PDA

View Full Version : Vickerson out six weeks



MOtorboat
11-26-2013, 07:55 AM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/26/report-kevin-vickerson-dislocated-his-hip-out-six-weeks/


Report: Kevin Vickerson dislocated his hip, out six weeks

Posted by Josh Alper on November 26, 2013, 7:49 AM EST

The Broncos expect to have cornerback Champ Bailey and tight end Julius Thomas back in the lineup for their date with the Chiefs in Week 13, but it doesn’t look like they’ll have defensive tackle Kevin Vickerson.

Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that Vickerson dislocated his hip in Sunday night’s overtime loss to the Patriots. Per Schefter, Vickerson doesn’t need surgery to repair the injury, but he’s expected to be out for six weeks so his season could be over if the Broncos don’t survive in the playoffs long enough for Vickerson to get a clean bill of health.

EastCoastBronco
11-26-2013, 08:06 AM
That really sucks.
He's been a force in the middle all year.

Joel
11-26-2013, 08:39 AM
I knew he left the game, but the possibility of an injury that severe slipped right by me in all the fretting over DRC and Moreno. And yes, it really does suck, because he has been an incredible force in the middle this year. Since midway through last year, actually; I keep referring to a tweet he sent from last years TC about gaining 50 lbs. while nearly halving his body fat percentage. It was definitely visible when he and Knighton stood up next to each other at the line between plays Sunday: Porkchop's got Dunlops Disease (he done lopped over his belt) but Big Vick looks VERY trim, especially for a guy listed at 348.

I just hope they checked him out VERY thoroughly, because watching one of ESPNs retrospectives (not sure the program) on Bo Jackson recently I heard him talking about the injury that ended his career: A dislocated hip on what looked like a routine tackle. It probably WOULD'VE been routine for anyone else, but Bo was evidently running so hard that when he was grabbed by the ankles his body just kept going and his hip came free, so he popped it back in on the field and no one believed him when he said it was dislocated, because "obviously" no one could reinsert their own dislocated hip.

What stuck in my mind, and came back to mind reading this, was that months later, in the offseason, a closer examination revealed that not only was his hip dislocated, but a major artery in the hip was severed in the process, and ever since he'd been (as Bo put it) essentially bleeding into his hip socket while all the tissue that had lost its blood supply slowly atrophied around his femur. The doctors quickly did emergency corrective surgery, but the dead tissue stayed dead; Bo never played another down of football, and was a shadow of his former self even in baseball.

Hopes and prayers go with Kevin Vickerson for a full, speedy and as painless as possible recovery, 'cause we can't spare him and no one should go out like that, especially not after working his way up from obscurity to become a key starter on a SB contending team. One person to go out and win a Ring for this season; maybe that and knowing he was a big contributor to the 9 wins that helped make it possible will take some of the sting out of what must be an excrutiating injury. In the mean time, he's earned thanks for his huge effort each week and for leaving it all on the field. :salute:

VonDoom
11-26-2013, 09:24 AM
I know this is true for many teams, every year, but injuries have been brutal for us this year. I don't think we've played one game yet where someone hasn't gone out with an injury.

SR
11-26-2013, 09:36 AM
I know this is true for many teams, every year, but injuries have been brutal for us this year. I don't think we've played one game yet where someone hasn't gone out with an injury.

Id be interested to see how many man-games Denver has lost to injury from its starters compared to other NFL teams.

BroncoJoe
11-26-2013, 09:49 AM
Hey Joel:

You normally make pretty good points and provoke thought/discussion, but the ungodly length of your posts make them unreadable. Can you not articulate a thought without writing a seven page dissertation?

This is not a bash on Joel - just trying to get him to realize he's probably the only one reading his lengthy posts.

Buff
11-26-2013, 10:06 AM
Time for the rook to step up.

Timmy!
11-26-2013, 10:08 AM
That hurts. Unrien and Sly will need to step it up.

chanesaw
11-26-2013, 10:56 AM
Wolfe and Jackson will have to take some reps at DT as well. I hope they don't IR him, we could need him in the playoffs.

Dzone
11-26-2013, 10:58 AM
this hurts. He has been playing great. I think he even had a sack on sunday

broncofaninfla
11-26-2013, 11:03 AM
In my opinion Big Vick has had his best season this season. sucks because he and Knighton have proven to be a force to try and run against. Hopefully Sly is ready to step up.

