PDA

View Full Version : The official "Who the **** is our QB" thread



Pages : [1] 2

aberdien
01-03-2016, 07:46 PM
Discuss.

Pudge
01-03-2016, 07:47 PM
Discuss.

Peyton /thread

Buff
01-03-2016, 07:50 PM
Peyton /thread

Lock it up.

Bronco4ever
01-03-2016, 07:51 PM
50 Omaha set hut.

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 07:51 PM
I guess we ride with Peyton. We'll see how it goes when the team isn't just hype from the spark they got of him coming in mid-game. Lucky for us the rest of the AFC is ass right now, so we have as good of a shot as anyone.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 07:51 PM
I would say Peyton but this will make Oz cheaper to lock down after the season.

aberdien
01-03-2016, 07:51 PM
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Peyton-Manning-Thumbs-Up-Broncos.gif

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 07:52 PM
I guess we ride with Peyton. We'll see how it goes when the team isn't just hype from the spark they got of him coming in mid-game. Lucky for us the rest of the AFC is ass right now, so we have as good of a shot as anyone.

I do not want to play Chiefs or steelers.

sneakers
01-03-2016, 07:52 PM
Trevor Siemian

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 07:54 PM
I do not want to play Chiefs or steelers.

Best case scenario is both home teams winning in WC weekend. Gives us Houston in round 2 and sends KC to NE.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 07:54 PM
Ok, we saw Peyton. We locked up the number 1 seed. Let's go back to Brock.

Also, what makes a thread official?

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 07:54 PM
Trevor Siemian

He wasn't listed and we don't accept write ins

chazoe60
01-03-2016, 07:55 PM
John mother****ing Elway

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 07:56 PM
Ok, we saw Peyton. We locked up the number 1 seed. Let's go back to Brock.

Also, what makes a thread official?

Pretty sure putting "/thread" in it makes it pretty official.

aberdien
01-03-2016, 07:57 PM
Also, what makes a thread official?
Vanity, mostly.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 07:57 PM
Ok, we saw Peyton. We locked up the number 1 seed. Let's go back to Brock.

Also, what makes a thread official?

Abe.

mouthofsouth
01-03-2016, 08:01 PM
Is this a serious discussion? The Broncos are in the very best position to go to and win the Super Bowl. Better position than two years ago when they had to face that terrible Seattle defense. And you ask if you are going to play a PEYTON WILLIAMS MANNING or essentially what is a rookie quarterback? Things are working out perfectly for the Broncos. Manning is getting healthier every week and the entire Broncos team is almost 100%. Bye week to get better and healthier. Number one seed. If they do not do it this year, well they are just jinxed. It would be a travesty not to give it your best shot with Manning. You would have to rack Kubiac up as INSANE!

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 08:02 PM
I hope we don't name our starter until game day. :lol:

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:03 PM
I guess we ride with Peyton. We'll see how it goes when the team isn't just hype from the spark they got of him coming in mid-game. Lucky for us the rest of the AFC is ass right now, so we have as good of a shot as anyone.

I think Kubiak has to ride with Manning, but ruined any rapport he had with Osweiler. Luckily, as you said the rest of the AFC is flux right now with no clear favorite, it would not surprise me to see a Wild Card team win it all at this point.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:03 PM
Is this a serious discussion? The Broncos are in the very best position to go to and win the Super Bowl. Better position than two years ago when they had to face that terrible Seattle defense. And you ask if you are going to play a PEYTON WILLIAMS MANNING or essentially what is a rookie quarterback? Things are working out perfectly for the Broncos. Manning is getting healthier every week and the entire Broncos team is almost 100%. Bye week to get better and healthier. Number one seed. If they do not do it this year, well they are just jinxed. It would be a travesty not to give it your best shot with Manning. You would have to rack Kubiac up as INSANE!


Yes, it's serious. Didn't you see the title? This is official shit.

I say we do it just like this one. Brock in the first half of each game, Manning in the second. Game plan for that bitches!

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 08:04 PM
I think Kubiak has to ride with Manning, but ruined any rapport he had with Osweiler. Luckily, as you said the rest of the AFC is flux right now with no clear favorite, it would not surprise me to see a Wild Card team win it all at this point.

Other than Houston, I could really see anyone winning the AFC. I think the NFC has to be huge title favorites, though. Seattle, Arizona, or Carolina would spank anyone in the AFC right now.

mouthofsouth
01-03-2016, 08:05 PM
Another thing. I heard those cheers when Manning entered the game. Must just be a few of you think Brock is better.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:09 PM
Another thing. I heard those cheers when Manning entered the game. Must just be a few of you think Brock is better.

No, they don't think that, they are just being "sarcastic".

tomjonesrocks
01-03-2016, 08:10 PM
I would say Peyton but this will make Oz cheaper to lock down after the season.

I think Os is gone after this.

Just a hunch.

VonDoom
01-03-2016, 08:12 PM
Best case scenario is both home teams winning in WC weekend. Gives us Houston in round 2 and sends KC to NE.

Pretty much this, except you mean Cincy to NE (KC would be out in that scenario). Did anyone bring up the Belichick conspiracy theory that they were better off as the two seed?

If Cincy can beat Pitt, things will set up nicely for us. Den/Hou and NE/Cincy - I would like our chances. If Pitt wins, though, I'm extremely worried about playing them, as anyone should be.

Oh, as to the original question ... I think it kind of has to be Peyton at this point, for good or ill. The positives are that he is well rested and seems relatively healthy. If Kubiak went to him here as a "test run", then he passed.

G_Money
01-03-2016, 08:12 PM
I think Os is gone after this.

Just a hunch.

There are worse problems. Go sign Brees. ;) Siemian should be ready by the time Brees is done, right?

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:17 PM
Another thing. I heard those cheers when Manning entered the game. Must just be a few of you think Brock is better.

I would say had Manning done more then simply hand it off and actually did better then one catch over 50% completion ratio then maybe, but people acting like he lit it up when it was the run game and defense that won this for us, is a joke. Kubiak cut off his nose to spite his face...what rapport he had with Brock is probably all but gone, and if Manning shows his season form again during the post-season then we're toast. Luckily the AFC looks like the 80's again too weak to compete, this is the NFC's to lose at this point.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:17 PM
I would say Peyton but this will make Oz cheaper to lock down after the season.

If I'm Brock I would no longer give a home town discount. I go yo whoever offers more. His play didn't warrant a benching. I'm just happy we won but we may of screwed up in the long haul if he holds a grudge. I'm sure he was excited to get a chance at the playoffs and now he gets to watch from the side.

I don't want manning next year if it means losing brock and defensive stars. I'm not sold on brock being the future but he deserves a chance. But my main concern is keeping our d together, hard to fo with peyton taking up so much cap space.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:19 PM
rapport with Brock?

LMAO.

tripp
01-03-2016, 08:19 PM
Only want Peyton if he's allowed to run his own offense. Since there's a better chance of me winning the lottery, I'd still stick with Brock.

VonDoom
01-03-2016, 08:21 PM
Also, isn't this the exact scenario some people were talking about earlier this week? Except it happened in this game and not the playoffs, but we started Brock, had a HOF QB on the bench and brought him in to win the game. I don't know whether they should go that route again, but the possibility exists.

Northman
01-03-2016, 08:21 PM
Best guy that gives a chance to win, if Manning is healthy he has the experience so i would roll with him win/lose.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:22 PM
I'm nervous about the playoffs now. If Peyton plays like he did all year we will struggle against these playoff teams. He looked like he was throwing a little harder today but I don't know if it will last. Can he take the besting these d lines are going to dish out? Luckily we have a bye and home field. If manning is 100 percent we may be in a great position for this year.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:22 PM
I think Os is gone after this.

Just a hunch.

After being told you're the starter and we're riding with you and then yank his *** when you could really only blame him for one of the turnovers? Yeah, I don't see Osweiler sticking with a coach who can not stick by him. And I think Elway would be a moron to place a franchise tag on him because he didn't show enough to earn that sort of paycheck, but neither has Manning. I feel great about our defense but have some serious doubts about our offensive future...lol.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:24 PM
After reading this thread, I want to go with the guy who is less emotional than a 14 year old girl. Whoever that might be.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:26 PM
rapport with Brock?

LMAO.

Yeah, it was reported that Brock and Kubiak had developed a strong rapport with one another leading partially to the change at quarterback...that is out the window, at least IMHO. I don't think I could respect a quarterback or player who allowed this to stand in the wake of not being the soul reason behind the offensive woes, I'd be pissed.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:26 PM
Another thing. I heard those cheers when Manning entered the game. Must just be a few of you think Brock is better.


