PDA

View Full Version : Kiszla: Quashing QB controversy can only undermine coach



TXBRONC
08-18-2009, 11:07 AM
I agree there is a quaterback controversy but did McDaniels do the right thing in quashing it? Time will tell.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_13147719

Kiszla: Quashing QB controversy can only undermine coach
By Mark Kiszla
The Denver Post

Posted: 08/18/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

Josh McDaniels got us into this quarterback mess.

How McDaniels gets the Broncos out of it will go a long way in determining whether he is a worthy successor to Mike Shanahan or just another football coach anxiously twirling his whistle at the end of a string.

"Orton Hears a Boo" was a sign held Monday by a 12-year-old boy at Broncos training camp. Out of the mouth of babes . . .

Darn right we have a quarterback controversy.

As best I can tell, there has been a full-fledged quarterback controversy since Jay Cutler told Denver to kiss his No. 6 goodbye.

And just because McDaniels insists there is no quarterback controversy does not make it so.

Sorry, Coach.

You might be able to tell players to run a lap if they mess up at practice. But, take it from me, you can't tell Broncomaniacs what to think.

To name Kyle Orton over Chris Simms as the team's starting quarterback before training camp began was a rookie mistake by a 33-year-old coach.

Was first-year pro Chris Baker told he had no chance of beating out Ronald Fields as the team's starting nose tackle? Has veteran running back LaMont Jordan stepped aside and politely asked if he could carry the bags for top draft choice Knowshon Moreno?

On a team that was not competitive enough for Shanahan to retain his job, McDaniels should have welcomed full, open competition at every position until the starting lineup took the field Sept. 13 for the season opener in Cincinnati.

The way McDaniels has handled this QB controversy is unfair to Simms.

Worse, it's a no-win situation for Orton.

In a football town where even John Elway had to prove his worth, handing the job to Orton does nothing but undermine his credibility with a fan base already suspicious of everything from the arm strength to the pedigree of this newcomer from Chicago.

If the NFL charges full price for tickets to exhibition games, it's hard for fans to accept the three interceptions thrown by Orton against San Francisco don't count.

"I understand they want us to be playing perfect right off the bat, and that's just how it is in this league," Orton said.

At this point, Orton looks robotic in a Broncos uniform. He seems enslaved to his progressions rather than being the master of defensive reads.

But is it also fair to note that the noodle arm of Orton produced more touchdown passes during the 2008 regular season than Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger?

Simms has an unsettling tendency to procrastinate in the pocket until he unloads the football away like a Form 1040 filed a minute before the post office clock strikes midnight on tax day.

But should it also be noted that as a third-year pro in 2005, Simms finished with a higher quarterback rating than a much more ballyhooed young QB, Eli Manning?

This in no way suggests Orton or Simms ever will make anyone forget Roethlisberger or Manning. But both of Denver's candidates to replace Cutler have what it takes to be competent NFL quarterbacks.

McDaniels made a tough, but reasonable choice to move on when Cutler threw a hissy fit. The new coach, however, now owes it to himself to give both Simms and Orton every chance to succeed in an unforgiving environment.

Like it or not, McDaniels has a quarterback controversy on his hands.

No matter how McDaniels wants to spin it, if the rookie coach is serious about earning the faith of fans and retaining the respect of his locker room, there is only one way the Broncos can deal with Orton, Simms and the issue of who starts when the games count.
Let the best quarterback win.

The ability to deal effectively with the fallout from a controversial decision is a true sign of coaching maturity.

A stubborn young coach who wastes time trying to rationalize a controversial decision won't be coaching for long.

Mark Kiszla: 303-954-1053 or mkiszla@denverpost.com

Thnikkaman
08-18-2009, 11:09 AM
Is it even worth reading if Kiszla's name is on the article?

claymore
08-18-2009, 11:13 AM
Is it even worth reading if Kiszla's name is on the article?

No.