Joel
11-26-2013, 11:16 AM
Hey Joel:

You normally make pretty good points and provoke thought/discussion, but the ungodly length of your posts make them unreadable. Can you not articulate a thought without writing a seven page dissertation?

This is not a bash on Joel - just trying to get him to realize he's probably the only one reading his lengthy posts.
I try to be thorough, both on principle and because I got tired of people angrily shouting, "you forgot this obvious fact everyone knows, proving you're an idiot!" It's hard to be comprehensively brief.

That's not a defense or objection (I also try hard to avoid things that can be taken wrong, which adds length, too) just an explanation.

Denver Native (Carol)
11-26-2013, 11:25 AM
Sylvester Williams, you're the next man up.

The Broncos received some tough news Tuesday when tests revealed starting defensive tackle Kevin Vickerson suffered a dislocated hip in the second half of the team's loss to New England, according to an NFL source.

A dislocated hip is a minimum six-week injury. The Broncos must decide whether to put Vickerson on season-ending injured reserve, or carry him in case the team reaches the AFC championship game or Super Bowl XLVIII.

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24603732/broncos-kevin-vickerson-out-at-least-six-weeks

Denver Native (Carol)
11-26-2013, 11:26 AM
from same article:


Vickerson is the second defensive starter the Broncos have lost in two weeks. Last week, the Broncos placed safety Rahim Moore on injured reserve designated to return in six weeks after he underwent surgery to correct a blood flow condition in his lower left leg.

No team can use the injured reserve designated to return a second time.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24603732/broncos-kevin-vickerson-out-at-least-six-weeks

Joel
11-26-2013, 11:28 AM
Id be interested to see how many man-games Denver has lost to injury from its starters compared to other NFL teams.
It honestly seems to me like it's been pretty brutal. I noted going into the last KC game that they're the only AFC contender not missing a(t least one) Pro Bowler, often likely HoFers, for the season.

The Pats were missing three in just their front seven, plus an All Pro tackle: All gone for the year (plus their top three CBs and Gronk were playing hurt; no excuse for losing that game, but anyway....)

Indy lost Reggie Wayne for the year at the end of our game.

Cincy lost Geno Atkins for the year.

Now KC's lost Houston and Hali, though at least one of them looks likely for Sunday, and both will probably be back before the season ends.

That's just among top AFC teams. Try this list; it's a little broad since it includes everyone from TC to Mondays gun (e.g. Koppen's listed even though he never played a down for us even in preseason, and Hali's listed as Out even though he'll almost certainly play Sunday) but has the advantage of listing every currently reported injury on ever team: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/injuries.htm

Joel
11-26-2013, 11:30 AM
from same article:

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24603732/broncos-kevin-vickerson-out-at-least-six-weeks
Double suck. I assume we're committed to using it for Moore, since we've already declared him? So we either keep Vickerson inactive but on the regular roster, or he's done for the year?

topscribe
11-26-2013, 11:33 AM
Hey Joel:

You normally make pretty good points and provoke thought/discussion, but the ungodly length of your posts make them unreadable. Can you not articulate a thought without writing a seven page dissertation?

This is not a bash on Joel - just trying to get him to realize he's probably the only one reading his lengthy posts.
On the other hand, some of us don't mind doing a bit of reading. Maybe some
of it has to do with attention span?
.

Lancane
11-26-2013, 12:48 PM
Double suck. I assume we're committed to using it for Moore, since we've already declared him? So we either keep Vickerson inactive but on the regular roster, or he's done for the year?

Moore was committed under that official tag the moment word came from his physicians and therein the medical staff of the level of injury and his timeframe for returning.

They have two choices really, keep him on the active roster or place him on IR and sign someone for depth purposes. Personally, he gets a ring no matter what if we win a championship but the team has to look at the next six weeks and what the lack of depth could cause to the defense over that period of time. I'd place him on IR and sign someone from a practice squad such as Michael Brooks from Seattle, Keith Browner from Houston, David King from Cincinnati, Anthony McCloud from Arizona or look at those in Free Agency such Shaun Cody, Richard Seymour or Justin Bannan.

underrated29
11-26-2013, 01:46 PM
In my opinion Big Vick has had his best season this season. sucks because he and Knighton have proven to be a force to try and run against. Hopefully Sly is ready to step up.