What a troll have you even been around since manning has been out? He comes in for half a game and here comes his fanatics. Calm your tits, please. Let us broncos fans enjoy "our team" victory.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:30 PM
Yeah, it was reported that Brock and Kubiak had developed a strong rapport with one another leading partially to the change at quarterback...that is out the window, at least IMHO. I don't think I could respect a quarterback or player who allowed this to stand in the wake of not being the soul reason behind the offensive woes, I'd be pissed.

I haven't the slightest idea what you trying to say in your second sentence, if I'm being honest.

But seriously. Who gives a shit about rapport? Manning was benched. He's a first ballot HoF. He did nothing but act with class and do what he was told to. If Brock can't do the same, good riddance.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:30 PM
After reading this thread, I want to go with the guy who is less emotional than a 14 year old girl. Whoever that might be.

It's an emotional game Ninja, don't think Manning is not dancing like a teenage girl whooping in the locker room and in his head singing, "I got my job back". You get wrapped up in the emotional tide of it all, hell I want a quarterback that has spunk, fire, is emotional and has a drive to win, but also has the talent to do it - I worry that we don't have either on the roster.

Northman
01-03-2016, 08:32 PM
Yeah, it was reported that Brock and Kubiak had developed a strong rapport with one another leading partially to the change at quarterback...that is out the window, at least IMHO. I don't think I could respect a quarterback or player who allowed this to stand in the wake of not being the soul reason behind the offensive woes, I'd be pissed.

If Brock was pissed that the starting QB was handed his job back than Brock will never succeed in the NFL. I agree that on the surface it seems like Kubiak blamed him for the offensive woes but i believe it had more to do with motivating the team because whatever leadership qualities Brock has wasnt working at the time. Even though Brock has done pretty good filling in the team was still Mannings. Brister knew it when he filled in and Brock surely has to know it with Manning.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:33 PM
It's an emotional game Ninja, don't think Manning is not dancing like a teenage girl whooping in the locker room and in his head singing, "I got my job back". You get wrapped up in the emotional tide of it all, hell I want a quarterback that has spunk, fire, is emotional and has a drive to win, but also has the talent to do it - I worry that we don't have either on the roster.

Spunk and fire is fine. Pouting and petulance isn't. If you can have the former without the latter, then who gives a shit about rapport?

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:34 PM
I haven't the slightest idea what you trying to say in your second sentence, if I'm being honest.

But seriously. Who gives a shit about rapport? Manning was benched. He's a first ballot HoF. He did nothing but act with class and do what he was told to. If Brock can't do the same, good riddance.

What does being a first ballot HOF have to do with ****? And did I ever say he was classless? What I am saying is that Kubiak had no reason to bench him, one turnover could be specifically pinpointed to Osweiler, the rest was on the whole of the offense...period. Manning didn't do much of anything either, he had one catch that put him over 50% in pass completions. At this point, I really don't feel warm and fuzzy about either quarterback to be honest.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:36 PM
I haven't the slightest idea what you trying to say in your second sentence, if I'm being honest.

But seriously. Who gives a shit about rapport? Manning was benched. He's a first ballot HoF. He did nothing but act with class and do what he was told to. If Brock can't do the same, good riddance.

Manning would of acted the same if he got benched for no reason. Manning needed to be benched. That loss to Kc was all on manning and almost cost us the division and the 1 seed. Brock might act fine with it anyway we dont know yet hoe he will handle it.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:37 PM
What does being a first ballot HOF have to do with ****? And did I ever say he was classless? What I am saying is that Kubiak had no reason to bench him, one turnover could be specifically pinpointed to Osweiler, the rest was on the whole of the offense...period. Manning didn't do much of anything either, he had one catch that put him over 50% in pass completions. At this point, I really don't feel warm and fuzzy about either quarterback to be honest.

What does being a first ballot HoFer have to do with how you react when being benched for what is basically a rookie? Do I seriously need to explain the relevance?

The fact that we scored 20 point after Kubiak put in manning speaks for itself. You can second guess the decision, but you can't second guess the outcome.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:38 PM
Manning wouldn't of acted the same if he got benched for no reason. Manning needed to be benched. That loss to Kc was all on manning and almost cost us the division and the 1 seed. Brock might act fine with it anyway we dont know yet hoe he will handle it.

Absurd. You have no ******* idea how manning would have reacted. Are you seriously justifying pouting over what comes down to a call that is not Brocks (or ours) to make?

And I was responding to the reports of a "rapport" that might be at risk now that Brock was benched.

mouthofsouth
01-03-2016, 08:38 PM
Manning plays with his head as much as anything. EXPERIENCE and knowing the game like no one else make him the only choice for the playoffs. Remember, playoff football is on another level. Manning knows how to read defenses and Brock is not adept at that yet. Couldn't you see the difference?

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:38 PM
If Brock was pissed that the starting QB was handed his job back than Brock will never succeed in the NFL. I agree that on the surface it seems like Kubiak blamed him for the offensive woes but i believe it had more to do with motivating the team because whatever leadership qualities Brock has wasnt working at the time. Even though Brock has done pretty good filling in the team was still Mannings. Brister knew it when he filled in and Brock surely has to know it with Manning.

Brister was never anointed the franchise quarterback of the future or had to deal with this same crap, there is a difference North - especially after Kubiak states that Osweiler is the starter going forward, per his own words, not mine. Otherwise I would completely agree with you. Manning is the quarterback of the off-season, but as to who is our quarterback after, well who the hell knows. :beer:

Northman
01-03-2016, 08:42 PM
Brister was never anointed the franchise quarterback of the future or had to deal with this same crap, there is a difference North - especially after Kubiak states that Osweiler is the starter going forward, per his own words, not mine. Otherwise I would completely agree with you. Manning is the quarterback of the off-season, but as to who is our quarterback after, well who the hell knows. :beer:

Things change man, perhaps if the Pats had won today Brock stays in regardless. I think the opportunity was to good to pass up considering everything that fell in our laps today. But, it could be worse. We could be the Jets.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:43 PM
What does being a first ballot HoFer have to do with how you react when being benched for what is basically a rookie? Do I seriously need to explain the relevance?

The fact that we scored 20 point after Kubiak put in manning speaks for itself. You can second guess the decision, but you can't second guess the outcome.

Not saying it did not jolt the team Ninja, just saying that what he did was unethical and more of what I would have expected from Jim Tomsula or Chip Kelley. Nor arguing that the outcome was bad, but let's not act like Manning threw for 200 plus yards and three touchdowns instead of 69 yards and zero touchdowns while the running game racked up well over 200 yards. So I can't argue the outcome, but I do question the decision more in the long-run rather then the short. So if Manning throws three interceptions the next game will we start leapfrogging back and forth?

aberdien
01-03-2016, 08:45 PM
I do think it's funny how the QB preferences on here have changed so dramatically :elefant:

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:45 PM
Not saying it did not jolt the team Ninja, just saying that what he did was unethical and more of what I would have expected from Jim Tomsula or Chip Kelley. Nor arguing that the outcome was bad, but let's not act like Manning threw for 200 plus yards and three touchdowns instead of 69 yards and zero touchdowns while the running game racked up well over 200 yards. So I can't argue the outcome, but I do question the decision more in the long-run rather then the short. So if Manning throws three interceptions the next game will we start leapfrogging back and forth?

C'mon. Did you really just call what Kubiak did unethical? I seriously can't understand even an iota of that sentiment.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:47 PM
Absurd. You have no ******* idea how manning would have reacted. Are you seriously justifying pouting over what comes down to a call that is not Brocks (or ours) to make?

And I was responding to the reports of a "rapport" that might be at risk now that Brock was benched.what pouting are you talking about anyway? He looked pissed for a while but kept interacting and cheering them team coming iff the field. Arr uou saying you wouldn't be pissed after being benched? You are makjng assumptions in how brock will react just like i believr manning would br pissed in the same scenario ( the chiefs game was not the same scenario). Im not jumping to conclusions any athlete will be pissed for an unwarranted benching.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:47 PM
C'mon. Did you really just call what Kubiak did unethical? I seriously can't understand even an iota of that sentiment.

Well maybe unethical is the wrong terminology, let's see...unprofessional, is that better? And I stand by that.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 08:49 PM
Things change man, perhaps if the Pats had won today Brock stays in regardless. I think the opportunity was to good to pass up considering everything that fell in our laps today. But, it could be worse. We could be the Jets.

True on both accounts...:beer:

wayninja
01-03-2016, 08:50 PM
Well maybe unethical is the wrong terminology, let's see...unprofessional, is that better? And I stand by that.

Unprofessional makes even less sense. It's literally the definition of professionalism to coach a team using every tool that you think gives you the best chance to win. He literally did his job, I don't get how you can call it unprofessional.

