coach Josh McDaniels tried to trade for Matt Cassel, he threw a hissy fit.

Cutler acted with the kind of indignation that a player who's won championships might have acted if he learned he was being disrespected by his team.

What exactly has Cutler won in Denver that should make him so untouchable?

Cutler should get over himself and realize this is the way of the world. Teams are always trying to improve, and few players are untouchable.

McDaniels, first as the Patriot quarterbacks coach and then as offensive coordinator, coached and nurtured Cassel, and the fact he tried to bring him to Denver is too bad for Cutler.

The thin skin Cutler has displayed has to make you wonder how he might handle the pressures of quarterbacking in New York.

Given Cutler's recent childish behavior, how would he react if things don't work out with the Jets? How long might it be before he's trying to whine his way out of his next situation?

On the Jets' side, for all the doubters who don't believe in Clemens, ask yourself this question: Has he really been given a chance?

The answer is a resounding no.

Clemens started eight games in 2007, playing behind a porous offensive line, and he not only struggled but was nearly decapitated a few times.

Consider, too, that Chad Pennington, starting the other eight games that year, had similar struggles and poor numbers.

This is no guarantee Clemens or even Ratliff, on whom the team is said to be high, is the definitive answer for the Jets. But the Jets have to find out about them. And trading multiple high draft picks to get Cutler is a bad idea.

Be careful what you wish for, Jets fans
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03172009/sports/jets/whiny_cutler_would_be_bad_call_159924.htm

[tomjonesrocks]

Yahoo said pretty much the same thing in regards to the Jets this morning FWIW:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rumors/post/Jets-an-unlikely-landing-spot-for-Broncos-Cutle?urn=nfl,148557

Jets an unlikely landing spot for Broncos' Cutler

The drama that is the relationship between the Denver Broncos and starting quarterback Jay Cutler raged on in the Rockies Monday. While the quarterback-needy New York Jets seem like a likely landing spot for Cutler, they would be a long shot at best according to the New York Times.

The Times reported general manager Mike Tannenbaum was expected to do due diligence on Cutler, much like he did before the Jets obtained Brett Favre. Favre and Cutler are represented by the same agent.

The Times noted that if the Jets' interest in Cutler takes a more serious turn, they will most likely need to involve a third team in order to complete a trade. The Broncos will want a proven quarterback in return for Cutler, and the Jets do not have one on their roster.

The Broncos can trade Cutler, or force him to play out the six-year, $48 million deal he signed in 2006.

Source: New York Times

[Shazam!]

St. Loo, Detroit or Cleveland will offer Denver the best in return.

[claymore]

St. Loo, Detroit or Cleveland will offer Denver the best in return.

Unless it involves players. :D

[MadMax]

I agree it probably won't happen, but it brings a grin to my face to imagine Cutler getting eaten alive by the NY media.

[Dortoh]

My bet would be the lions, Bucs, 49ers, jets in that order

[tomjonesrocks]

My bet would be the lions, Bucs, 49ers, jets in that order

Surprised the Vikings aren't included. Cutler could be the missing piece there to a Super Bowl run--and reports are they're interested.

Because I don't think the Broncos will successfully get much for Cutler, I think he could go anywhere.

[Dortoh]

Surprised the Vikings aren't included. Cutler could be the missing piece there to a Super Bowl run--and reports are they're interested.

Because I don't think the Broncos will successfully get much for Cutler, I think he could go anywhere.

Oh damn good call. The vikes would be smart to make a play for Cutler no doubt about it.

[Den21vsBal19]

Oh damn good call. The vikes would be smart to make a play for Cutler no doubt about it.
I was just reading this blog on that very idea................


Cutler in Purple? ~ Star Tribune (http://blogs.startribune.com/vikingsblog/?p=2638)

March 17th, 2009 – 12:31 PM by Judd Zulgad
Fresh off a red-eye flight, Trent Dilfer was nice enough to call us to talk about the Jay Cutler situation and, in particular, what the disgruntled Broncos quarterback might be able to do if he ended up in Minnesota. Here is what the former NFL quarterback and current ESPN analyst had to say.

Q. What are your thoughts on Cutler in Minnesota?

A. “I would think it would be a sexy acquisition. I definitely think if you’re a Vikings fan and you’re starving for a marquee name at the quarterback position, Cutler is one of those young guns out there that brings great name recognition from the get go. So from a public relations standpoint, it would be a nice move. But I don’t think football wise it would add that much. I believe Jay Cutler is one of the top 12 quarterbacks in the NFL, but I would not put him in the top eight. He has a lot more to prove.

“That being said, when you have a dominant run game as the Vikings do with Adrian Peterson, you are going to have a lot of vertical passing chances throughout the game. That’s obviously his strength. His strength is play set-up off play action and his ability to put the ball down field. So from a schematical standpoint it does add another dimension to the offense that Sage [Rosenfels] or Tarvaris [Jackson] doesn’t necessarily bring from day one. But I don’t know if he’s any better than Sage at moving the ball down the field and playing on the critical downs.”

Q. So you aren’t that sold on Cutler?

A. “What takes a quarterback to the next level is not arm strength or mobility or any of that stuff. It’s the ability to play on critical downs. Manage third downs, or red zones or four-minute or two-minute situations. I think that Sage, Tarvaris and Jay Cutler are all in the same boat in that sense. None have proven they can do it a high level consistently. I don’t think because Cutler is a marquee name that he brings you anymore quality in those situations. That’s where he’s unproven and why I don’t feel the Broncos are crazy [in how they’ve handled things]. They are not. Cutler is still unproven in some of the situations that end up winning or losing [games for you].”

Q. Are you comfortable with the Vikings having Sage Rosenfels and Tarvaris Jackson battle for the starting spot?

A. “My feeling about the quarterback situation in Minnesota is I think competition is good. I’m one of the few guys who doesn’t have a problem with what they’re doing. Their team is built from the inside out both on the defensive and offensive side. That works. It worked for the Steelers, it worked for the Ravens, it worked for other teams. … I think if the quarterback understands, whoever wins the job, that he has to play critical downs better that is the key. It’s not about first and second down all the time. You have to make sure you’re playing well on third down and capitalize on red-zone opportunities. If the quarterback has that perspective on it, the Vikings are definitely Super Bowl contenders. Now, if the quarterback thinks that this is an opportunity to throw for 3,500 yards and have a 100 quarterback rating and takes the chances that you have to take to get to that spot, then the Vikings are going to be in the same boat they have been the last couple of years.”

Q. Do you feel the way Cutler has handled this situation has hurt him with other teams that might have been interested?

A. “This is not a glamorous answer but it doesn’t matter until the season starts. He has shown some hyper-sensitivity to being wanted and feels like he needs to be the guy and that makes you question if he has the mentality of wanting to earn everything he gets or wants it given to him. But, once again, it doesn’t matter if he goes out and plays at a high level. Then all of that goes away very quickly. He has the ability to erase any negative feelings about this situation by his performance.”

Q. What do you think it would take to get Cutler in trade?

A. “That’s hard because if you’re the Broncos you have to identify, ‘What do the Vikings have that meets our immediate needs and contractually we don’t have to make a huge investment?’ I would say [Chad] Greenway is a comparable football player to Jay Cutler. He’s a young rising star, a good football player but do they have that need? What is his contract status? So many things come into play.”

[Den21vsBal19]

There is all kinds of talk going on here in NY in the papers and on sports talk radio, how 'The Jets are monitoring the deteriorating Cutler situation in Denver closely' and was reported in both local papers. Cutler is on the backpage of the NY Daily News and the entire back cover of the Post is Jay. I think NY is a pipe dream as they don't have the picks (#1, 17) as St. Loo or Detroit, or the personnel to offer as would say a Cleveland.

I thought this article was an interesting take from an obvious Jets fan, who normally would be desperate for a QB.
Another article in the same vein............................this is what I meant in another thread about Cutler having to come in a work lights out for his own good, whether he stays or goes........................