Those two guys are playing like bulldozers. They own the run everytime and when needed we can ask them to split the line and crush the pocket and get the qb.....IMO one of the top 5 pairs of dts in the game. This blows.

IMO we need to put Wolfe in as the DT. On penetrating and sly as the run stuffer.

Joel
11-26-2013, 02:24 PM
Moore was committed under that official tag the moment word came from his physicians and therein the medical staff of the level of injury and his timeframe for returning.
Thanks (I think... ) just confirming.


They have two choices really, keep him on the active roster or place him on IR and sign someone for depth purposes. Personally, he gets a ring no matter what if we win a championship but the team has to look at the next six weeks and what the lack of depth could cause to the defense over that period of time. I'd place him on IR and sign someone from a practice squad such as Michael Brooks from Seattle, Keith Browner from Houston, David King from Cincinnati, Anthony McCloud from Arizona or look at those in Free Agency such Shaun Cody, Richard Seymour or Justin Bannan.
Cody or Seymour, maybe, but I'm not missing Bannan, and, while I'm no expert (and don't follow every team) it's hard to believe the others any good if I've never even heard of them (even the guy from the Texans, who I do follow; if he were a 3-4 NT, maybe, but his bio says he's a 6'6" 290 lb. DE/OLB, which sounds ALL wrong.) Put it this way: Are there any viable options better than Unrein and Williams? If we didn't have Jamaal Charles and CJ2K coming up I'd say just keep Vickerson on the active roster till the playoffs, when we'll need him. I'm tempted to anyway, except, of course, it's not my call.

BroncoNut
11-26-2013, 02:25 PM
awesome!!!

BroncoNut
11-26-2013, 02:26 PM
dislocated hip? damn.

Joel
11-26-2013, 02:26 PM
Those two guys are playing like bulldozers. They own the run everytime and when needed we can ask them to split the line and crush the pocket and get the qb.....IMO one of the top 5 pairs of dts in the game. This blows.

IMO we need to put Wolfe in as the DT. On penetrating and sly as the run stuffer.
That might be the best option; if Cody or Seymour have anything left in the tank, why are they in the bleachers? I really hope we can bring Vickerson back for the playoffs regardless, because we'll need him then, and aren't likely to find anything close to a replacement soon.

Dapper Dan
11-26-2013, 02:35 PM
Didn't everyone peg him as an idiot that would lose games for us?

slim
11-26-2013, 02:36 PM
Didn't everyone peg him as an idiot that would lose games for us?

He is an idiot.

But he has played well against the run.

Dzone
11-26-2013, 02:40 PM
I think we are losing a lot of players, more than other teams. Its all Tutens fault

Lancane
11-26-2013, 02:50 PM
Thanks (I think... ) just confirming.


Cody or Seymour, maybe, but I'm not missing Bannan, and, while I'm no expert (and don't follow every team) it's hard to believe the others any good if I've never even heard of them (even the guy from the Texans, who I do follow; if he were a 3-4 NT, maybe, but his bio says he's a 6'6" 290 lb. DE/OLB, which sounds ALL wrong.) Put it this way: Are there any viable options better than Unrein and Williams? If we didn't have Jamaal Charles and CJ2K coming up I'd say just keep Vickerson on the active roster till the playoffs, when we'll need him. I'm tempted to anyway, except, of course, it's not my call.

Oh, I am not saying that those above mentioned players from those practice squads are good or bad, but they are on the practice squads of the top defenses currently in the league which means that there is a better chance that they could be gold amongst the mud and guck of such rosters. Look at Vickerson's own history, he looked to be a seventh round bust and became a practice squad player after several mediocre years in the league it was Denver who gave him a legit shot and it's turned out pretty good for the Broncos and Vickerson. If Denver suddenly finds another piece of gold who can bolster the depth of the line behind Knighton and Williams then that is simply for the better. But, one more injury or two could spell disaster for Denver. Seymour or Cody makes sense, but is the front office willing to actually spend for a veterans salary compared to an unknown? Either way is a smarter move then being paper thin during such a period.

VonDoom
11-26-2013, 03:21 PM
Per Klis on Twitter, he says this is more like an eight week injury and that he is "expected" to go on IR. Looks like another depth signing coming, this time at DT.