What would be unprofessional is if Brock somehow gets a chip on his shoulder about it.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:51 PM
Manning plays with his head as much as anything. EXPERIENCE and knowing the game like no one else make him the only choice for the playoffs. Remember, playoff football is on another level. Manning knows how to read defenses and Brock is not adept at that yet. Couldn't you see the difference?


Can you change your profile? I hate every thing you type but you look like my grandma. Don't make me have unwarranted animosity for my deceased grandmother.

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 08:51 PM
What would be unprofessional is if Brock somehow gets a chip on his shoulder about it.

Disagree totally with this. I hope he gets a chip on his shoulder and that fire motivates him to play even better next time he gets a chance.

It would be unprofessional if he vocalized his displeasure, but it's not unprofessional to feel a certain way. That's just silly talk.

Valar Morghulis
01-03-2016, 08:53 PM
Well maybe unethical is the wrong terminology, let's see...unprofessional, is that better? And I stand by that.

Unorthodox perhaps

Northman
01-03-2016, 08:53 PM
I do think it's funny how the QB preferences on here have changed so dramatically :elefant:

I cant speak for anyone else but for me it has more to do with circumstances and timing rather than who i would prefer. Neither QB showed much today in terms of making plays downfield but i do think with Manning finishing the game and showing he can stand upright (as well as his experience) that he should be the guy to start the playoffs. IF Brock had finished (win or lose) than i would still be asking for Brock to start. Circumstances have changed and if the team feels more confident with Manning behind center than thats who you roll with.

chazoe60
01-03-2016, 08:53 PM
I wasn't a fan of Brock getting benched at the time but it definitely sparked the team and especially the fans. The bigger move was puting Polumbus in (why the **** was he not in earlier?) but I digress.

Now the genie is out of the bottle though and you have to ride with Manning but if he's the Manning of the previous 20+ games he needs to have a quick hook as well.

As far as Brock goes if he can't handle a little benching then he doesn't have the intestinal fortitude required to be an elite QB anyway. I think he'll be fine and I think he'll be our started next year.

TXBRONC
01-03-2016, 08:55 PM
There really isn't a discussion to have. Manning will be the starting quarterback going into the playoffs.

chazoe60
01-03-2016, 08:56 PM
Imagine how great the story will be if Manning can win a SB and ride off into the sunset? You can't write this shit.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-03-2016, 08:56 PM
I don't think Brock will be too butt-hurt about being pulled for a 4-time MVP and 1st ballot HOFer. Had Peyton not dressed and they'd have pulled Brock for say Siemian, then yeah. This isn't exactly that type of scenario. He's PFM for Heaven's sake, not some scrub backup. Brock has done some really great things - he helped the team beat both NE and Cincy. I have the feeling, however, had he stayed in the game we would've lost and ended up the 5th seed. Not where anyone wanted to be.

It's Kubiak's job to make those tough calls. He did and it paid off this time. It actually makes me have hope that if Manning is hurting and he's hurting the team in a playoff game, he won't hesitate to go back to try to win the game.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 08:58 PM
I don't care who qbs i just want to win. But if Brock walks next year I wouldn't blame him one bit. If I'm Brock I would go Ray Finkle on Sanders and CJ for fumbling. He had a chance to ride the #1 defense into the playoffs with a bye and home field advantage but the team around him cost him that chance. I cant blsme the guy if he is pissed.

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 08:58 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 09:00 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.

Not a robot but he needs to realize Kubiak made the right choice and we won the game. The coach does what's best for the team. I'm sure Brock knows that by now.

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:01 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.


Well, i once heard that you cannot lose your starting job to an injury. How would you feel if you got injured and the backup came in and didnt really set the world on fire and you never got your job back? Personally, i think Brock has learned a lot from Manning and i dont think he is going to be pissed as i think he understands this is his team once Manning is gone.

chazoe60
01-03-2016, 09:03 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.

If I was put into a leadership role and the guys were screwing up I would understand my demotion. And you can not compare the world of professional sports with other normal professions. Benching are part of the game. If Brock can't get over this then I don't want him leading this team anyway. He'll be fine he understands the deal, I'm sure he doesn't like it and I wouldn't want him to like it, but if he can't get over it and be our starter next year then bye bye.

GEM
01-03-2016, 09:04 PM
Another thing. I heard those cheers when Manning entered the game. Must just be a few of you think Brock is better.

As Peyton himself just said...those same people were booing me in October vs. the Chiefs...

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:05 PM
As Peyton himself just said...those same people were booing me in October vs. the Chiefs...

Well, you actually have to watch more than one game to know that. lol

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:06 PM
Imagine how great the story will be if Manning can win a SB and ride off into the sunset? You can't write this shit.

It would be the second best conclusion for me. :D

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 09:07 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.

His agent will tell him the same. Denver had a history of this now. Plummer gone for cutler, cutler gone for cassel/ orton, tebow wins a playoff and hes gone. Fox has a winning record and gets us to the playoffs and hes gone. I was happy to get manning instead of tebow and thought fox needed to go because he couldn't get it done. But all the knee jerk moves we make as a franchise will be on brocks agents mind.

Dreadnought
01-03-2016, 09:08 PM
I don't think Brock will be too butt-hurt about being pulled for a 4-time MVP and 1st ballot HOFer. Had Peyton not dressed and they'd have pulled Brock for say Siemian, then yeah. This isn't exactly that type of scenario. He's PFM for Heaven's sake, not some scrub backup. Brock has done some really great things - he helped the team beat both NE and Cincy. I have the feeling, however, had he stayed in the game we would've lost and ended up the 5th seed. Not where anyone wanted to be.

It's Kubiak's job to make those tough calls. He did and it paid off this time. It actually makes me have hope that if Manning is hurting and he's hurting the team in a playoff game, he won't hesitate to go back to try to win the game.

This right here. Kubiak sat Brock down to give the team a spark. Its an old school coaching move, used to be practically routine when I was a kid. I thought Brock played pretty well, but stuff wasn't working. Kubes took a flyer, and thankfully, it worked. Creative coaching. Yay. I still like Brock long term, and I think I like Manning two weeks from now.

I think the whole business about anyone "losing rapport" and Brock being seriously butt hurt is simply nonsense-on-stilts. It was a weird game. We won anyway. Yay

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:10 PM
This right here. Kubiak sat Brock down to give the team a spark. Its an old school coaching move, used to be practically routine when I was a kid. I thought Brock played pretty well, but stuff wasn't working. Kubes took a flyer, and thankfully, it worked. Creative coaching. Yay. I still like Brock long term, and I think I like Manning two weeks from now.

I think the whole business about anyone "losing rapport" and Brock being seriously butt hurt is simply nonsense-on-stilts. It was a weird game. We won anyway. Yay

It was good to see Brock claps his hands and not be a petulant child on the sidelines. Even if Brock is upset now, I doubt he'll make a big deal out of it, and I doubt that the feelings will linger. Honestly does it matter if he's upset right now, if he's not upset a week from now?

Jsteve01
01-03-2016, 09:11 PM
I don't think Brock will be too butt-hurt about being pulled for a 4-time MVP and 1st ballot HOFer. Had Peyton not dressed and they'd have pulled Brock for say Siemian, then yeah. This isn't exactly that type of scenario. He's PFM for Heaven's sake, not some scrub backup. Brock has done some really great things - he helped the team beat both NE and Cincy. I have the feeling, however, had he stayed in the game we would've lost and ended up the 5th seed. Not where anyone wanted to be.

It's Kubiak's job to make those tough calls. He did and it paid off this time. It actually makes me have hope that if Manning is hurting and he's hurting the team in a playoff game, he won't hesitate to go back to try to win the game.

This right here. Kubiak sat Brock down to give the team a spark. Its an old school coaching move, used to be practically routine when I was a kid. I thought Brock played pretty well, but stuff wasn't working. Kubes took a flyer, and thankfully, it worked. Creative coaching. Yay. I still like Brock long term, and I think I like Manning two weeks from now.

I think the whole business about anyone "losing rapport" and Brock being seriously butt hurt is simply nonsense-on-stilts. It was a weird game. We won anyway. Yay agree totally. Kubiak has given Brock far more opportunity this year than Fox ever did. Does it suck, yes. Does it bruised ego a little bit yes. But the big thing is that everybody knows that the interceptions really weren't his fault I don't even know about the protection on that sack strip. crazy thing is that I feel better about Brock in the future than I did going into this game

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 09:12 PM
Not a robot but he needs to realize Kubiak made the right choice and we won the game. The coach does what's best for the team. I'm sure Brock knows that by now.

Winning the game doesn't mean it was the right choice. Peyton didn't really do anything in the passing game. We got unlucky with turnovers, and then started running the ball better when Peyton came in. Schofield being benched probably made more of a difference. If we gave Brock the same line play/running game, we would have won with him too. If Peyton shits the bed in the playoffs, it wasn't the right decision.