Jets don't need this head case (http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jets/ny-spglaub176072392mar17,0,4230033.column?track=rss)

Conventional wisdom suggests the Jets are a quarterback away from being a legitimate Super Bowl contender. And now that the Broncos' Jay Cutler is kicking and screaming and trying to force his way out of Denver, there's the solution: Give up a first-round pick for a 25-year-old Pro Bowl quarterback and - poof! - the Jets are in the mix for Super Bowl XLIII.

Not so fast.

Sure, it's an intriguing proposition, and the Jets certainly will do their due diligence on Cutler, as they would with any other player potentially available in a trade. But keep in mind that Cutler has thrown up the biggest red flag in this whole thing. So the Jets must factor in his behavior regarding his set-to with Josh McDaniels over the new coach's admission that he considered - considered - trading for Matt Cassel, his former quarterback in New England.

Although there is fault to be found on both sides, Cutler's reaction to McDaniels' idea is a bit extreme. His demand to be traded because of it leads me to wonder whether he might react similarly if faced with other difficult circumstances with a new team and a new coach.

What if he took exception to the no-nonsense Rex Ryan, who wants to win by playing defense and running the ball? It worked this past season when the Ravens went to the AFC Championship Game with Ryan's defense and rookie quarterback Joe Flacco.

McDaniels still hopes to rectify the situation and keep his quarterback, but there's a chance that Cutler will continue to want out. If that's the case, the Jets surely will be among the teams to investigate.

That's what teams do. They check out their options. They listen to offers. That's what the Broncos were doing last month when the Cassel option surfaced. It happens all the time.

But Cutler chose to freak out that the Broncos would even ponder the idea that someone else might be worthy of consideration as their long-term quarterback. And now he wants to exit.

Let me ask you something: Is that how you want your quarterback to react?

Or do you want him to react by saying, be it publicly or to himself: So, Coach, you think someone else can do this job better than me? Fine. I'll prove you wrong, you son of a gun. Let's get to work.

Give me the latter, please.

Cutler would rather get the heck out of town than prove himself to his new coach. He's pouting because McDaniels didn't dismiss the idea of a trade involving a player he'd tutored with the Patriots the last several years. A player who never started a single game in college and who never pouted about being a backup to one of the greatest quarterbacks ever in Tom Brady. A player who took advantage of his first opportunity last year and went 11-4 in his first 15 starts since high school.

Cutler? He has publicly bashed AFC West rival Philip Rivers, once proclaimed that he has a better arm than John Elway (what?!) and produced a 17-20 record. And he has appeared in zero playoff games.

No, you cannot pin the losing record entirely on Cutler, because there are far too many extenuating circumstances that go into a football team's success. But you can't pronounce Cutler an elite quarterback either, not after only three seasons and an 87.1 career rating.

Besides, the way you judge a quarterback isn't simply by the way he plays; it's by the way he carries himself in front of his coaches and teammates. And the way he reacts in a crisis.

There's an "it" factor that goes beyond the touchdowns and the yards. And I just don't think Cutler has that "it" factor you need to win a championship.

Not in this town, anyway.

[BroncoJoe]

Pretty funny seeing how the national media - local media - is agreeing Cutler is a cry baby.

[claymore]

Pretty funny seeing how the national media - local media - is agreeing Cutler is a cry baby.

There are an equal number that think McDaniles is a Douche, and Bowlen is an idiot.

[BroncoJoe]

There are an equal number that think McDaniles is a Douche, and Bowlen is an idiot.

I'm talking more about the local news on a national basis. Seems like every article I've read, they caution the fans about bringing Cutler in.

[CoachChaz]

My area is pretty neutral on the whole thing since most are Dallas fans. Those that know I'm a Broncos fan come to me regularly and ask me the same question. "What the hell is up Cutler's ass?"

So, I think there is a consensus majority that see Cutler as a whiner. Granted they don't know all the details, but hey...neither do we.

[NameUsedBefore]

Anyone uses Cutler's record against him doesn't understand the scope of how historically bad the Broncos defense has been these past years.

[BroncoJoe]

Cardinals gave up a whopping 22 less points than we did.

How'd their season go?

Edited in orange - mistake.

[claymore]

Cardinals gave up a whopping 22 more points than we did.

How'd their season go?

As bad as ours. They didnt win the Super Bowl.

[CoachChaz]

As bad as ours. They didnt win the Super Bowl.

That's petty. I hope you arent serious

[sneakers]

Do we have to trade him?

[CoachChaz]

Do we have to trade him?

Hopefully not, but it doesnt seem like communication and interpretation are key factors on either side of this debacle

[NameUsedBefore]

Cardinals gave up a whopping 22 more points than we did.

How'd their season go?

That's impossible.

[BroncoJoe]

That's impossible.

Sorry, I meant to say 22 LESS points, not more.

My bad, but the point is still valid.

[NameUsedBefore]

Sorry, I meant to say 22 LESS points, not more.

My bad, but the point is still valid.

Not really.

Cardinals won 1-more game, going 9-7 in the ever so competitive NFC. The Patriots went 11-5 and missed the playoffs.

Cardinals defense actually showed up in the playoffs.

Cardinals have a few more weapons than the Broncos on offense, to say the least.

I'm gonna take a wild stab and say the Cardinals are also one of the many teams who have a better special teams too, but that's an assumption.

[BroncoJoe]

My point is, everyone talks about how great Cutler and our offense is/was. It really was just average when it came to SCORING. And, last I checked, you need to score points to win any game.

We did not score more than 20 points in seven games. Call our defense bad, which is accurate, but if our offense was so great, we should have losses like 34-37, not 41-7.

[CoachChaz]

Sorry, I meant to say 22 LESS points, not more.

My bad, but the point is still valid.

To a degree. 2 of our losses were by 7 points, so if we didnt give up those extra 22, then we'd have had a better record than the Cardinals and would have made the playoffs.

I only say it now because someone else undoubtedly will.

[BroncoJoe]

Cardinals have a few more weapons than the Broncos on offense, to say the least.

:confused:

[BroncoJoe]

To a degree. 2 of our losses were by 7 points, so if we didnt give up those extra 22, then we'd have had a better record than the Cardinals and would have made the playoffs.

I only say it now because someone else undoubtedly will.

Point is, if we have the high-powered, Cutler driven offense everyone thinks we have (since we were #2 in yards - not scoring, but YARDS) we should have won those games, right?

#2 in yards, #16 in points scored. Problem.

[NameUsedBefore]

My point is, everyone talks about how great Cutler and our offense is/was. It really was just average when it came to SCORING. And, last I checked, you need to score points to win any game.

We did not score more than 20 points in seven games. Call our defense bad, which is accurate, but if our offense was so great, we should have losses like 34-37, not 41-7.

Cardinals suffered similar losses.

But, again, they are in the NFC and have more weapons.

They also get turnovers. A brief google shows 13-INTs. That's more turnovers than we had total.

[BroncoJoe]

Cardinals suffered similar losses.

But, again, they are in the NFC and have more weapons.

They also get turnovers. A brief google shows 13-INTs. That's more turnovers than we had total.

And less than we gave up. The argument goes both ways. Cutler himself gave the ball away 24 times.

They (Cardinals) also scored a lot more points on offense than we did.

My point is this - Cutler is not the end all be all. We accumulated a lot of yards, but an average amount of points.

[claymore]

My point is, everyone talks about how great Cutler and our offense is/was. It really was just average when it came to SCORING. And, last I checked, you need to score points to win any game.

We did not score more than 20 points in seven games. Call our defense bad, which is accurate, but if our offense was so great, we should have losses like 34-37, not 41-7.

Red Zone. No Running Backs.

[claymore]

Didnt want to start a new thread, Im sure it will be done though.


MMQB Mail: Bucs, Jets make most sense if Broncos opt to trade Cutler

Hold off on the Jay Cutler trade talk -- for now. A source close to one team that has inquired with the Broncos about the unhappy quarterback tells me the Broncos have told them they're hanging on to Cutler and won't entertain discussions for him at this time.