Ziggy
11-26-2013, 03:31 PM
It would take a miracle healing for big Vick to make it back from a dislocated hip to play NFL football this season. This is going to hurt our inside run defense. Vick was playing at a pro bowl level. Time to see why Elway drafted Sly instead of trading down....though expecting a rookie DT to make an impact is asking an awful lot.

slim
11-26-2013, 03:34 PM
We are 11 games in, no excuses for Sly.

Dzone
11-26-2013, 03:54 PM
I thought I saw Sly playing pretty good on Sunday, but I dont know. He is strong enough and big enough to do some damage, but does he know what he is doing out there?

Joel
11-26-2013, 04:01 PM
Didn't everyone peg him as an idiot that would lose games for us?
Not everyone. ;)

Joel
11-26-2013, 04:10 PM
Oh, I am not saying that those above mentioned players from those practice squads are good or bad, but they are on the practice squads of the top defenses currently in the league which means that there is a better chance that they could be gold amongst the mud and guck of such rosters. Look at Vickerson's own history, he looked to be a seventh round bust and became a practice squad player after several mediocre years in the league it was Denver who gave him a legit shot and it's turned out pretty good for the Broncos and Vickerson. If Denver suddenly finds another piece of gold who can bolster the depth of the line behind Knighton and Williams then that is simply for the better. But, one more injury or two could spell disaster for Denver. Seymour or Cody makes sense, but is the front office willing to actually spend for a veterans salary compared to an unknown? Either way is a smarter move then being paper thin during such a period.
Okay, I see what you mean now. If they're serious about "win now" and "SB or bust" mode, they should be willing to pay for it if they have the cash on hand. It's a fair point a PS guy from a good D is more likely to be there because he's good, just not as good as the stars ahead of him.

There's a big problem with comparing them to what we did with Vickerson: We don't have multiple preseasons to work him into shape; we need a starter NOW. I keep citing Vickersons massive weight gain and fat loss last year, but the DP article on it noted it was because he was asked to slim down a lot to play DE in our 3-4: How long ago was THAT? It wasn't till midway through last year he became a solid starter.


I thought I saw Sly playing pretty good on Sunday, but I dont know. He is strong enough and big enough to do some damage, but does he know what he is doing out there?
I suspect Jamaal Charles will help answer that question in about five days, and CJ2K will eliminate any lingering uncertainty the following week. I take back my earlier supposition: No rest for the weary between the KC and SD games.

Magnificent Seven
11-26-2013, 04:12 PM
Elway might sign someone from somewhere? Just like, he got Michael Huff.

BroncoWave
11-26-2013, 04:15 PM
I try to be thorough, both on principle and because I got tired of people angrily shouting, "you forgot this obvious fact everyone knows, proving you're an idiot!" It's hard to be comprehensively brief.

That's not a defense or objection (I also try hard to avoid things that can be taken wrong, which adds length, too) just an explanation.

Pretty much every single other poster on this board is able to articulate their thoughts in less than 4 paragraphs per post without getting bashed for leaving out obvious facts. I would be willing to bet that 95% of people just skip posts as long as yours.

BroncoWave
11-26-2013, 04:17 PM
On the other hand, some of us don't mind doing a bit of reading. Maybe some
of it has to do with attention span?
.

I don't always have time to read a novel when I log on here. I just like to skim threads and see everyone's one-sentence take on things. I go to Yahoo or ESPN when I want to read an article.

Joel
11-26-2013, 06:38 PM
Pretty much every single other poster on this board is able to articulate their thoughts in less than 4 paragraphs per post without getting bashed for leaving out obvious facts. I would be willing to bet that 95% of people just skip posts as long as yours.
I (repeatedly) got called a liar for leaving out two obvious facts about Manning (i.e. his awful Colts defenses and two SB appearances, one a win) even when I EXPLICITLY cited BOTH in my first post in a thread. So, yeah, there's a fair amount of CYA involved. If people don't have the time or interest to read them, that's understandable and their prerogative. I'm not long winded for the Hell of it though; believe it or not, I try quite hard to use as few words as possible without cutting necessary ones.