Well, i once heard that you cannot lose your starting job to an injury. How would you feel if you got injured and the backup came in and didnt really set the world on fire and you never got your job back? Personally, i think Brock has learned a lot from Manning and i dont think he is going to be pissed as i think he understands this is his team once Manning is gone.

I think it's more reasonable to lose your job to injury if the backup comes in and plays really well. Plus, a lot of us thought Peyton should have lost his job regardless of injury.

Ravage!!!
01-03-2016, 09:12 PM
Man, some of you guys expect athletes to be robots. How would you guys feel if you lost your job even if you were performing well and it was your co-workers who were screwing up?

Brock basically got benched for no reason at all. This was way worse than letting Manning start the game IMO. If I were Brock, I'd be done with Kubiak and wouldn't even consider re-signing with Denver if there were any other offers. But that's just me, and I really hope Brock is a nicer guy than I am.

But if he's not, he's not immature or unprofessional, he's just human.

He wasn't making the reads. He wasn't audibling to the right plays, and he was missing some throws. It's why the offense looked btter with Manning. Brock can be upset allllll he wants, but the truth is, the game was TOO important for 5 turnovers.

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 09:13 PM
People have a really short memory. Peyton threw 17 INTs in 10 games.

I don't see any reason to believe he gives us a better chance than Brock. None at all.

MOtorboat
01-03-2016, 09:14 PM
Six pages in an hour and a half. Impressive.

:clap2:

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:14 PM
People have a really short memory. Peyton threw 17 INTs in 10 games.

I don't see any reason to believe he gives us a better chance than Brock. None at all.

Depends how much of it was injury and how much of it was just old age. Its not about short memory, its about what is truth when talking about his woes earlier in the season.

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 09:15 PM
He wasn't making the reads. He wasn't audibling to the right plays, and he was missing some throws. It's why the offense looked btter with Manning. Brock can be upset allllll he wants, but the truth is, the game was TOO important for 5 turnovers.

CJ's fumble, Sanders' fumble, and Brock's first INT were not on him at all. Absolutely nothing he could do about them. I mean, that INT was right in the receiver's hands, you can't throw it any better.

His fumble was 100% on him, and his other INT really wasn't his fault but you could at least make an argument that he gets some blame for it. The others, 0% his fault.

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:15 PM
Manning still overthrows the deep passes, he's old. But he hit some mid-range passes that looked better (consistently) than his former self.

That does make me a little optimistic.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 09:15 PM
Winning the game doesn't mean it was the right choice. Peyton didn't really do anything in the passing game. We got unlucky with turnovers, and then started running the ball better when Peyton came in. Schofield being benched probably made more of a difference. If we gave Brock the same line play/running game, we would have won with him too. If Peyton shits the bed in the playoffs, it wasn't the right decision.



I think it's more reasonable to lose your job to injury if the backup comes in and plays really well. Plus, a lot of us thought Peyton should have lost his job regardless of injury.

If if if.

We'll see.

I guess it all comes down to luck. Go find some 4 leaf clovers.

Tned
01-03-2016, 09:16 PM
I would say Peyton but this will make Oz cheaper to lock down after the season.

Yep, kind of what I've been thinking.

Assuming he didn't come out of the game lame, including bruised/broken rips from that earth shaking punch to the chest, I don't see how Kubiak goes with anyone but Manning in the playoffs. Fact is, while he didn't throw a lot of balls, it's the best we've seen him throw in a while. The balls had zip and mostly were on target. He looked real good.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-03-2016, 09:18 PM
His agent will tell him the same. Denver had a history of this now. Plummer gone for cutler, cutler gone for cassel/ orton, tebow wins a playoff and hes gone. Fox has a winning record and gets us to the playoffs and hes gone. I was happy to get manning instead of tebow and thought fox needed to go because he couldn't get it done. But all the knee jerk moves we make as a franchise will be on brocks agents mind.

If Brock really feels that way then let him leave. Maybe he can end up somewhere like Cleveland where he won't have great receivers, the #1 defense and an offensive minded coach to help him. If he takes the $ to play for a bottom dweller, he can have it. Worked out great for Julius Thomas didn't it? Sure, he got his $, but he'll NEVER get a ring (and maybe not even a shot at the playoffs) in Jacksonville.

tripp
01-03-2016, 09:18 PM
Regardless of who is QB, I'm appreciative of both QB's, we wouldn't be where we are if it wasn't for Brock and Peyton. I think Brock might be the better option still, but at the end of the day, this is Peyton's last year with us - I wouldn't mind if he had the keys to this team till the end of the playoffs. We'll have Brock for years to come, Peyton for only a month and a bit longer if it goes as planned.

Ravage!!!
01-03-2016, 09:18 PM
CJ's fumble, Sanders' fumble, and Brock's first INT were not on him at all. Absolutely nothing he could do about them. I mean, that INT was right in the receiver's hands, you can't throw it any better.

His fumble was 100% on him, and his other INT really wasn't his fault but you could at least make an argument that he gets some blame for it. The others, 0% his fault.


Doesn't matter. It's 5 turnovers. The offense wasn't getting it done... SOMETHING had to change. Brock wasn't making the right calls.. and the pss that was dropped for INT can be argued as to if it was a good pass or not. I can ABSOLUTELY say it could be thrown better, 100% could easily say that. Ask Elway if throwing the ball too hard is detrimental to the receivers catching it. He had to learn too.

Brock wasn't reading the blitzes, and has had a BIG problem reading them since NE. Manning's adjustments and calls were OBVIOUSLY making a difference up front that Brock just wasn't doing.

tripp
01-03-2016, 09:19 PM
If Brock really feels that way then let him leave. Maybe he can end up somewhere like Cleveland where he won't have great receivers, the #1 defense and an offensive minded coach to help him. If he takes the $ to play for a bottom dweller, he can have it. Worked out great for Julius Thomas didn't it? Sure, he got his $, but he'll NEVER get a ring (and maybe not even a shot at the playoffs) in Jacksonville.

When was the last time anyone even heard someone say Julius Thomas' name since he went to Jacksonville? Seriously lol. Outside of annoying fantasy football talk, he doesn't get mentioned.

Tned
01-03-2016, 09:19 PM
Depends how much of it was injury and how much of it was just old age. Its not about short memory, its about what is truth when talking about his woes earlier in the season.

Exactly.

The second half last season he was awful, after he had some lower body injuries. The thing we see now is that Manning needs his lower body more than ever. He can't make an arm throw, so if he's dealing with lower body injuries, or the line doesn't give him time to step into his throws, they are horrible. If he has a little time (he doesn't need much) and has a reasonably healthy set of legs, he looks like he can still fling it.

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:20 PM
If Brock really feels that way then let him leave. Maybe he can end up somewhere like Cleveland where he won't have great receivers, the #1 defense and an offensive minded coach to help him. If he takes the $ to play for a bottom dweller, he can have it. Worked out great for Julius Thomas didn't it? Sure, he got his $, but he'll NEVER get a ring (and maybe not even a shot at the playoffs) in Jacksonville.

Pretty much. Money is great but being surrounded by a good organization is equally as important unless you simply are doing it for the paycheck.

Ravage!!!
01-03-2016, 09:21 PM
His agent will tell him the same. Denver had a history of this now. Plummer gone for cutler, cutler gone for cassel/ orton, tebow wins a playoff and hes gone. Fox has a winning record and gets us to the playoffs and hes gone. I was happy to get manning instead of tebow and thought fox needed to go because he couldn't get it done. But all the knee jerk moves we make as a franchise will be on brocks agents mind.

You've spanned different coaches and different GMs over a decade of football. Do you really think Brock is looking at it as though its a pattern set by the coaches/GMs in place? This is the NFL...where FA rules the league. Moves are made with every franchise.

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:24 PM
You've spanned different coaches and different GMs over a decade of football. Do you really think Brock is looking at it as though its a pattern set by the coaches/GMs in place? This is the NFL...where FA rules the league. Moves are made with every franchise.

All i know is if Brock gets pissy and wants to leave than i dont want him here. Where else are you going to find a team that was willing to take a chance on you with limited college experience, let you sit and learn from one of the alltime greats, and have you come in with some really talented players and a solid defense out of the gate in your first few games? I dont think Brock will be a baby but really the guy has nothing to complain about in my opinion. He's had it REAL good here in Denver, just ask Manziel how much he likes it in Cleveland right now.

tripp
01-03-2016, 09:28 PM
All i know is if Brock gets pissy and wants to leave than i dont want him here. Where else are you going to find a team that was willing to take a chance on you with limited college experience, let you sit and learn from one of the alltime greats, and have you come in with some really talented players and a solid defense out of the gate in your first few games? I dont think Brock will be a baby but really the guy has nothing to complain about in my opinion. He's had it REAL good here in Denver, just ask Manziel how much he likes it in Cleveland right now.