That's a natural thing for the Broncos to say. They can't give Cutler or his agent, Bus Cook, a shred of evidence that they want to move him until coach Josh McDaniels is convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt the relationship with Cutler is not fixable. But it's probably more likely than unlikely the Broncos will find the situation can't be remedied, in my opinion. So I do expect Denver's tune to change sometime between now and the April 25 draft, and I do expect Cutler to be traded.

I expect the usual suspects to line up for Cutler -- Detroit, Cleveland, San Francisco, Tennessee and perhaps Carolina, though the Panthers, without a first-round pick in the 2009 draft, will be at a severe disadvantage. But I don't think he'll end up in one of those spots unless Detroit offers the 20th and 33rd picks of the draft, and a player sweetener, straight up for him.

I expect the most fervent suitors to be Tampa Bay and the New York Jets.

The Broncos pick 12th in the first round, right in the wheelhouse for a draft expected to be full of very good first-round prospects because of the influx of so many good juniors; I'm told that this draft could produce as many as 20 junior-eligible players drafted in the first round. Tampa Bay picks 19th in the first round. The Jets pick 17th.

Those teams know that acquiring Cutler, if he's dealt, will require that first-round pick, plus more. I think both teams would pay more. For the record, Tampa Bay has traded its second-round pick in the deal for Kellen Winslow, and so has only the 19th and 81st overall picks in the first three rounds. The Bucs may well have to involve a high 2010 draft choice to get a deal done. The Jets hold the 17th, 52nd and 76th picks in the first three rounds, much better ammo to get something done.

The Bucs are veterans in the chase for Cutler, having pursued him the day before free-agency began, dangling their first-round pick plus something in a package for Cutler. They also have an offensive scheme under new coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski that resembles the system Mike Shanahan ran in Denver, and a defensive coordinator, Jim Bates, who's the father of Cutler's offensive coordinator last year in Denver, Jeremy Bates. Cutler and Jeremy Bates were close, and those close to Cutler believe the Broncos' decision to not retain Bates is a part of his dissatisfaction.

The Jets proved last year they'll stop at nothing to get what they want. What they wanted last year was Brett Favre, who turned out to be a one-year fix that cost New York its third-round pick in the 2009 draft. What they'll want this year would be, they hope, a 10-year fix, and would cost far, far more. Owner Woody Johnson and GM Mike Tannenbaum will not be intimidated by the price for Cutler. I think New York, at the end of the day, will be tempted to pay more for Cutler than anyone else.

Would Denver be swayed by a package of first- and second-round picks, plus either of the young New York quarterbacks -- Brett Ratliff or Kellen Clemens? I believe it may come to that.

But first, you can bet McDaniels will do everything in his power to sit down alone with Cutler sometime in the next couple of weeks. If that happens, he might be able to save the relationship. But I don't think so.



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/17/mail/

[BroncoJoe]

Red Zone. No Running Backs.

Red Zone. Offensive turnovers.

[claymore]

Red Zone. Offensive turnovers.

We accomplished allot offensively with all the turnover of running backs.

Admit this to me Joe.

[NameUsedBefore]

Turnovers and playing from behind are typically linked. IIRC, it was 12/18 INTs for Jay when playing from a deficit. I'm not making excuses for him, but it's not like he had everything going his way, both offensively, defensively, special teams, etc.



But first, you can bet McDaniels will do everything in his power to sit down alone with Cutler sometime in the next couple of weeks. If that happens, he might be able to save the relationship. But I don't think so.

"Everything in his power".

McDaniels has the charisma of a carp.

[GEM]

Thanks....now I have the stupid Elton John song in my head. :yardog:

[Dortoh]

My point is, everyone talks about how great Cutler and our offense is/was. It really was just average when it came to SCORING. And, last I checked, you need to score points to win any game.

We did not score more than 20 points in seven games. Call our defense bad, which is accurate, but if our offense was so great, we should have losses like 34-37, not 41-7.

Crap I'm going to have to do a 180 on this one. While I think Cutler is being a bitch I blame our offensive troubles squarely on the shoulders of the defense. The offense was forced to push and attempt to score early and often. When you try to play like that you will make mistakes and it will end badly.


That and 7 RB's on IR

oh and a very speical ed speical teams.

[BroncoJoe]

Turnovers and playing from behind are typically linked. IIRC, it was 12/18 INTs for Jay when playing from a deficit. I'm not making excuses for him, but it's not like he had everything going his way, both offensively, defensively, special teams, etc.

Check the games. There were only a few blowouts, or where we were behind by a substantial amount by 1/2 time or even after the third quarter.


Crap I'm going to have to do a 180 on this one. While I think Cutler is being a bitch I blame our offensive troubles squarely on the shoulders of the defense. The offense was forced to push and attempt to score early and often. When you try to play like that you will make mistakes and it will end badly.


That and 7 RB's on IR

oh and a very speical ed speical teams.

Blame the coaching, I guess. We were 2nd in yards per carry, 12th in yards, yet 28th in attempts. See my above comment, and explain why we abandoned the running game.

Shanahan was coddling Cutler, IMO.

[BroncoJoe]

Just checked. In our losses, here's where we stood at 1/2 time or at the end of the 3rd Q.

KC -3 @ end of the 3rd Q (2 INT's, 2 Fumbles)
Jags -3 @ the 1/2 (1 int, 2 fumbles)
NE - Blowout (2 int, 3 fumbles)
MIA -6 @ end of the third (3 int)
OAK -7 @ end of the third (1 int, 1 fumble)
CAR - Blowout (1 int, 1 fumble)
BUF +4 @ end of the third (1 int [CRITICAL], 1 fumble)
SD - Blowout (2 int)

Anyone else see a pattern here?

[BroncoJoe]

P.S. Only three of our 18 fumbles were by our RB's.

Between Cutler and Marshall, they combined for 27 of our 36 turnovers.

[claymore]

P.S. Only three of our 18 fumbles were caused by our RB's.

Weigman really screwed us this year. :tsk:

[Shazam!]

The NYJ is a pipe dream. They pick 17th and have nothing to give in terms of a viable option at QB. Not happening.

[bullis26]

Cleveland?

[Denver27og]

if i gave it my all as a QB for this franchise... ide be mad too.. i think anyone would be upset.. crybaby or not... i stand by my QB... wtf

[lex]

There is all kinds of talk going on here in NY in the papers and on sports talk radio, how 'The Jets are monitoring the deteriorating Cutler situation in Denver closely' and was reported in both local papers. Cutler is on the backpage of the NY Daily News and the entire back cover of the Post is Jay. I think NY is a pipe dream as they don't have the picks (#1, 17) as St. Loo or Detroit, or the personnel to offer as would say a Cleveland.

I thought this article was an interesting take from an obvious Jets fan, who normally would be desperate for a QB.

They dont have the ammo without a third team.

[skycoyote]

Rex Ryan and Jay Cutler would be a beautiful thing--even if it is in NY. Should of's, Would of's, Could of's.

[Shazam!]

Quinn and a 1st.

[lex]

Quinn and a 1st.

Thats not enough.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Not nearly enough. Quinn, first-rounder and a third rounder would be fine with me. However, I'm looking for a trade like this:

Every pick a team has got. That's right bitches. Give us all your picks. You get the diabetic malcontent QB. How does that sound? Great. Awesome. Do it.

[lex]

Not nearly enough. Quinn, first-rounder and a third rounder would be fine with me. However, I'm looking for a trade like this:

Every pick a team has got. That's right bitches. Give us all your picks. You get the diabetic malcontent QB. How does that sound? Great. Awesome. Do it.

I would go with something like this: Cutler for Brady Quinn, their first in 2009 (#5) and Shaun Rogers. Otherwise, Im sticking with what Pat Kirwan said.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

I'd take a first this year, a third this year and a conditional pick that goes up to like a first or a second in 2010. I think that's close to what Pat said. First rounder, third rounder and a quality player though I'd be cool with.