Dortoh
08-18-2009, 11:15 AM
Seems like an appropriate place for this LMAO

http://pic16.picturetrail.com/VOL637/2498345/5019711/372158227.jpg

TXBRONC
08-18-2009, 11:15 AM
Is it even worth reading if Kiszla's name is on the article?

He ripped into Cutler before he was traded and a lot of people liked what he had to say then. Or is it that you're afraid he's going to rip McDaniels?

Thnikkaman
08-18-2009, 11:21 AM
He ripped into Cutler before he was traded and a lot of people liked what he had to say then. Or is it that you're afraid he's going to rip McDaniels?

He lost all credibility with me the way he dealt with Sakic's retirement. I supported Cutler until he stopped responding to phone calls.

As with everyone else in the U.S.A., Kiszla has the right to his opinion, and I have the right to say his opinion is bullshit.

BroncoWave
08-18-2009, 11:22 AM
I read the article and it seems to me like Kiszla is trying to stir something up that just isn't there.

claymore
08-18-2009, 11:24 AM
I read the article and it seems to me like Kiszla is trying to stir something up that just isn't there.

He seems like he is a fan of another team or something. He is a weaseal.

TXBRONC
08-18-2009, 11:26 AM
He lost all credibility with me the way he dealt with Sakic's retirement. I supported Cutler until he stopped responding to phone calls.

As with everyone else in the U.S.A., Kiszla has the right to his opinion, and I have the right to say his opinion is bullshit.

I never said you didn't have a right to your opinion. Nevertheless it's disingenuous to say his opinion is bullshit if you haven't read it.

Thnikkaman
08-18-2009, 11:31 AM
I never said you didn't have a right to your opinion. Nevertheless it's disingenuous to say his opinion is bullshit if you haven't read it.

Kiszla has cried wolf a few too many times, I.E. his track record shows that he has no credibility. He might as well be writing a blog entry for the bleacher report. I'm sure that the Denver Post gives him a paycheck because he is "controversial" and helps sell papers.

claymore
08-18-2009, 11:32 AM
Kiszla has cried wolf a few too many times, I.E. his track record shows that he has no credibility. He might as well be writing a blog entry for the bleacher report. I'm sure that the DP gives him a paycheck because he is "controversial" and helps sell papers.

Careful. DP means something different to some of us. I know what you meant though.

topscribe
08-18-2009, 11:35 AM
We need a Septic Tank forum, if for nothing else, for depositing Kiszla articles there . . .

(Oh, and anything from Jamie Pukes, too.)

-----

CoachChaz
08-18-2009, 11:35 AM
He's a waste...regardless of what ot who he's writing about. This article has to rank amongst his 10 worst.

MasterShake
08-18-2009, 12:23 PM
He wants there to be a QB controversy. Good or bad, by naming Orton the starting QB I think McDaniels was smart in establishing the "field general". Even if is arm is more of a pistol than a howitzer, I would hate to be a player on a team that didn't have an identity OR a starting Quarterback. By making Orton "The Guy" he is answering at least one part in what will be a preseason full of questions. I also don't think McDaniels is so stubborn that Simms would not take Orton's place if he continues to decline over the next few weeks.

JDL
08-18-2009, 12:50 PM
As far as whether or not McDaniels made the right decision.

I can think of two recent prominent QB controversies that were held in the opposite manner and both have turned out a bit different.

Cardinals - Kurt Warner and Matt Leinart. Kurt Warner was coming off a season in which his injuries and effect on his play were reminiscent of his final days in St. Louis. So, after that horrific 2006 they held a QB competition and the season began with Leinart at starting QB. Leinart played decent early and almost threw for 300yds in a win against Seattle in week 2. He got hurt in the 3rd game of the season and Warner took over and played well against a tough Baltimore D. However, despite the promising moments of both QBs the team went 3-5 to open the season. They left Warner in and there were bright moments and bad moments (he had 17INTs and 7Fumbles.) With his age and continued struggles with turnovers and the Franchise waiting in the wings... they had another competition which, IIRC, did not end until AFTER the 4th preseason game or just before that game. They opened up well enough with 2 wins, followed by two losses before a nice streak.