Nothing has given me any indication Brock will act this way. If you saw the post game interview, Brock is all class. I'd be shocked big time if he acted any differently than what he has conducted himself all year.

Dreadnought
01-03-2016, 09:29 PM
Well, we have the #1 seed. We wouldn't have had it if Peyton hadn't pulled this one out...or if Brock hadn't pulled off brilliant comebacks against Cincy and the vile Patriots. We owe them both a vote of thanks

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:31 PM
Well, we have the #1 seed. We wouldn't have had it if Peyton hadn't pulled this one out...or if Brock hadn't pulled off brilliant comebacks against Cincy and the vile Patriots. We owe them both a vote of thanks

It's almost as if the situation doesn't have to be a contentious dichotomy or something.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 09:32 PM
Winning the game doesn't mean it was the right choice.

It was for a first round bye, the AFC west, and the 1st seed.

Winning means it was the right choice.

Northman
01-03-2016, 09:33 PM
Well, we have the #1 seed. We wouldn't have had it if Peyton hadn't pulled this one out...or if Brock hadn't pulled off brilliant comebacks against Cincy and the vile Patriots. We owe them both a vote of thanks

Yeeeep. Teamwork.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 09:34 PM
Disagree totally with this. I hope he gets a chip on his shoulder and that fire motivates him to play even better next time he gets a chance.

It would be unprofessional if he vocalized his displeasure, but it's not unprofessional to feel a certain way. That's just silly talk.

Yeah, you know that's not what I meant. I meant a public/pouty/Jay Cutler vibe. Having the benching spark your determination is not what I was talking about.

Tned
01-03-2016, 09:35 PM
All i know is if Brock gets pissy and wants to leave than i dont want him here. Where else are you going to find a team that was willing to take a chance on you with limited college experience, let you sit and learn from one of the alltime greats, and have you come in with some really talented players and a solid defense out of the gate in your first few games? I dont think Brock will be a baby but really the guy has nothing to complain about in my opinion. He's had it REAL good here in Denver, just ask Manziel how much he likes it in Cleveland right now.

And to this point, in his three and a half years as backup, and nearly half a season as starter, he's been a class act. I don't know if he was always this way, or learned how to handle himself watching Manning (I'm guessing he was always like this, considering the story about choosing his college based on an easy flight for his parents and stuff).

Just like most things in the NFL, it will come down to money. He's done enough in his Broncos debut to get himself a decent payday in the off season. Will that be with the Broncos or another team is something we just will have to wait to find out.

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:35 PM
Look, I really like Brock. I think he's a great talent. I think he has guts, I think he wants to win, and I think he's one helluva a professional. I thought he was on fire early in the game. I don't blame him at all for the Norwood Pick, nor do I blame him for the second INT. I've seen some of the best QB's in the game make that type of pick when they were in their prime.

The fumble was a tough moment for him. i think that was on him. But the team needed a spark, and unfortunately there's only one QB on the field. Denver needing a spark isn't all on him; he did not make Anderson or Sanders fumble. But again, if the team needs a spark, and the QB situation is precarious, Kubiak actually showed some guts today.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 09:38 PM
Look, I really like Brock. I think he's a great talent. I think he has guts, I think he wants to win, and I think he's one helluva a professional. I thought he was on fire early in the game. I don't blame him at all for the Norwood Pick, nor do I blame him for the second INT. I've seen some of the best QB's in the game make that type of pick when they were in their prime.

The fumble was a tough moment for him. i think that was on him. But the team needed a spark, and unfortunately there's only one QB on the field. Denver needing a spark isn't all on him; he did not make Anderson or Sanders fumble. But again, if the team needs a spark, and the QB situation is precarious, Kubiak actually showed some guts today.

I said it in the gameday thread, but it's appropriate here as well. I totally agree with this. He wasn't put in because of anything specifically physically wrong with Brock. He was put in to pull together a team on the verge of breaking apart at the seams. The wheels were about to fall off and a steady hand was needed on the wheel. Sorry if I mixed too many metaphors.

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:39 PM
I said it in the gameday thread, but it's appropriate here as well. I totally agree with this. He wasn't put in because of anything specifically physically wrong with Brock. He was put in to pull together a team on the verge of breaking apart at the seams. The wheels were about to fall off and a steady hand was needed on the wheel. Sorry if I mixed too many metaphors.

We agree. This is weird.

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 09:40 PM
I said it in the gameday thread, but it's appropriate here as well. I totally agree with this. He wasn't put in because of anything specifically physically wrong with Brock. He was put in to pull together a team on the verge of breaking apart at the seams. The wheels were about to fall off and a steady hand was needed on the wheel. Sorry if I mixed too many metaphors.

The spark our team got certainly made my pants burst apart at the seams.

Dreadnought
01-03-2016, 09:41 PM
We agree. This is weird.

Wayninja is almost never ever wrong. Anytime you disagree with him you should doublecheck yourself.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 09:43 PM
Wayninja is almost never ever wrong. Anytime you disagree with him you should doublecheck yourself.

If I get my wife on the phone, can you talk to her?

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:43 PM
Wayninja is almost never ever wrong. Anytime you disagree with him you should doublecheck yourself.

Dread, we're having a moment, you and I; don't spoil it.

Dreadnought
01-03-2016, 09:43 PM
If I get my wife on the phone, can you talk to her?

I can't vouch for wives, dude. They operate on their own system

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 09:43 PM
It was for a first round bye, the AFC west, and the 1st seed.

Winning means it was the right choice.

It's impossible trying to debate with someone who only judges the result rather than how we achieved that result.

Peyton was 5/9 for 69 yards. He was basically inconsequential. Our running game won us this game in the 2nd half. If you want to say Peyton contributed to that, a valid argument can be made, but it's always silly to assume something is correct just because of the end result.

Foochacho
01-03-2016, 09:44 PM
You've spanned different coaches and different GMs over a decade of football. Do you really think Brock is looking at it as though its a pattern set by the coaches/GMs in place? This is the NFL...where FA rules the league. Moves are made with every franchise.

I dont think it will make much difference to him but we sure do come off as a knee jerk sort of team. If I had to guess we still sign brock but i was initially responding to a post about him being cheaper now. I find that he may be more expensive to sign now because of the way his season ended. I doubt anything before the elway gm era will matter but if he is looking for stability and a long term deal he may see us as a disloyal franchise. We should be fine either way but I would of loved to have got him on a short reasonable contract. He has potential but we dont know what he may be. Benching him and our recent history may make it harder for us to find out.

All I want this year is a superbowl. But I hate risking anything in the future. I was hoping manning would be gone we ride with brock and keep our defense mostly in tact with the manning savings. We could compete for years. If Brock waljs do we give Manning another year with all his injuries the past couple years? Can we rely on him to make it the whole season? How many free agents do we lise by keeping manning. If brees is available can we afford him and our other free agents? Will we have to move up in the draft to draft a qb if we cant affird a rental?

I just feel keeping our d intact is our best bet at competing and dont want to lose them for a qb rental. I wont worry about it much right now because i think peyton when healthy gives us a great chance at winning this year. But Damn ill be pissed if we lose this defensive unit because of overpaying a qb.

GEM
01-03-2016, 09:48 PM
It's impossible trying to debate with someone who only judges the result rather than how we achieved that result.

Peyton was 5/9 for 69 yards. He was basically inconsequential. Our running game won us this game in the 2nd half. If you want to say Peyton contributed to that, a valid argument can be made, but it's always silly to assume something is correct just because of the end result.

Maybe it had more to do with Schofield getting the **** off the field and te help for polumbus...:whistle:

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 09:48 PM
Maybe it had more to do with Schofield getting the **** off the field and te help for polumbus...:whistle:

That makes the most sense to me. It's mind boggling how it took the coaches so long to make that move.

GEM
01-03-2016, 09:50 PM
That makes the most sense to me. It's mind boggling how it took the coaches so long to make that move.

I wish they would have done that solid for Brock weeks ago...

Poet
01-03-2016, 09:51 PM
It's impossible trying to debate with someone who only judges the result rather than how we achieved that result.

Peyton was 5/9 for 69 yards. He was basically inconsequential. Our running game won us this game in the 2nd half. If you want to say Peyton contributed to that, a valid argument can be made, but it's always silly to assume something is correct just because of the end result.

But he was a reason as to why the running game came back alive. Even if for no other reason the team responded to him.


Think of it this way - if staying with Brock is the right choice, this reality did nothing to hamper that as the Broncos can still go back to him. But, this move buys the team another week to contemplate this and get more data -medical reports and practice observations- to make that choice.

Is that unfair as a position to you?