[lex]

I'd take a first this year, a third this year and a conditional pick that goes up to like a first or a second in 2010. I think that's close to what Pat said. First rounder, third rounder and a quality player though I'd be cool with.


Yeah, he said a player and 3600 points.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Yeah, he said a player and 3600 points.

Dude, I think we're gonna molest a team big time. So many people seem to be interested, if we don't come away with something rapetacular I'll be severely disappointed. May drop out of school.

[skycoyote]

Dude, I think we're gonna molest a team big time. So many people seem to be interested, if we don't come away with something rapetacular I'll be severely disappointed. May drop out of school.

You mean like Herschel Walker rapetacular?:lol:

[Requiem / The Dagda]

You mean like Herschel Walker rapetacular?:lol:

If that happened I would quit school because it'd be so awesome projecting the draft. I hope it happens.

[lex]

If that happened I would quit school because it'd be so awesome projecting the draft. I hope it happens.

Or put another way: it would be so awesome projecting that theyd have to shut down traffic and start wearing goggles.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Can you imagine having all those picks? I'd go to Hell for it.

[lex]

Can you imagine having all those picks? I'd go to Hell for it.

Yeah, the only thing that would suck about it is that Cleveland has the better player and Detroit has the better combination of picks. Id kind of rather have Curry if we're going to make a move like this. Curry is the least risky guy in the entire draft but having said that, I wish this were happening in a year where there were better skill position players so to have more to choose from. Im not enamored with Crabtree. I think Orakpo and Brown could be ok but there is a bust factor. But having said that, if we were to get Quinn, Rogers, and the #5, you could start justifying a number of picks at 12 like Maualuga, Wells/Moreno, Jenkins, etc., because NT would have been addressed along with Jack LB.

[NameUsedBefore]

Dream just wants draft picks. Loads and loads of 'em. I do not trust his intentions!

[Foochacho]

Yeah, the only thing that would suck about it is that Cleveland has the better player and Detroit has the better combination of picks. Id kind of rather have Curry if we're going to make a move like this. Curry is the least risky guy in the entire draft but having said that, I wish this were happening in a year where there were better skill position players so to have more to choose from. Im not enamored with Crabtree. I think Orakpo and Brown could be ok but there is a bust factor. But having said that, if we were to get Quinn, Rogers, and the #5, you could start justifying a number of picks at 12 like Maualuga, Wells/Moreno, Jenkins, etc., because NT would have been addressed along with Jack LB.

Lex you could get your franchise rb at 12.

[lex]

Lex you could get your franchise rb at 12.

Yeah, they could but it doesnt seem likely with all the mediocre scrubs they brought in already. The one thing I am absolutely averse to in any circumstance is draftin a QB with a first round pick. If McDaniels feels he can get away with running off a first round talent like Cutler, then let him try to win with a low round pick like Cassel again. Of course, Cassel had been in NE for 4 years but, still, McDaniels needs to live up to his own ego.

[bud]

Hate to tell you this bare hard cold fact... BUT...

The national media doesn't like the Denver Broncos. They never liked the Denver Broncos. Count how many of our boys are in the Hall of Fame... They were saying Elway wasn't good enough for the Hall of Fame as late as 1996. At that time, Dan Marino was already considered to be a "slam dunk" for the Hall. (Marino never won a single Super Bowl. In fact, he struggled to even get to the big game.)

The local media?... Did you know that there isn't a sports writer at the Post that was born and raised in Denver Colorado?... Maybe kids don't know that. They aren't from Denver. They just get paid to write about sports here...

None of the media really cares what happens to the Denver Broncos. They don't care if the team loses ballgames. They don't care if the Broncos have a quarterback--or not.

In fact, many members of the national media continue to openly mock the Denver Broncos... and our list of Hall of Fame quality players.

Think about that before you go around swallowing their opinions. There isn't a voice in the national media--or at the Post--that honestly gives a darn.

Sorry to burst your bubbles. Most of America still hates that stupid orange expansion club. "Those cowtown hicks must have gotten lucky or something. They couldn't possibly play with real football teams like Oakland and Pittsburgh." They are STILL thinking it. They STILL believe that.

Remember that. They don't care about the Broncos.

[lex]

Hate to tell you this bare hard cold fact... BUT...

The national media doesn't like the Denver Broncos. They never liked the Denver Broncos. Count how many of our boys are in the Hall of Fame... They were saying Elway wasn't good enough for the Hall of Fame as late as 1996. At that time, Dan Marino was already considered to be a "slam dunk" for the Hall. (Marino never won a single Super Bowl. In fact, he struggled to even get to the big game.)

The local media?... Did you know that there isn't a sports writer at the Post that was born and raised in Denver Colorado?... Maybe kids don't know that. They aren't from Denver. They just get paid to write about sports here...

None of the media really cares what happens to the Denver Broncos. They don't care if the team loses ballgames. They don't care if the Broncos have a quarterback--or not.

In fact, many members of the national media continue to openly mock the Denver Broncos... and our list of Hall of Fame quality players.

Think about that before you go around swallowing their opinions. There isn't a voice in the national media--or at the Post--that honestly gives a darn.

Sorry to burst your bubbles. Most of America still hates that stupid orange expansion club. "Those cowtown hicks must have gotten lucky or something. They couldn't possibly play with real football teams like Oakland and Pittsburgh." They are STILL thinking it. They STILL believe that.

Remember that. They don't care about the Broncos.

Even though he's not yet a flower, he speaks the truth. Its amazing how Jay is meh when he is with the Broncos but as soon as he might land on the Jets, he has this buzz about him. It gets old.

[bud]

My point is, everyone talks about how great Cutler and our offense is/was. It really was just average when it came to SCORING. And, last I checked, you need to score points to win any game.

We did not score more than 20 points in seven games. Call our defense bad, which is accurate, but if our offense was so great, we should have losses like 34-37, not 41-7.

You need to start actually watching Broncos football games to post here.

This site is for real fans that watch the ballgames.

Real fans know what went wrong in the red zone last season.

Do you really need an explanation of the value of the run game at the goal line? Do you really need an explanation of the dangers of throwing at a short field?

Jeezus. That should have been obvious. Even my wife knows why it's risky to throw at a short field.

Please don't post any more analysis.

But, I will certainly enjoy reading your useless/pathetic attempts to flame this post.

I own you right now.

I will enjoy laughing at you, though. Please, fire away.

[slim]

You need to start actually watching Broncos football games to post here.



Said the man with 10 posts.

Who the **** do you think you are?

Everyone is welcome to post here. If you don't like it, then **** off.

[bud]

Said the man with 10 posts.

Who the **** do you think you are?

Everyone is welcome to post here. If you don't like it, then **** off.

adhominem ad hom'i·nem' adv.
Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason.

By the way, I'm no stranger. Ask around.

[Zweems56]

You need to start actually watching Broncos football games to post here.

This site is for real fans that watch the ballgames.

Real fans know what went wrong in the red zone last season.

Do you really need an explanation of the value of the run game at the goal line? Do you really need an explanation of the dangers of throwing at a short field?

Jeezus. That should have been obvious. Even my wife knows why it's risky to throw at a short field.

Please don't post any more analysis.

But, I will certainly enjoy reading your useless/pathetic attempts to flame this post.

I own you right now.

I will enjoy laughing at you, though. Please, fire away.

I forgot how big of an ******* you are since the freak closed down. Its reopened under broncosfreaks.com. Please go back.

[Den21vsBal19]

Real fans know what went wrong in the red zone last season.

Do you really need an explanation of the value of the run game at the goal line? Do you really need an explanation of the dangers of throwing at a short field?


So how do you explain the previous two years? I'm not buying into that argument completely, as we have been 7th, 17th, 21st & 16th.............

Pretty yardage between the 20s doesn't alter the fact that we've distinctly average or worse with Jay at the helm when it comes to actually scoring points...................and that is the purpose of the offense, points, not yards

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Bud is certainly no Bill Devaroe. I am glad he is here though.