Dapper Dan
11-26-2013, 06:58 PM
Why does Joel hate Peyton Manning?

atwater27
11-26-2013, 07:04 PM
I try to be thorough, both on principle and because I got tired of people angrily shouting, "you forgot this obvious fact everyone knows, proving you're an idiot!" It's hard to be comprehensively brief.

That's not a defense or objection (I also try hard to avoid things that can be taken wrong, which adds length, too) just an explanation.

In layman's terms, he's anal retentive.

Dapper Dan
11-26-2013, 07:08 PM
In layman's terms, he's anal retentive.

He keeps things in his butt?

Slick
11-26-2013, 07:16 PM
Don't change, Joel. I enjoy most of your posts.

Joel
11-26-2013, 08:15 PM
Why does Joel hate Peyton Manning?
I don't? But thanks for the timely example of the kind of :censored: I was trying to explain. Right up there with calling a lifelong Oilers fan a BROWNS fan because I mocked Kosars porn star daughter.

Dapper Dan
11-26-2013, 08:50 PM
I don't? But thanks for the timely example of the kind of :censored: I was trying to explain. Right up there with calling a lifelong Oilers fan a BROWNS fan because I mocked Kosars porn star daughter.

I rarely read your posts, but I have for the past few days. Even if it's a different topic, you start talking about Peyton Manning. You usually have some sort of sarcastic remark about how he's supposed to be good, but isn't. When you make post-after-post about someone in a negative light, people will think you don't like that person. Maybe it's because you think people are too soft on Peyton Manning. I am not sure if that's the case. I agree that some things get overlooked. I still think he's very good and is the best option for the team. He's going to be quarterback until he gets hurt or retires. We need to get used to seeing him do things well and badly. He's not perfect, but he works hard to be. That's good enough for me. Honestly, I hate comparisons. They are shitty and never fair. Every player is in a different situation. They have different players, coaches, cities, etc.

Peyton Manning isn't perfect, but he's better than any other option. He may not even be as good as he used to be. His neck in welded to his body. He now wears a glove. He is getting old. His body is starting to fall apart. Still, he fights through and gives every ounce he has in his body. I enjoy watching several teams. For the most part, I like their players and coaches. The only reason I would talk negatively about a player is if he acts like a turd or is extremely inconsistent. As much as I can remember this second, no team I keep up with has either of those players, so I'm pretty happy. Several times you seem to bring up the Texans and the other T word. After several of the same posts mentioning the same thing, people start trying to get an impression of what you think. If you feel people are getting the wrong impression, you may not be doing well at getting your point across. From me reading your posts, I get the impression you think the Broncos should have kept Tebow and Peyton should have went to Houston. That would be great for Houston, but probably not so much for Denver. Peyton Manning is a very good player and I'm thrilled that he's in Denver. I also like the Texans. I kind of hope they don't go after "Johnny Football" because I wonder if he will live up to the hype. Regardless of who their QB is, I think Kubiak will make him look good. He's a good coach. He puts together a good running game. It's very beneficial for any quarterback, especially a younger one.

If you're a die-hard Denver fan, that's fine. It just doesn't seem like to most. I know once you get a reputation for being a certain way, people will think of you in that way.

DenBronx
11-27-2013, 08:48 AM
Hey Joel:

You normally make pretty good points and provoke thought/discussion, but the ungodly length of your posts make them unreadable. Can you not articulate a thought without writing a seven page dissertation?

This is not a bash on Joel - just trying to get him to realize he's probably the only one reading his lengthy posts.
On the other hand, some of us don't mind doing a bit of reading. Maybe some
of it has to do with attention span?
.


Count me as one with a short attention span. When post are short and sweet they seem to be most effective.

Then again...sort of explains why I always wanted to read comics instead of books as a kid. Ha!

Broncolingus
11-27-2013, 03:16 PM
Vickerson's out for the rest of this season is what the headline should read...

Joel
11-29-2013, 01:52 AM
Just to save space in future by linking this post whenever someone raises either subject with me.