Lancane
01-03-2016, 09:53 PM
Maybe it had more to do with Schofield getting the **** off the field and te help for polumbus...:whistle:

Phil Simms has only pointed that out about 100 times the last two games he's announced!!! LMAO

GEM
01-03-2016, 09:54 PM
But he was a reason as to why the running game came back alive. Even if for no other reason the team responded to him.


Think of it this way - if staying with Brock is the right choice, this reality did nothing to hamper that as the Broncos can still go back to him. But, this move buys the team another week to contemplate this and get more data -medical reports and practice observations- to make that choice.

Is that unfair as a position to you?

I think having a LT that could actually block had a lot to do with it...a move we should have made weeks ago...then we probably wouldn't be in a qb conundrum now. Aggravating!

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 09:54 PM
The offense crapped the bed; 5 turnovers and 7 points in 2.5 quarters is horrible.

Manning came in and they score 20 points in 1.5 quarters. Why you ask? Because he made the right audibles at the line and did a great job of diagnosing the blitz.

There's no doubt in my mind we would have lost that game and ended up going to Houston where we would have possibly been bounced.

Making the switch took clacker balls, and it worked.

TXBRONC
01-03-2016, 09:55 PM
I can't vouch for wives, dude. They operate on their own system

Aint that the truth.

GEM
01-03-2016, 09:55 PM
Phil Simms has only pointed that out about 100 times the last two games he's announced!!! LMAO

I dont listen to a word that ****tard says...his ******* voice is like nails on chalkboard for me . Him and his albino rat son can go kick rocks.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 09:57 PM
I <3 Phil Simms

Lancane
01-03-2016, 09:59 PM
But he was a reason as to why the running game came back alive. Even if for no other reason the team responded to him.


Think of it this way - if staying with Brock is the right choice, this reality did nothing to hamper that as the Broncos can still go back to him. But, this move buys the team another week to contemplate this and get more data -medical reports and practice observations- to make that choice.

Is that unfair as a position to you?

So if the team responds to change, do you continually make the change or tell them to do their damn jobs? After all, when the run game stalled and the whole offense has woes do you bench Wilson, Rodgers, Newton, Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Dalton, etc. You sometimes simply tell players do your jobs or there is the bench, not bench the player doing his job and being hampered by others. I guess Reeves should have benched Elway when that happened, or Walsh do the same to Montana, etc. Manning looked horrible before the so-called foot injury, or are we going to blame (another) injury for poor play since November 2014?

tripp
01-03-2016, 10:00 PM
I dont listen to a word that ****tard says...his ******* voice is like nails on chalkboard for me . Him and his albino rat son can go kick rocks.

LOL I love it.

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 10:00 PM
But he was a reason as to why the running game came back alive. Even if for no other reason the team responded to him.


Think of it this way - if staying with Brock is the right choice, this reality did nothing to hamper that as the Broncos can still go back to him. But, this move buys the team another week to contemplate this and get more data -medical reports and practice observations- to make that choice.

Is that unfair as a position to you?

I think it's fair. I can see validity in an argument for Peyton, even though I don't agree with it.

I do think pulling Brock from the game was worse for him than just starting Peyton, and I feel like this might have been the plan all along. It's not like Brock's play was so bad that it forced Kubiak's hand. If anything they may have been anticipating having a big lead against San Diego and seeing what Manning could do in garbage time.

TXBRONC
01-03-2016, 10:00 PM
It's impossible trying to debate with someone who only judges the result rather than how we achieved that result.

Peyton was 5/9 for 69 yards. He was basically inconsequential. Our running game won us this game in the 2nd half. If you want to say Peyton contributed to that, a valid argument can be made, but it's always silly to assume something is correct just because of the end result.

Stats wise no. His veteran leadership was huge. That said, I'm not sure that will be enough to offset his diminished skill if he's starting quarterback in the divisional round.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:01 PM
The offense crapped the bed; 5 turnovers and 7 points in 2.5 quarters is horrible.

Manning came in and they score 20 points in 1.5 quarters. Why you ask? Because he made the right audibles at the line and did a great job of diagnosing the blitz.

There's no doubt in my mind we would have lost that game and ended up going to Houston where we would have possibly been bounced.

Making the switch took clacker balls, and it worked.

You mean Oz hitting Sanders for the huge play and he fumbles on 5 hard life easier was bit a great job reading defense? Or any of the huge runs or big passes. Offense had something like 250 yards of offense in first half. Problem were TOs which most were not Brock's fault. I would argue that Oz offense moved ball just as well if not better. Oz also hit deeper passes.

You can't say Manning read the defense better in this game.

BroncoWave
01-03-2016, 10:02 PM
So if the team responds to change, do you continually make the change or tell them to do their damn jobs? After all, when the run game stalled and the whole offense has woes do you bench Wilson, Rodgers, Newton, Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Dalton, etc. You sometimes simply tell players do your jobs or there is the bench, not bench the player doing his job and being hampered by others. I guess Reeves should have benched Elway when that happened, or Walsh do the same to Montana, etc. Manning looked horrible before the so-called foot injury, or are we going to blame (another) injury for poor play since November 2014?

So Osweiler has the clout of a Montana or an Elway now? Reign it in a bit there man.

tripp
01-03-2016, 10:05 PM
I think it's fair. I can see validity in an argument for Peyton, even though I don't agree with it.

I do think pulling Brock from the game was worse for him than just starting Peyton, and I feel like this might have been the plan all along. It's not like Brock's play was so bad that it forced Kubiak's hand. If anything they may have been anticipating having a big lead against San Diego and seeing what Manning could do in garbage time.

I thought it would hurt Brock's confidence going forward, especially if Kubiak anticipates Brock playing in the playoffs. I know I personally wouldn't like playing on a short leash, with a 1st ballot HoF QB breathing down your neck on the sidelines. Uncomfortable environment.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:05 PM
You mean Oz hitting Sanders for the huge play and he fumbles on 5 hard life easier was bit a great job reading defense? Or any of the huge runs or big passes. Offense had something like 250 yards of offense in first half. Problem were TOs which most were not Brock's fault. I would argue that Oz offense moved ball just as well if not better. Oz also hit deeper passes.

You can't say Manning read the defense better in this game.

I'm not saying all of the turnovers were Brock's fault. He did some good things, but either way you slice it the offense crapped the bed. Manning was the spark they needed.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still really high on Brock. I just think he experienced some growing pains. I'm eager to see what he looks like after they invest in the offensive line and give him an offseason with the 1's.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:06 PM
It's impossible trying to debate with someone who only judges the result rather than how we achieved that result.

Peyton was 5/9 for 69 yards. He was basically inconsequential. Our running game won us this game in the 2nd half. If you want to say Peyton contributed to that, a valid argument can be made, but it's always silly to assume something is correct just because of the end result.

I agree, it's hard to debate outcomes. Is that what you are attempting?

I put more stock in the destination than the journey, when it comes to sports. But good on you if you've achieved some sort of zen by questioning the outcome.

Interesting though, that you don't want to focus on the outcome, but are fixated by Mannings' stats. Seems a bit biased.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:06 PM
I thought it would hurt Brock's confidence going forward, especially if Kubiak anticipates Brock playing in the playoffs. I know I personally wouldn't like playing on a short leash, with a 1st ballot HoF QB breathing down your neck on the sidelines. Uncomfortable environment.

Anyone breathing on my neck makes me uncomfortable.

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:07 PM
To be fair to Staples, a playcall could be foolish and poor and work, and a good call could be brilliant and fail. I don't think results based analysis is the way to go on situations like these.

tripp
01-03-2016, 10:08 PM
Anyone breathing on my neck makes me uncomfortable.

True, especially if they breath loud.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:08 PM
I'm not saying all of the turnovers were Brock's fault. He did some good things, but either way you slice it the offense crapped the bed. Manning was the spark they needed.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still really high on Brock. I just think he experienced some growing pains. I'm eager to see what he looks like after they invest in the offensive line and give him an offseason with the 1's.

Maybe Manning is the reason ayers held on to the ball and no longer fumbled. Maybe he had stickum ready.

Oz made more plays. Offense just played better with manning.

Tned
01-03-2016, 10:10 PM
I dont listen to a word that ****tard says...his ******* voice is like nails on chalkboard for me . Him and his albino rat son can go kick rocks.

There aren't too many times where something I read online literally makes me :laugh: out loud. This was one of them.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:10 PM
True, especially if they breath loud.

You're a tripp

GEM
01-03-2016, 10:10 PM
Offense played better with no Schofield....

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
Offense played better with no Schofield....

He was the best player on the field...for the other team.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
So Osweiler has the clout of a Montana or an Elway now? Reign it in a bit there man.

Neither did they when they were drafted or first starting, use your head Wave.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
Maybe Manning is the reason ayers held on to the ball and no longer fumbled. Maybe he had stickum ready.