[BroncoJoe]

You need to start actually watching Broncos football games to post here.

This site is for real fans that watch the ballgames.

Real fans know what went wrong in the red zone last season.

Do you really need an explanation of the value of the run game at the goal line? Do you really need an explanation of the dangers of throwing at a short field?

Jeezus. That should have been obvious. Even my wife knows why it's risky to throw at a short field.

Please don't post any more analysis.

But, I will certainly enjoy reading your useless/pathetic attempts to flame this post.

I own you right now.

I will enjoy laughing at you, though. Please, fire away.

Uh, Bud, how about you watch some of the games and get back to me. Explain this:


Just checked. In our losses, here's where we stood at 1/2 time or at the end of the 3rd Q.

KC -3 @ end of the 3rd Q (2 INT's, 2 Fumbles)
Jags -3 @ the 1/2 (1 int, 2 fumbles)
NE - Blowout (2 int, 3 fumbles)
MIA -6 @ end of the third (3 int)
OAK -7 @ end of the third (1 int, 1 fumble)
CAR - Blowout (1 int, 1 fumble)
BUF +4 @ end of the third (1 int [CRITICAL], 1 fumble)
SD - Blowout (2 int)

Anyone else see a pattern here?

[bud]

Yes. I do see a pattern.

You didn't mention how many rushing yards the Broncos had. You didn't mention how much offense Cutler had created.

And you didn't mention a running back that was selling cell phones. I remember saying this particular running back was soft. I saw it his rookie year. Nevertheless, in all the youthful wisdom (so common these boards) I was told that Bell would replace and exceed Portis' success in Denver.

You also didn't name the running backs that started the ballgames.. And you didn't mention if the back that started each game could still walk (without crutches) by the time the 4th quarter rolled around.

So, yes... I do see a pattern

[BroncoJoe]

Yes. I do see a pattern.

You didn't mention how many rushing yards the Broncos had. You didn't mention how much offense Cutler had created.

And you didn't mention a running back that was selling cell phones. I remember saying this particular running back was soft. I saw it his rookie year. Nevertheless, in all the youthful wisdom (so common these boards) I was told that Bell would replace and exceed Portis' success in Denver.

You also didn't name the running backs that started the ballgames.. And you didn't mention if the back that started each game could still walk (without crutches) by the time the 4th quarter rolled around.

So, yes... I do see a pattern

*sigh*

2nd in yards per carry.
12th in total rushing yards.

28th in attempts.

In our eight losses, we were only being blown out in three of them. No reason to abandon the running game. And the cell phone salesman you referred to performed just fine when called upon, 44 attempts, 249 yards, 5.7 ypc and two touchdowns. Oh, and ZERO turnovers.

We had other RB's on the sideline. To completely abandon the running game was (as Zam would say) STOOPID.

P.S. Ranked 14th in rushing TD's. Not terrible either.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Get him Joe.

[Watchthemiddle]

Uh, Bud, how about you watch some of the games and get back to me. Explain this:

Powned

[TXBRONC]

Cardinals gave up a whopping 22 less points than we did.

How'd their season go?

Edited in orange - mistake.

And what was their giveway/takeaway ratio? How many sacks did they get? How did their special teams perform? Did their defense actually start playing well at some point?

[Watchthemiddle]

If cutler cant handle the one Denver media he would be eaten alive in NY. He would litterally cry at pressers

[bud]

Wow. What a newsflash.

Slashing style runners have higher rushing averages?

Bigger gains from draw plays and from running out of spread formations between the 20's?

Amazing.

What a newsflash. We are all enlightened...

Next, you can tell us there isn't as climate change going on... or, you can tell us that the big bang didn't happen.

I don't put my conclusions ahead of my observations. I watched the Broncos struggle in short yardage because virtually every back we used could be ankle tackled by an oompa loompa.

Mediocre slashers that crumple at the first hint of contact can't get a couple tough yards wen the team needs them most.

Shanahan called passing plays in short yardage because he knew the running game wasn't getting it done.

Everybody knows Denver struggled to run the ball in short yardage last season. That's why teams left nickel backs in the game inside the red zone... Theories to the contrary come from fringe crackpots with their own hidden agendas. (That's you Joe)

Have a good one.

[claymore]

Wow. What a newsflash.

Slashing style runners have higher rushing averages?

Bigger gains from draw plays and from running out of spread formations between the 20's?

Amazing.

What a newsflash. We are all enlightened...

Next, you can tell us there isn't as climate change going on... or, you can tell us that the big gang didn't happen.

I don't put my conclusions ahead of my observations. I watched the Broncos struggle in short yardage because virtually every back we used could be ankle tackled by an oompa loompa.

Mediocre slashers that crumple at the first hint of contact can't get a couple tough yards wen the team needs them most.

Shanahan called passing plays in short yardage because he knew the running game wasn't getting it done.

Everybody knows Denver struggled to run the ball in short yardage last season. That's why teams left nickel backs in the game inside the red zone... Theories to the contrary come from fringe crackpots with their agendas. (That's you Joe)

Have a good one.

Dont take shit from Joe. I dont even know what you 2 are arguing about, but I know you are right.

[omac]

Wow. What a newsflash.

Slashing style runners have higher rushing averages?

Bigger gains from draw plays and from running out of spread formations between the 20's?

Amazing.

What a newsflash. We are all enlightened...

Next, you can tell us there isn't as climate change going on... or, you can tell us that the big bang didn't happen.

I don't put my conclusions ahead of my observations. I watched the Broncos struggle in short yardage because virtually every back we used could be ankle tackled by an oompa loompa.

Mediocre slashers that crumple at the first hint of contact can't get a couple tough yards wen the team needs them most.

Shanahan called passing plays in short yardage because he knew the running game wasn't getting it done.

Everybody knows Denver struggled to run the ball in short yardage last season. That's why teams left nickel backs in the game inside the red zone... Theories to the contrary come from fringe crackpots with their own hidden agendas. (That's you Joe)

Have a good one.

Great post! :salute:

If someone still has the Atlanta game, in either the 1st or 2nd quarter, the commentators flashed a stat that the Broncos were ranked 6th in the league in red zone conversion. That was already the 10th game of the season, or 2/3 of the season. Also check out games where we scored a lot of points, and you'll see either Pittman, Torain, or Hillis scoring rushing TDs. That only further stresses the importance of getting balance from your rushing offense and scoring.

[bud]

Its ok to blame Jay Cutler for things he actually has done. His attitude has been lousy.

But, its silly when people start making things up...

Don't piss down my back and tell me its raining.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03182009/sports/jets/boomer__jets_gotta_go_jay_walkin_160143.htm

March 18, 2009 --

The Jay Cutler-to-the-Jets debate continues to rage.

Weighing in yesterday was former Jet quarterback Boomer Esiason, whose opinion was direct and strong: Go get the disgruntled Bronco QB at almost any cost.

"I'm telling you, if I could get this kid, I would go guns a-blazing and try to get him," Esiason said.

"I don't know what it would take, but he's a kid that can play here for the next 10 years. This is not Brett Favre, a one-year Band-Aid. This is a totally different story.

"This is a kid who, if he does get traded - which I think is going to happen - you're getting him . . . smack dab in midst of his prime.

"He's not going to get any better than he will be in the next five or six years."

Esiason, an NFL studio analyst for CBS Sports and a morning host on WFAN, said he's certain the Jets are eyeing Cutler.

"I know [Jet GM] Mike Tannenbaum, by virtue of the fact that he brought Brett Favre here, I guarantee you he is absolutely all over this, 100 percent," Esiason said.

Asked, if he's the GM, what he would give the Broncos in a trade for Cutler, Esiason said, "I don't know what it would take. I'm not giving up two No. 1 draft choices for him. A No. 1 and [CB] Darrelle Revis? That ain't happening, so forget that.

"You have to remember you're also doing Denver a favor because he's a disgruntled player. There's also talk of Buffalo possibly trading Trent Edwards for Cutler. If I'm a Jet fan, I want Jay Cutler. Do I want Kellen Clemens or Jay Cutler? I'll take Jay Cutler over Kellen Clemens, believe me."