I rarely read your posts, but I have for the past few days. Even if it's a different topic, you start talking about Peyton Manning. You usually have some sort of sarcastic remark about how he's supposed to be good, but isn't. When you make post-after-post about someone in a negative light, people will think you don't like that person. Maybe it's because you think people are too soft on Peyton Manning. I am not sure if that's the case. I agree that some things get overlooked. I still think he's very good and is the best option for the team. He's going to be quarterback until he gets hurt or retires. We need to get used to seeing him do things well and badly. He's not perfect, but he works hard to be. That's good enough for me. Honestly, I hate comparisons. They are shitty and never fair. Every player is in a different situation. They have different players, coaches, cities, etc.
Since he got his rhythm back after a rocky start last year (understandable when he hadn't played a game in a year and a half) I haven't been too critical of Manning, with the notable exception of his poor playoff performance and this past Sunday. Both were justified:

Baltimore: 28/43 for 290 yds, 3 TDs 2 Ints (and 2 fumbles, one lost) in 5+ quarters.
New England: 19/36 for 150 yds, 2 TDs and 1 Int in nearly 5 full quarters.

That's crap, and, however, one feels about comparisons, when the opposing QBs had lesser receivers and protection against a better secondary (and, in NE, a better pass rush) yet BOTH outperformed a first ballot HoFer, comparisons are inevitable. The ultimate comparison between Manning and each opposing QB—the one that obviates all others—is their 3 more points on the scoreboard. I don't know if it was the cold, the pressure or some as yet unknown factor, but if he plays like that Sunday or in the playoffs, we'll lose, just like the last two times.

That's only two games, so we can't be sure he'll always play like that under those conditions, but those two games and the likelihood of similar conditions at some (or all) points in the playoffs offers NO encouragement. We'll find out in about two months, one way or the other; hopefully we don't have this same conversation then (I certainly won't: I'll just link this one.)

By and large, he's played well otherwise, again excepting last years bumpy rusty start. If you HAD read my posts over the last few months you wouldn't have found many criticisms of Manning, only desperate pleas to do something about Clark getting him strip-sacked and his ankles crushed in three straight games (it HAS gotten better, though as beat up as NEs front seven it's hard to be sure the problem's really been solved.) I have reservations about his playoff/freezing weather performance, but that wasn't my objection to the signing.

I didn't like the signing because I thought it a poor but expensive fit. Denver was in full tear down and rebuild mode after the 4-12 season; the DRoY and a talented but raw overperforming QB backing us into the playoffs on a half dozen improbable victories didn't change that. Coming off FOUR spinal surgeries at 36 years old, Manning belonged some place he was the LAST piece of the puzzle, not the first, preferably someplace with home conditions similar to the dome where he spent his whole pro career, and Mile High's about as far from that as it gets.

I give credit to the front office making moves that mostly accelerated a strong rebuild, and to Manning rehabbing well enough that, after a year of play and offseason to regain his sea legs, he looks like his old self. It's still a poor fit, and the best evidence is that when we finally got all the pieces in place a series of serious injuries have jeopardized everything when neither he nor Champ have the luxury of saying, "wait till next year." I said when we signed him we had two, MAYBE three years; this is the second.

We'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised if Manning hung it up after another freezing playoff loss at home rather than return for more of the same. Especially if we again lack any playoff WINS for comfort and encouragement. There's a progression from career to job to chore to ordeal, and when not only any payoff but any HOPE of one vanishes, so does the drive. On the other hand, if we DO go all the way this year, Manning will have to win at least one playoff game in the cold (two counting the NYC SB:) What will he have left to prove?


Peyton Manning isn't perfect, but he's better than any other option. He may not even be as good as he used to be. His neck in welded to his body. He now wears a glove. He is getting old. His body is starting to fall apart. Still, he fights through and gives every ounce he has in his body. I enjoy watching several teams. For the most part, I like their players and coaches. The only reason I would talk negatively about a player is if he acts like a turd or is extremely inconsistent. As much as I can remember this second, no team I keep up with has either of those players, so I'm pretty happy. Several times you seem to bring up the Texans and the other T word. After several of the same posts mentioning the same thing, people start trying to get an impression of what you think. If you feel people are getting the wrong impression, you may not be doing well at getting your point across. From me reading your posts, I get the impression you think the Broncos should have kept Tebow and Peyton should have went to Houston. That would be great for Houston, but probably not so much for Denver. Peyton Manning is a very good player and I'm thrilled that he's in Denver. I also like the Texans. I kind of hope they don't go after "Johnny Football" because I wonder if he will live up to the hype. Regardless of who their QB is, I think Kubiak will make him look good. He's a good coach. He puts together a good running game. It's very beneficial for any quarterback, especially a younger one.