Oz made more plays. Offense just played better with manning.

You're a tad salty tonight dude.

The offense starting to stall, and I really don't think we would have won had Brock stayed in. Honestly, at the time I didn't like the move, but it worked. Maybe it just hlepd the offense get the jolt they needed to not play scared.

I also recognize there are some games we would have lost in the last 2 months if Manning was playing.

GEM
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
He was the best player on the field...for the other team.

16 games straight! I hope he finds the nearest mall cell phone kiosk.

I Eat Staples
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
To be fair to Staples, a playcall could be foolish and poor and work, and a good call could be brilliant and fail. I don't think results based analysis is the way to go on situations like these.

Yeah, that was pretty much my argument.

You can make an argument that bringing Peyton in was correct, but you'd need to do more than just say we won the game in order to defend that position.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
To be fair to Staples, a playcall could be foolish and poor and work, and a good call could be brilliant and fail. I don't think results based analysis is the way to go on situations like these.

That's not the situation here though. Kubiak didn't do anything obviously foolish or poor. He made a gut call at an appropriate time and it paid off. It was the right call at the time, and the outcome proved that out.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:13 PM
Offense played better with no Schofield....

With Oz offense was averaging 10.3 or so yards per play. Stats popped up comparing SD vs Denver yards per game.

End of the game was 8.5 or so, state popped up again.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:14 PM
Yeah, that was pretty much my argument.

You can make an argument that bringing Peyton in was correct, but you'd need to do more than just say we won the game in order to defend that position.

But that's just it. You don't need to do anything more. I'm not saying there is no other analysis to be had, but saying that it wasn't the right move demands more of a justification than the reverse given the outcome.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:14 PM
All the yards in the world doesn't put points on the board.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:16 PM
You're a tad salty tonight dude.

The offense starting to stall, and I really don't think we would have won had Brock stayed in. Honestly, at the time I didn't like the move, but it worked. Maybe it just hlepd the offense get the jolt they needed to not play scared.

I also recognize there are some games we would have lost in the last 2 months if Manning was playing.

All it am saying is Brock played better. Offense clicked very well today in general and was running up yhe yards on SD all day. Only difference is with Manning there were no TOs and we scored instead.

GEM
01-03-2016, 10:16 PM
With Oz offense was averaging 10.3 or so yards per play. Stats popped up comparing SD vs Denver yards per game.

End of the game was 8.5 or so, state popped up again.

Stats popped up when Schofield took a seat, Polumbus came in, and they put a TE on him for support. Just wish they would have done that for Brock.

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:16 PM
That's not the situation here though. Kubiak didn't do anything obviously foolish or poor. He made a gut call at an appropriate time and it paid off. It was the right call at the time, and the outcome proved that out.

It was just an example. Yet if two years ago had the HC switched the two we would say it was foolish. In other words, it could be foolish, or wrong, or iffy, or -insert something negative here- is all I am saying. And it could still work. I have seen coaches bench incorrectly before. It could have happened now. Just because it did not does not mean it was correct. It comes down to reasoning as well. If he, for instance, and I am being absurd on purpose here, benched Brock so that Manning could give the Broncos a mobile threat, we would laugh at him.

Northman
01-03-2016, 10:19 PM
All it am saying is Brock played better. Offense clicked very well today in general and was running up yhe yards on SD all day. Only difference is with Manning there were no TOs and we scored instead.

Well, something was missing and something changed when Manning came in. Whether it was just Manning's presence or whatever it worked and the team got their shit together and got the job done. In the end thats all that matters.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:20 PM
All it am saying is Brock played better. Offense clicked very well today in general and was running up yhe yards on SD all day. Only difference is with Manning there were no TOs and we scored instead.

Maybe he did. ...I don't know if he did a better job of audibling.

It could be as simple as the offense needing something to happen to bolster their confidence. They looked scared and that changed after Manning came in.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:21 PM
It was just an example. Yet if two years ago had the HC switched the two we would say it was foolish. In other words, it could be foolish, or wrong, or iffy, or -insert something negative here- is all I am saying. And it could still work. I have seen coaches bench incorrectly before. It could have happened now. Just because it did not does not mean it was correct. It comes down to reasoning as well. If he, for instance, and I am being absurd on purpose here, benched Brock so that Manning could give the Broncos a mobile threat, we would laugh at him.

I don't disagree in principle, but we aren't talking about two years ago, we are talking about this specific decision. And this specific decision was the right one. I can use the outcome to defend that position. If someone says it was not the right decision, they simply need way more of an argument than I do.... since the outcome favored the decision. That's all.

Absolutely a fool can get lucky. That's just not what happened here. The exact change that was made had the exact desired outcome.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:21 PM
Stats popped up when Schofield took a seat, Polumbus came in, and they put a TE on him for support. Just wish they would have done that for Brock.

Between Andersons big run, DT pass, Sanders pass in 1st quarter. Offense was moving well. I am not sure why schofield is still the starter? Every DE on earth has owned him.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:22 PM
I'm glad we have 2 qb's. Some teams have zero.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:23 PM
I'm glad we have 2 qb's. Some teams have zero.

Houston has/had 4!

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:23 PM
I don't disagree in principle, but we aren't talking about two years ago, we are talking about this specific decision. And this specific decision was the right one. I can use the outcome to defend that position. If someone says it was not the right decision, they simply need way more of an argument than I do.... since the outcome favored the decision. That's all.

Absolutely a fool can get lucky. That's just not what happened here. The exact change that was made had the exact desired outcome.

I'm not even sure if we disagree. I'm just saying because something worked doesn't mean it was correct. And if something didn't work, it wouldn't necessarily mean it was wrong. Like if Manning got carted off the field because a pass rusher mauled him we might be saying it was foolish to put Manning back in. That might not hypothetically be correct either.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:23 PM
Well, something was missing and something changed when Manning came in. Whether it was just Manning's presence or whatever it worked and the team got their shit together and got the job done. In the end thats all that matters.

I noticed on siding during game. Manning was talking to offense and Oz was on the tablet.

Manning has always been the leader on the offense, it might have just been that spark to try a little harder on everyone's part. I could see Manning telling the huddle to get their shit together.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:25 PM
I noticed on siding during game. Manning was talking to offense and Oz was on the tablet.

Manning has always been the leader on the offense, it might have just been that spark to try a little harder on everyone's part. I could see Manning telling the huddle to get their shit together.

That's pretty much what I was trying to say bro. Why the rage on me? :laugh:

GEM
01-03-2016, 10:25 PM
Between Andersons big run, DT pass, Sanders pass in 1st quarter. Offense was moving well. I am not sure why schofield is still the starter? Every DE on earth has owned him.

I I'm happy we got the win. I'm happy for Manning. I just wish they would have benched Schofield earlier so we could have seen Oz with Polumbus and TE help.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:26 PM
That's pretty much what I was trying to say bro. Why the rage on me? :laugh:

No rage here. Sorry if it came across that way.

Kicked back with a beer here.

Northman
01-03-2016, 10:26 PM
I noticed on siding during game. Manning was talking to offense and Oz was on the tablet.

Manning has always been the leader on the offense, it might have just been that spark to try a little harder on everyone's part. I could see Manning telling the huddle to get their shit together.

Definitely, i think a more leadership role with Brock will come but its clear that he is still learning plays and adjusting which is why he was on the tablet a lot. The team just needed something more today that Brock wasnt delivering on but no, Brock played well, was just missing that extra something.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:27 PM
I'm not even sure if we disagree. I'm just saying because something worked doesn't mean it was correct. And if something didn't work, it wouldn't necessarily mean it was wrong. Like if Manning got carted off the field because a pass rusher mauled him we might be saying it was foolish to put Manning back in. That might not hypothetically be correct either.

We don't disagree. You are simply talking about principle, and I am talking this specific case. We agree in principle, and I think we agree on this specific case.

I didn't mean to imply that the outcome is the only thing that ever matters... but in this specific case, it's hard to make an argument against it. It wasn't some foolish, untimely, poorly thought out decision that somehow bounced correctly into Denver's lap. It was designed to produce the exact effect that it had, so the outcome, in this case, is a very strong argument that the decision was the correct one.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:27 PM
No rage here. Sorry if it came across that way.

Kicked back with a beer here.

I wish I could join ya.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:28 PM
Definitely, i think a more leadership role with Brock will come but its clear that he is still learning plays and adjusting which is why he was on the tablet a lot. The team just needed something more today that Brock wasnt delivering on but no, Brock played well, was just missing that extra something.

I think his leadership is not as strong as it could be. But I wonder if it hard with Manning looming too, since you know own it's not your team with him on roster.