The Jets yesterday matched the one-year, $1.5 million offer sheet to backup S Abram Elam, who signed the offer seven days ago with the Browns.

The Jets had signed Elam, a restricted free agent, to a one-year, $1.01 million tender before the Browns extended the offer sheet.

The Jets, who've watched Eric Mangini's Browns sign away four of their free agents in recent weeks - DT C.J. Mosley, CB Hank Poteat and LBs David Bowens and Eric Barton - had until yesterday to match the offer.

Jet RB Thomas Jones appears to be making a statement by skipping the team's voluntary offseason workout program for the second consecutive day. Jones, who won the AFC rushing title last season and went to the Pro Bowl, wants a new contract, according to sources close to him. He has two remaining years on his four-year, $20M pact.

mark.cannizzaro@nypost.com

[BroncoJoe]

Bud, my point is, if the offense performed better and/or more consistently, perhaps our defense wouldn't have been on the field so much, and the stats wouldn't be so horrendous. Having the 2nd "ranked" offense in yards doesn't mean shit when we were ranked 16th in scoring. Also, 27 turnovers from our two "marquee" players is unacceptable.

We could have run the ball in the redzone. Shanahan (who I am/was a big fan of) decided not to. Give me a break about all the backs going down. We always had another one on the sideline, and hasn't the mantra in Denver been "anyone can run in that system"?

Go ahead and pout again, and tell me I'm not a Broncos fan or I don't watch games. You, and your opinion mean nothing to me.

[Den21vsBal19]

Bud, my point is, if the offense performed better and/or more consistently, perhaps our defense wouldn't have been on the field so much, and the stats wouldn't be so horrendous. Having the 2nd "ranked" offense in yards doesn't mean shit when we were ranked 16th in scoring. Also, 27 turnovers from our two "marquee" players is unacceptable.

We could have run the ball in the redzone. Shanahan (who I am/was a big fan of) decided not to. Give me a break about all the backs going down. We always had another one on the sideline, and hasn't the mantra in Denver been "anyone can run in that system"?

Go ahead and pout again, and tell me I'm not a Broncos fan or I don't watch games. You, and your opinion mean nothing to me.
I'd much rather be 16th in yards, and 2nd in scoring ;)

Fancy yards between the 20s means absolutley jack if you can't finish

[bud]

That was the press saying that any back was a star in swooshes.

Ironically, that really got started when Olandis Gary was carrying the rock... The same Gary that went airbourne (for no apparent reason) in short yardage. He was no Marcus Allen; Gary got stuffed every time he jumped... He ran hard after he had a few yards to get some steam; but he didn't have instant power and burst from the first step. That was exclusive to Davis and Portis.

Year after year, Broncos fans have been asking who will take over (and be the feature back) since Portis' departure.

There is a reason for that.

Last year was particularly cruel. Slashing backs don't get tough yards.

But, you can't talk sense to a crackpot. You win. Cutler was on the grassy knoll. Crackpot conspiracy theories don't add up.

[topscribe]

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03182009/sports/jets/boomer__jets_gotta_go_jay_walkin_160143.htm

March 18, 2009 --

The Jay Cutler-to-the-Jets debate continues to rage.

Weighing in yesterday was former Jet quarterback Boomer Esiason, whose opinion was direct and strong: Go get the disgruntled Bronco QB at almost any cost.

"I'm telling you, if I could get this kid, I would go guns a-blazing and try to get him," Esiason said.

"I don't know what it would take, but he's a kid that can play here for the next 10 years. This is not Brett Favre, a one-year Band-Aid. This is a totally different story.

"This is a kid who, if he does get traded - which I think is going to happen - you're getting him . . . smack dab in midst of his prime.

"He's not going to get any better than he will be in the next five or six years."

Esiason, an NFL studio analyst for CBS Sports and a morning host on WFAN, said he's certain the Jets are eyeing Cutler.

"I know [Jet GM] Mike Tannenbaum, by virtue of the fact that he brought Brett Favre here, I guarantee you he is absolutely all over this, 100 percent," Esiason said.

Asked, if he's the GM, what he would give the Broncos in a trade for Cutler, Esiason said, "I don't know what it would take. I'm not giving up two No. 1 draft choices for him. A No. 1 and [CB] Darrelle Revis? That ain't happening, so forget that.

"You have to remember you're also doing Denver a favor because he's a disgruntled player. There's also talk of Buffalo possibly trading Trent Edwards for Cutler. If I'm a Jet fan, I want Jay Cutler. Do I want Kellen Clemens or Jay Cutler? I'll take Jay Cutler over Kellen Clemens, believe me."

The Jets yesterday matched the one-year, $1.5 million offer sheet to backup S Abram Elam, who signed the offer seven days ago with the Browns.

The Jets had signed Elam, a restricted free agent, to a one-year, $1.01 million tender before the Browns extended the offer sheet.

The Jets, who've watched Eric Mangini's Browns sign away four of their free agents in recent weeks - DT C.J. Mosley, CB Hank Poteat and LBs David Bowens and Eric Barton - had until yesterday to match the offer.

Jet RB Thomas Jones appears to be making a statement by skipping the team's voluntary offseason workout program for the second consecutive day. Jones, who won the AFC rushing title last season and went to the Pro Bowl, wants a new contract, according to sources close to him. He has two remaining years on his four-year, $20M pact.

mark.cannizzaro@nypost.com

Which ought to send a message to Bowlen and McDaniels: "If I could keep this
kid, I would go guns a-blazing and try to keep him."

-----

[BroncoJoe]

But, you can't talk sense to a crackpot.

Thanks for making my point crystal clear.

[TXBRONC]

Bud, my point is, if the offense performed better and/or more consistently, perhaps our defense wouldn't have been on the field so much, and the stats wouldn't be so horrendous. Having the 2nd "ranked" offense in yards doesn't mean shit when we were ranked 16th in scoring. Also, 27 turnovers from our two "marquee" players is unacceptable.

We could have run the ball in the redzone. Shanahan (who I am/was a big fan of) decided not to. Give me a break about all the backs going down. We always had another one on the sideline, and hasn't the mantra in Denver been "anyone can run in that system"?

Go ahead and pout again, and tell me I'm not a Broncos fan or I don't watch games. You, and your opinion mean nothing to me.

Not hardly Joe. I know you want pin it on Jay and the offesne but that just isn't going to cut it no5 when this defense was allowing opposing offense to convert 60% of their third downs. In the Jaguar game they allowed Garrard to complete 70% of his freaking passes. Also how take away did our defense get for our offense? It was somewhere neighborhood of 15 total.

[BroncoJoe]

Not hardly Joe. I know you want pin it on Jay and the offesne but that just isn't going to cut it no5 when this defense was allowing opposing offense to convert 60% of their third downs. In the Jaguar game they allowed Garrard to complete 70% of his freaking passes. Also how take away did our defense get for our offense? It was somewhere neighborhood of 15 total.

I have never "pinned" it all on the offense, but when our two "star" players give up the ball a combined 27 times, it is a problem.

Wanna talk about the Bills game with the season on the line?

[TXBRONC]

I have never "pinned" it all on the offense, but when our two "star" players give up the ball a combined 27 times, it is a problem.

Wanna talk about the Bills game with the season on the line?

Just for the record it wasn't quite 27 turnovers combined.

You want talk about the Bills game go for it?

[BroncoJoe]

Jay Cutler, 18 INTS, 5 fumbles (actually 6, but one was a blown call).
Brandon Marshall, 4 fumbles.

That's 27.

Yeah. Let's talk about the Bills game. INT thrown in the redzone with less than 6 minutes left that would have (potentially) put the game away.

[TXBRONC]

Jay Cutler, 18 INTS, 5 fumbles (actually 6, but one was a blown call).
Brandon Marshall, 4 fumbles.

That's 27.