If you're a die-hard Denver fan, that's fine. It just doesn't seem like to most. I know once you get a reputation for being a certain way, people will think of you in that way.
I've had almost NOTHING to say about Tebow since the start of last season. If you want to know why he keeps coming up around me, ask the people who can't speak TO me without speaking OF him; there are certainly plenty to ask. He's gone and therefore irrelevant to the Broncos unless he's playing against us, which doesn't look too likely. I couldn't stand that kid when we drafted him. McDumbass immediately and irrevocably lost me pulling that crap with a franchise QB just starting his career and coming off his first Pro Bowl THEN lying to his face about it

McDumbass could have done NOTHING worse to turn me against him—except then spend a first round pick (one of the few good things about the Cutler/Orton trade) on the SECAAs overhyped raw option QB du jour. Tebow symbolizes every reasons I avoid the NCAA: It's "amateur" in all the worst senses, and a popularity contest dominated by the SEC (and Notre Dame, of course.) Prostituting my religion to push politics I despise in a SB ad before he'd ever played a pro down just sealed the deal for me with Tebow.

Thus, when I was as sick of Orton as everyone else, the guy I suggested we start (out of desperation rather than confidence) was Quinn. Anyone who knows me could tell you that showed EXACTLY what I thought of Tebow: I preferred the last NOTRE DAMES last overhyped phenom du jour, even though he'd already washed out of the NFL.

Then something weird happened: A team that had only won 5 of its last 20 games won 8 of its next 13 (including a playoff game against the NFLs #1 defense, setting playoff passing records along the way.) I not only wanted but EXPECTED that kid to fail; instead he carried us to the playoffs for the first time since 2005, and what was (and still is) our first playoff WIN since then.

There's a critical point to grasp about Tebow and so many like him: Talent is gentetics, but skill is training. Tebow had all the inborn talent anyone needs to be a top NFL QB, and yes, even the brains; what he never had was training, in part because his talent was more than enough to crush HS and college competition. Unfortunately, that meant he was incredibly raw, the virtual antithesis of an "NFL ready" QB. It would've taken two or three YEARS to instill the intensive high level training he's never had.

I thought it was worth the effort for a team in total rebuild; not for a contender just missing the one critical piece of the championship puzzle to put them over the top, but that's not who we were. That (and Mile Highs often freezing environment) is what made Manning a bad fit and Tebow a good one, especially with Elway as tutor (yes, he's an executive, but if Manning hadn't come on the market you can bet Elway would've spent the offseason drilling a 5 time SB starters experience into Tebow, who'd have hung on his every word.)

The other thing to grasp about Tebow is that none of that MATTERS now. Anyone who makes any definite declarations about Tebow—pro or con—is talking through their hat, because it's all just speculation, and at this point that's probably all it'll ever be. No one's going to invest the years of training time to try and produce a 30 year old NFL ready QB, and whatever (if anything) the Jets had to teach him couldn't do that job. Wondering about it serves no constructive purpose; it can only provoke counterproductive bitterness and recriminations.

What if the David Robinson Rule had existed in the mid-sixties? Would Roger Staubach have won the Ice Bowl and led Dallas to the first two Super Bowls? Would he have won SB V where Craig Morton lost it? If he hadn't retired after winning his last passing title, would The Catch have happened two years later, or would Montana just be another in a long line of overhyped underperforming Notre Dame phenoms? After winning 4 of the first 6 and 7 of the first 16 SBs, while losing 2 more, would it be the Landry Trophy now? Probably not, and it's pointless to ask.

Broncos>Texans>Cowboys>Vikings, with the last way down the list (but don't tell my wife that.) I've been completely clear and open about that from the start. And I agree Johnny Football's probably not the answer in Houston; typical NCAA phenom, except with "character issues" in red all caps. From the sound of things, Kube's is committed to Keenum long term unless he plays them both out of a job. Kubiak's a Houstonian and so am I: Take the kid from U of H unless he proves he can't hack it even with Kubiaks tutoring.


If you're a die-hard Denver fan, that's fine. It just doesn't seem like to most. I know once you get a reputation for being a certain way, people will think of you in that way.
I wasn't aware it had been polled, though that frankly wouldn't surprise me at this point. :tsk: If people need to pigeonhole, they will; I've never lost much sleep over rep, online or anywhere.