I would say that maybe in 2007 the QB controversy and all the QB issues may have contributed to the bad 1st half of the season. But, the competition did not seem to hurt them last year as they didn't really struggle until after the 1st half of the season, before recovering to go on a big playoff run.

Browns - Cleveland managed a surprising 10-6 season in 2007. However, with drafting of Brady Quinn and the offseason contract questions and trade rumors of Derek Anderson, they went into training camp with a full-on QB controversy. Anderson eventually won the job, but they opened terribly going 0-3 DA throwing for only an avg. of 135yds/gm. The first half they went 3-5 and DA pretty much looked like the backup QB a lot of people claimed he was. Quinn came in mid-season had a nice opener against us but otherwise fell flat and the Browns season just went from bad to worse.

Certainly there were other facts in both teams situations and reasons why sometimes it went one way and other times another. So, I would guess there are pretty reasonable arguments for quashing a QB controversy or having an open competition.

If I had to say, I think it is better (similar to New England last year with all the Gutierrez talk) to just stick to your guns. I am not particularly an Orton fan (not sure anyone is), but I think in the end we are probably better off just sticking with him, until and unless he becomes a pick machine in the regular season. I suspect his preseasons are a big reason why Chicago was always trying to replace him or start someone else, even with all his rookie success. He has played two (almost) full seasons as a NFL starter and not thrown more than 13INTs in either season, less than 1 per game. He will probably be throwing more so maybe that will go up, but ultimately those numbers are reasonable. He's now behind a better OL with better WRs, hopefully that helps offset any increase from throwing more, but we won't know unless we at least see what he has in the regular season.

I completely get how the present evidence doesn't support giving the guy much faith, he has flat out stunk it up protecting the ball throughout training camp, scrimmages and 1 preseason game. I would just worry that if you don't back him right now the situation might devolve to where our only hope is Simms as you could crush Orton's confidence. If you move from Orton, I don't think you are going to be able to go back to him, he isn't really a vet like Warner, he is more like Anderson - a borderline starter with probably a fragile grip on his confidence (probably the same for Cassel.) I'd like to at least see if Orton can protect the ball like he has as a starter before and if we are absolutely sure he cannot, move onto Simms. The season is long and there will be time to switch to Simms. I know it is hard to give up on a season before it starts (and really in this weak division I actually am somewhat unrealistically hopeful), but we aren't likely going to do much this season, so tempering our expectations a bit might be the way to go and just allow Orton the chance to suck or succeed in real games.

* NOTE - I do, however, EXPECT to see SOME improvement in the INT department next game, that probably isn't asking too much. :confused: Right? :D

BTW - sorry for the long post... I ramble sometimes...lol.

Kaylore
08-18-2009, 12:55 PM
Is it even worth reading if Kiszla's name is on the article?

Nope. This myth that Orton was named the QB for the season ignores the several since-made comments that he was the starter for camp and could still lose the job. Orton will look awesome against fourth string corners too. Stupid take, Kizla.

claymore
08-18-2009, 05:33 PM
Nope. This myth that Orton was named the QB for the season ignores the several since-made comments that he was the starter for camp and could still lose the job. Orton will look awesome against fourth string corners too. Stupid take, Kizla.

Thats a bold statement. :D

Foochacho
08-18-2009, 08:11 PM
All Ortons problems will be solved after he regrows the neckbeard. The neckbeard is like "the pick of destiny", it holds all the power. Even Plummer got in on the action. Who would of thought that Plummer could of taken us to an afc championship game?

EMB6903
08-18-2009, 08:16 PM
^ If only Orton was half as talented as Plummer....

Superchop 7
08-18-2009, 09:02 PM
The best way to start a QB controversy is to throw 3 picks.

If you look at NE, maybe the best QB for the system is someone you groom from a rookie.