Yeah. Let's talk about the Bills game. INT thrown in the redzone with less than 6 minutes left that would have (potentially) put the game away.

The stats I saw were 18 ints and 2 lost fumbles for Cutler. Marshall had 4 lost fumbles that's 24.

Yeah and let's talk about how our defense gave up 70 yard plus reception to Fred Jackson that lead to the Bill touchdown that won the game.

[BroncoJoe]

The stats I saw were 18 ints and 2 lost fumbles for Cutler. Marshall had 4 lost fumbles that's 24.

Yeah and let's talk about how our defense gave up 70 yard plus reception to Fred Jackson that lead to the Bill touchdown that won the game.

Or, we could talk about how we out gained them in yards by 532-275, but had two turnovers and were 2-6 scoring in the redzone.

Add in the INT with less than 6 minutes while in scoring position. Even a FG would have put us up by seven. The 70 yard plus reception and eventual TD would have only tied the game.

Next?

[BroncoJoe]

The stats I saw were 18 ints and 2 lost fumbles for Cutler.

2 lost fumbles compared to putting the ball on the ground five times. BFD. If the QB drops the ball, it's lost yardage.

[TXBRONC]

Or, we could talk about how we out gained them in yards by 532-275, but had two turnovers and were 2-6 scoring in the redzone.

Add in the INT with less than 6 minutes while in scoring position. Even a FG would have put us up by seven. The 70 yard plus reception and eventual TD would have only tied the game.

Next?

Next my ass. It was just after that play they Jackson carried the ball eight yards for the go ahead score. :coffee:

[BroncoJoe]

Next my ass. It was just after that play they Jackson carried the ball eight yards for the go ahead score. :coffee:

If we scored in the redzone, that score is meaningless.

:coffee:

[Shazam!]

As for the Cutler-Jets article, that's exactly been my point. They have nothing to give, nor do they want to give up much at all (as per Boomer's comments). He will not go cheap if he doesn't stay, and I think the longer this wears on, even if it is before Draft day, I dont think dealing him may happen at all.

[TXBRONC]

If we scored in the redzone, that score is meaningless.

:coffee:

And geez maybe with 6 minutes in the game if defense comes up with a turnover we have chance. :coffee:

[BroncoJoe]

And geez maybe with 6 minutes in the game if defense comes up with a turnover we have chance. :coffee:

And geez, maybe if our offense scores we don't have to rely on our defense getting a turnover.

:coffee:

[bud]

3rd year...

Ok.

Elway threw 23 picks in '85. And, lost 4 fumbles.

That's 27.

Amazing.

And, he didn't even need Marshall's help to get there.

Aren't stats fun?

[TXBRONC]

And geez, maybe if our offense scores we don't have to rely on our defense getting a turnover.

:coffee:

And geez we weren't able to rely on our defense the whole freakin year. :coffee:

[omac]

Not hardly Joe. I know you want pin it on Jay and the offesne but that just isn't going to cut it no5 when this defense was allowing opposing offense to convert 60% of their third downs. In the Jaguar game they allowed Garrard to complete 70% of his freaking passes. Also how take away did our defense get for our offense? It was somewhere neighborhood of 15 total.

Nice post, TXBRONC.

Actually, our total takeaways was 13, last in the league.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/sortableStatsTeam?div=NFL&stype=offense&stable=turnovers&stat=turnTtot&dir=descending

For a defense that was supposedly on the field more often because of the offenses turnovers, and the offenses' heavily oriented passing style of play that uses less clock than traditional rushing does, they sure had much more opportunities to try to get turnovers.

Also, our defense gave up an average of 6.1 yards per play, ranking 30th in the league. Only the Lions and the Rams gave up more yards per play.

Contrast that to Coyer's time as the DC (2003-2006), where our defense gave up 4.9 yards per play (9th), 4.9 (7th), 5.1 (18th), 5.1 (12th).

When the defense was on the field, they had more opportunities to get turnovers, but they couldn't. They also couldn't prevent opponents from getting large chunks of yards per play.

Funny how that's the offenses' fault. :coffee:

[bud]

Jay Cutler personally scored every touchdown the Broncos made against the Buffalo Bills last season.

[BroncoJoe]

3rd year...

Ok.

Elway threw 23 picks in '85. And, lost 4 fumbles.

That's 27.

Amazing.

And, he didn't even need Marshall's help to get there.

Aren't stats fun?

He also went 11-5. And, who is talking about Elway here? Get with the program, Bud.


And geez we weren't able to rely on our defense the whole freakin year. :coffee:

Back and forth we go. I really don't give a shit anymore. We've both made our points.

[BroncoJoe]

Jay Cutler personally scored every touchdown the Broncos made against the Buffalo Bills last season.



Did we win the game Bud? Who gives a crap?

[TXBRONC]

Nice post, TXBRONC.

Actually, our total takeaways was 13, last in the league.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/sortableStatsTeam?div=NFL&stype=offense&stable=turnovers&stat=turnTtot&dir=descending

For a defense that was supposedly on the field more often because of the offenses turnovers, and the offenses' heavily oriented passing style of play that uses less clock than traditional rushing does, they sure had much more opportunities to try to get turnovers.

Also, our defense gave up an average of 6.1 yards per play, ranking 30th in the league. Only the Lions and the Rams gave up more yards per play.

Contrast that to Coyer's time as the DC (2003-2006), where our defense gave up 4.9 yards per play (9th), 4.9 (7th), 5.1 (18th), 5.1 (12th).

When the defense was on the field, they had more opportunities to get turnovers, but they couldn't. They also couldn't prevent opponents from getting large chunks of yards per play.

Funny how that's the offenses' fault. :coffee:

You know that has to be the offense's fault. They have more opportunities but can come with but a meager 13 turnovers it has to be the offense's fault.

[BeefStew25]

QB's are totally responsible for wins and losses.

:fart:

Joe, no chalupas.

[bud]

On 9 combined carries, Cutler and Eddie Royal rushed for 101 yards against the Buffalo Bills.

Bell, Young, and Pope combined for 80 yards on 18 carries.

In 2002, Clinton Portis rushed for 103 yards on 18 carries in a victory over the Bills.

Aren't stats fun?

[bud]

He also went 11-5. And, who is talking about Elway here? Get with the program, Bud.



Back and forth we go. I really don't give a shit anymore. We've both made our points.

Where did the defense finish? 14th.

The running backs rushed for 20 touchdowns. Not 15 like last season.

[omac]

You know that has to be the offense's fault. They have more opportunities but can come with but a meager 13 turnovers it has to be the offense's fault.

The offense should've worked harder on defense to get more takeaways, and lessen the chunks per play the opponents easily got. :D

[BroncoJoe]

On 9 combined carries, Cutler and Eddie Royal rushed for 101 yards against the Buffalo Bills.

Bell, Young, and Pope combined for 80 yards on 18 carries.

In 2002, Clinton Portis rushed for 103 yards on 18 carries in a victory over the Bills.

Aren't stats fun?


2006: 9-7, no playoffs
2007: 7-9, no playoffs
2008: 8-8, no playoffs

Yep. Stats are really fun.

[bud]

Did we win the game Bud? Who gives a crap?



You're the one pointing fingers.

You're the one trying to go against conventional wisdom.

You're the one claiming you know something that we don't.

Yet, you can't prove it.

The facts keep pointing to Cutler being the foundation of Denver's offense... and their lone hope for victory against Buffalo.

[TXBRONC]

The offense should've worked harder on defense to get more takeaways, and lessen the chunks per play the opponents easily got. :D

Did you just talk in a circle? :confused: :lol:

[bud]

2006: 9-7, no playoffs
2007: 7-9, no playoffs
2008: 8-8, no playoffs

Yep. Stats are really fun.

One liners and generalized statements don't prove your point.

Name calling is all you have left. You have no evidence.

[BroncoJoe]

One liners and generalized statements don't prove your point.

Name calling is all you have left. You have no evidence.

How am I name calling?