Simple Jaded
11-29-2013, 02:47 AM
Personally, I keep bringing Tebow up because your posts drip with butthurt and hypocrisy. The mere fact that a HoF QB in the midst of another MVP doesn't live up to the expectations of one of the biggest Tebow fans on this MB is indicative of that. Truth is, it's reasonable to expect better from Peyton Manning than what we saw Sunday night, it's just impossible to take seriously from a guy who thinks that Manning should be playing anywhere but for the team he claims to care for.

This from a guy who used to put as much effort into propping up Tebow as he currently puts into tearing Manning down, from the tone of his posts you'd think it was Manning that couldn't hit the broadside of a barn and that Tebow that was on a record setting pace. From the tone of your posts you get the impression that you're actually insulted by how well Manning has played, which would explain why you've jumped at the rare opportunity of subpar play from Manning to echo the criticism you saw heaped on Tebow.

This, after you've spent the better part of two years whining about how Tebow shouldn't be judged by the same standards as other QB's. You've spent the better part of the last 2-3 days wiping your ass with two games as if the other 26 pale in comparison.

I could be wrong about you, but even some of your positive posts at this point seem forced and thoroughly uncomfortable. It's a stark contrast to the poster we saw years ago.

Joel
11-29-2013, 04:41 AM
Personally, I keep bringing Tebow up because your posts drip with butthurt and hypocrisy. The mere fact that a HoF QB in the midst of another MVP doesn't live up to the expectations of one of the biggest Tebow fans on this MB is indicative of that.
I'll stop you right there, because that's what we call "circular reasoning." You keep bringing up Tebow because my posts are all about Tebow and the proof is my posts are all about Tebow. :rolleyes:

I never said any QB shouldn't be judged by the same standards as every other: I NO QB should be judged SOLELY as a passer rather than QB, and I'm not the first to say it. I'm not even the dozenth, and people far more experienced and knowledgeable about football than you or I have been saying it longer than you've probably been alive.

Many serious problems threaten our championship hopes (again) this year, and I've been critical of many: This is the first time this season I recall criticizing Manning; if you concede that first criticism is valid, why is it HYPOcritical? If there's any hypocrisy here, it's condemning me for saying something with which you AGREE. Just because I "always" say it, even though I don't.

I'm not seizing on these two games to prove Manning hopeless, I'm responding to an undeniably awful performance with criticism just as I did the last. It's not like every intervening post, or most, took the same tone, unless one thinks screaming for decent pass protection and run blocking so Manning doesn't keep getting his ankles crushed trying to do it alone qualifies. Seriously, what the HELL do you want from me? An unbroken string of always-complimentary never-critical posts about Manning? If you can't say anything nice about the team don't say anything at all?

If that's the standard, BOTH our fan cards are forfeit, because last I checked neither of us had any use for Beadles (though that's not a great exampe; he's been much better recently.)

ForgettingBrandonMarshall
11-29-2013, 11:50 AM
So….who read the previous three posts?

Ravage!!!
11-29-2013, 11:54 AM
So….who read the previous three posts?

No way I read that "War and Peace" post.

Joel
11-29-2013, 04:27 PM
Since both my supposed obsessions were raised in concert this is as good a time as any to fully address both and (heaven willing) be done with them. Next time either's raised, I'll just link it. :)

Broncolingus
12-09-2013, 07:25 AM
What was this thread about...

...Vickerson being injured?

Dapper Dan
12-09-2013, 07:35 AM
What was this thread about...

...Vickerson being injured?

No. Idk where you got that idea.

Joel
12-09-2013, 09:43 AM
What was this thread about...

...Vickerson being injured?
Started that way, but then an often valid point that my exhaustive posts can be exhausting abruptly escalated with a question about why I "hate Manning," leading to the automatic accusation I worship He Who Must Not Be Named, so I answered that charge once and for all. Maybe now we can get back to Vickerson, whom we're sorely missing vs. the run. Hopefully Williams can fill the gap; it's a big gap. Porkchop's a quality DT in his own right, but there's only one of him and we've still got (hopefully) three playoff games, with a good chance of Marshawn Lynch in the last.

Simple Jaded
12-09-2013, 02:37 PM
Knighton is playing at a PB level, I think.