Fact is, the defense was atrocious, but I don't get all the love for Cutler. He hasn't proven anything yet, other than being a turnover machine.

[BeefStew25]

Joe,

His potential was maxed out and he was on the downhill slide, much like your ass buddy Plummer. You are right. Lets get Simms in here.

[BroncoJoe]

Joe,

His potential was maxed out and he was on the downhill slide, much like your ass buddy Plummer. You are right. Lets get Simms in here.

I'm not blaming Cutler. But to say our offense was "the second best in the NFL!" is not only stupid, but idiotic.

[omac]

2006: 9-7, no playoffs
2007: 7-9, no playoffs
2008: 8-8, no playoffs

Yep. Stats are really fun.

Jake Plummer's first 6 seasons in the league, with a team with poor defense, but not as bad as the broncos the last 2 seasons ....

30 wins x 52 losses. 90 TDs x 114 INTs. 4 out of 6 seasons with 20 or more INTs. Only 1 season in 6 where he had more TDs than INTs. Talk about turnovers! :D

He goes to a Denver team with much better defense and rushing offense, and it turns around.

Yeah, stats are fun.

[BeefStew25]

I'm not blaming Cutler. But to say our offense was "the second best in the NFL!" is not only stupid, but idiotic.

I agree in terms of red zone production. But lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.

[BroncoJoe]

Jake Plummer's first 6 seasons in the league, with a team with poor defense, but not as bad as the broncos the last 2 seasons ....

30 wins x 52 losses. 90 TDs x 114 INTs. 4 out of 6 seasons with 20 or more INTs. Only 1 season in 6 where he had more TDs than INTs. Talk about turnovers! :D

He goes to a Denver team with much better defense and rushing offense, and it turns around.

Yeah, stats are fun.

Who's talking about Jake Plummer?

[BroncoJoe]

I agree in terms of red zone production. But lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.

Bief, the baby has already been aborted.

[BeefStew25]

Bief, the baby has already been aborted.

Well, the legs are at least in the stirrups.

What sucks is when out defense improves you are going to chuck up our new QB's record as testament to how Jay sucked.

Which I think will be wrong of you, and I will slap your bald head for it.

[TXBRONC]

Who's talking about Jake Plummer?

It's point of reference that fits the conversation Joe.

[BroncoJoe]

Well, the legs are at least in the stirrups.

What sucks is when out defense improves you are going to chuck up our new QB's record as testament to how Jay sucked.

Which I think will be wrong of you, and I will slap your bald head for it.

I love Cutler's potential, and want him to remain a Bronco. That said, when we have the supposed #2 offense that rarely scores, it's a problem.

I'm not blaming Cutler, but the defense wasn't the only problem. That's my point.

[BroncoJoe]

It's point of reference that fits the conversation Joe.

Maybe in 2006...

[TXBRONC]

I love Cutler's potential, and want him to remain a Bronco. That said, when we have the supposed #2 offense that rarely scores, it's a problem.

I'm not blaming Cutler, but the defense wasn't the only problem. That's my point.

Agreed the defense wasn't only problem. Special teams was also terrible.

[BroncoJoe]

Agreed the defense wasn't only problem. Special teams was also terrible.

ST wasn't as bad as the defense, but certainly a problem. Was it as bad as our offense? That's debatable.

[TXBRONC]

ST wasn't as bad as the defense, but certainly a problem. Was it as bad as our offense? That's debatable.

I believe we were near the bottom in average starting field position on kickoffs and at the same time near the bottom with average starting field position. Punt returns I think we were ok because Royal, punt coverage I'm not sure.

[BroncoJoe]

I believe we were near the bottom in average starting field position on kickoffs and at the same time near the bottom with average starting field position. Punt returns I think we were ok because Royal, punt coverage I'm not sure.

Probably, but if you look at the numbers, there's typically only a five-ten yard difference between the top and bottom. Hardly a game changer...

[WARHORSE]

Point is, if we have the high-powered, Cutler driven offense everyone thinks we have (since we were #2 in yards - not scoring, but YARDS) we should have won those games, right?

#2 in yards, #16 in points scored. Problem.

Thats true.


But think the redzone offense might have anything to do with a missing running game?


Quite a bit easier to defense the pass when you know theres no threat of run....................which in turn affects your scoring output.


Before we started getting pounded with injuries at the tailback position, the scoring was as prolific as the yardage for the most part.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/2009/03/22/2009-03-22_cut_us_in_on_any_jay_cutler_deal_jets_te.html

Cut us in on any Jay Cutler deal, Jets tell Broncos

DANA POINT, Calif. - Jay Cutler wants out of Denver and the Jets have told the Broncos they want him if they decide to trade him.

Multiple sources told the Daily News Sunday at the opening of the NFL meetings that Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum contacted the Broncos to let them know the Jets are very interested in trading for Cutler. But the Jets have yet to make a trade offer, and the Broncos have not said what they want, because Denver has not determined the Cutler situation is beyond repair.

But this much is clear: The Jets are definitely in the Cutler Derby. They will closely monitor the situation and are prepared to put together a package when the Broncos tell them the time has arrived. "Of course the Jets want Cutler," one source said. "Why wouldn't they?"

The Broncos want to meet one more time with Cutler to see if they can end his feud with rookie coach Josh McDaniels before they start soliciting offers.

Cutler is upset that McDaniels tried to deal him to Tampa Bay in a three-way deal that would have brought Matt Cassel from New England to Denver. He was further incensed when McDaniels didn't appease him in a face-to-face meeting after Cassel wound up being traded to Kansas City. The Jets will face strong competition from the Bucs and Bears if Cutler is available. Last summer, the Jets outbid the Bucs for Brett Favre.

Where does this leave the Jets' quarterback situation?

Tannenbaum, coach Rex Ryan and offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer were in Manhattan, Kan., last week to work out Kansas State QB Josh Freeman, who may be working his way into the top half of the first round. The Jets are picking 17th on April 25. Ryan said Sunday he liked what he saw of Freeman. Ryan also said the Jets will work out Southern Cal QB Matt Sanchez this week while he and Tannenbaum are on the West Coast for the league meetings. Sanchez has been training in Southern California. They are not spending much time on Georgia's Matt Stafford, expected to go No. 1 to the Lions.

If nothing changes, Ryan said Kellen Clemens and Brett Ratliff will go into training camp as "1 and 1-A. Clemens may get the first snap, but then 1-A is Ratliff. This is clearly an open competition. Erik Ainge, if he comes around and lights it up, he will be in there."

Ryan told the Daily News Sunday that the first conversation he had with Favre as the Jets' head coach came when Favre contacted the team in February to let them know he was retiring. Ryan said he wanted Favre to play for him this season, but didn't feel it would be appropriate for him to call Favre to recruit him.

"I never wanted to push him one way or the other. He played the game long enough that he knows what is best for him and his family," Ryan said.

He said he didn't believe he could have talked Favre into playing another year. "We don't have that kind of relationship," he said. "I've never met Brett."

[Shazam!]

The Jets are dreaming. Not happening.

[TXBRONC]

The Jets are dreaming. Not happening.

If you go with thought that Jay is worth two number ones picks the Jets can't cover that.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Sure they can, they are called future picks.

[Fan in Exile]

If you go with thought that Jay is worth two number ones picks the Jets can't cover that.

There's always one this year and one next year.

[Shazam!]

Dude I live here... They're just creaming for a QB and naturally this is what the talk is here. They have nothing to give, they don't want to part with their best defensive help. #17? Why would a team go on a three team deal like Cleveland who won't get anything worthy of a starter in return? If Cleveland got the 3 team deal going, the Jets can get a starter but NOT CUTLER-

Cutler to Cleveland
Anderson to the NYJ
Quinn to the Broncos
The NYJ's #17 or Cleveland's 2nd to Denver

All would benefit... BUT KEEP CULTER damnit.

[TXBRONC]

There's always one this year and one next year.

I don't get into draft values, but from what I understand a future draft pick is only worth half the value of a current pick because it's a year in the future.