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:28 PM
We don't disagree. You are simply talking about principle, and I am talking this specific case. We agree in principle, and I think we agree on this specific case.

I didn't mean to imply that the outcome is the only thing that ever matters... but in this specific case, it's hard to make an argument against it. It wasn't some foolish, untimely, poorly thought out decision that somehow bounced correctly into Denver's lap. It was designed to produce the exact effect that it had, so the outcome, in this case, is a very strong argument that the decision was the correct one.


We are in agreement in that putting Manning in was correct. I think we have different reasons? IDK.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 10:29 PM
I think his leadership is not as strong as it could be. But I wonder if it hard with Manning looming too, since you know own it's not your team with him on roster.

Exactly, I don't think we'll really see that until next year when it's Brock's team.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:29 PM
We are in agreement in that putting Manning in was correct. I think we have different reasons? IDK.

Maybe... why do you think it was correct?

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:31 PM
Maybe... why do you think it was correct?

Because it would provide an emotional spark. I don't think he was put out there to light it up, althoguh he would definitely have to show that he could complete some passes.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:37 PM
Because it would provide an emotional spark. I don't think he was put out there to light it up, althoguh he would definitely have to show that he could complete some passes.

Then I don't think we disagree. I mentioned earlier, only I called it a "steady hand on the wheel", not necessarily an emotional spark. Whatever keeps the team together and helps them get their shit together is what I was trying to say.

Joel
01-03-2016, 10:37 PM
I would say Peyton but this will make Oz cheaper to lock down after the season.
Unless he's fuming over getting benched over his LINEMENS poor play: He looked pretty irate our first two possessions after sitting. He's already done enough to get good offers from other teams.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 10:38 PM
I think his leadership is not as strong as it could be. But I wonder if it hard with Manning looming too, since you know own it's not your team with him on roster.

It's never been easy, look at Montana and Young, Favre and Rodgers, Cutler and Plummer...and each one has caused friction among the fans...lol. I'd have felt much better about this had we extended Osweiler before the season began, cause then you have a year or two to overcome something like this. But we're talking literally a month or two depending on how well the team does in the playoffs, but if the team is out in two weeks, we could have a quarterback-less team and that first round pick which should go for offensive line could be headed to find another quarterback, along with other picks and players depending on how they move, if Elway doesn't go shopping for another broken down horse on it's last leg again.

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:40 PM
Then I don't think we disagree. I mentioned earlier, only I called it a "steady hand on the wheel", not necessarily an emotional spark. Whatever keeps the team together and helps them get their shit together is what I was trying to say.

Question - what if he played around the same statistically, and give the team that emotional lift, but you guys lost? Would be it be right? I'm not debating with you. I'm trying to work through this.

VonDoom
01-03-2016, 10:40 PM
Twitter says Kubiak will sit both guys down and make a decision on Thursday

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:41 PM
Twitter says Kubiak will sit both guys down and make a decision on Thursday

I would make a decision but not announce it until right before. Let the other team guess.

Tned
01-03-2016, 10:43 PM
16 games straight! I hope he finds the nearest mall cell phone kiosk.

lol, yea, like what's his face, our Portis replacement. This getting old shit sucks, my memory sucks.

arapaho2
01-03-2016, 10:43 PM
What does being a first ballot HoFer have to do with how you react when being benched for what is basically a rookie? Do I seriously need to explain the relevance?

The fact that we scored 20 point after Kubiak put in manning speaks for itself. You can second guess the decision, but you can't second guess the outcome.

You don't th ink that benching schofield at the very instant manning came in had anything to do with that

Tned
01-03-2016, 10:45 PM
Unless he's fuming over getting benched over his LINEMENS poor play: He looked pretty irate our first two possessions after sitting. He's already done enough to get good offers from other teams.

Irate? Really? Might want to head over to Websters or another site to check out the meaning, or get your eyes checked.

Tned
01-03-2016, 10:46 PM
I would make a decision but not announce it until right before. Let the other team guess.

In the words of John Fox..... I'm not going to announce that, for competitive reasons...

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:47 PM
Question - what if he played around the same statistically, and give the team that emotional lift, but you guys lost? Would be it be right? I'm not debating with you. I'm trying to work through this.

Sorta difficult to say as things would have to have gone differently for that to happen, and it's tough to analyze what didn't happen, but I guess I would say that there are some games you can't win no matter what decision you make. I'm not sure that makes a decision wrong though.

The fact that our running game seemed to click better with peyton, and I think ultimately that's what Kubiak really wanted, then the decision would still have been an 'effective' one even if it wasn't enough to pull the win out. Whether that makes the decision right or wrong is harder to gauge.

Poet
01-03-2016, 10:47 PM
Sorta difficult to say as things would have to have gone differently for that to happen, and it's tough to analyze what didn't happen, but I guess I would say that there are some games you can't win no matter what decision you make. I'm not sure that makes a decision wrong though.

The fact that our running game seemed to click better with peyton, and I think ultimately that's what Kubiak really wanted, then the decision would still have been an 'effective' one even if it wasn't enough to pull the win out. Whether that makes the decision right or wrong is harder to gauge.

This has been an interesting conversation. I'll continue to ponder it. Thank you.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 10:49 PM
I really think we stay with Oz. Team has a lot of mental hiccups and ay bad 1 half of the game.

SD was missing half their defense and only way they were able to stop our offense was to force a TO, which they did. SD defense was getting rolled.

Playing against a good defense I like odds with Oz. Good defenses shut down Manning and know how to defend him. I do not think Manning can consistently throw the long ball to keep a defense back and safties deep. He did hit a 16 yard pass and over throw some other long balls.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 10:49 PM
You don't th ink that benching schofield at the very instant manning came in had anything to do with that

I honestly can't say. I'm not good at analyzing the nuances of an offensive line. I suspect it helped, but my gut tell me that Mannings ability to read the Defense, audible, and draw a few penalties made more of a difference. He only threw 9 times in the half, because he didn't need to throw it more than that. I don't put all of that on Schofield/polumbus. For the first time maybe all year, the offense was working the way it was explained from the start.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:49 PM
Twitter says Kubiak will sit both guys down and make a decision on Thursday

I read that as Kubiak will bench both guys.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 10:51 PM
Unless he's fuming over getting benched over his LINEMENS poor play: He looked pretty irate our first two possessions after sitting. He's already done enough to get good offers from other teams.

I know a few teams made inquiries about a trade this past off-season, Houston being one of them. Now there is no trade required, and to lock him up Elway would have to tag him and that would be a dumb move - way too much money. I'd be surprised if the Jets didn't give him a serious look knowing he took down Cincinnati and especially their hated rivals the Patriots, and they have a lot of pieces in place to make serious noise. Houston will probably make a move, since they've shown interest before and Browns could look to save spending a first round pick on another quarterback, and with so many comparing him to Flacco who usually has their number? Not to mention that Fox and Gase have a feel for him, so Chicago could come into play. Philadelphia, San Francisco and St. Louis could be in the mix as well. With the quarterback class in flux as it is...I could see teams trying to save picks and try to role with Osweiler to see what he can do.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 10:55 PM
I heard we will only trade Oz if Schofield goes with him.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 10:59 PM
I heard we will only trade Oz if Schofield goes with him.

Now that's funny, unfortunately that would have devalued any worthy trade.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 11:02 PM
Now that's funny, unfortunately that would have devalued any worthy trade.

Maybe. Schofield is a good RT. But it's suspicious that they wouldn't let him play with Manning in. As soon as they benched Oz, they benched Schofield. Shady.

Lancane
01-03-2016, 11:05 PM
Maybe. Schofield is a good RT. But it's suspicious that they wouldn't let him play with Manning in. As soon as they benched Oz, they benched Schofield. Shady.

He probably got sick of Phil Simms talking about it for 45 minutes everytime he was announcing the games.

Dapper Dan
01-03-2016, 11:08 PM
He probably got sick of Phil Simms talking about it for 45 minutes everytime he was announcing the games.

I like to base most of my decisions based on Phil Simms' commentary.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:22 PM
I am disturbed by the way this game went.

1. Brock got blamed for our WR and Oline's problems. If I were him any home team discount I was considering just went out the window. Some here are claiming his price just went down but if I'm Osweiler's agent staying in Denver just got more expensive.

2. Manning still looked like the same Manning to me. And it was against a pathetic Chargers defense who prepared to face Osweiler. Once teams know they are facing Manning again plan on 9 guys in the box and everybody at the LOS. Our running game looked better before Manning took over not just when he was in. Our team just kept giving the ball to the Charger's on a silver platter.

I for one did not come away from this game feeling better about our chances. I feel worse this year than I did last year going into the playoffs and I was sure last year that we were going to lose. I'll be pleasantly surprised if we win the 1st playoff game. I don't expect to, especially with Manning at QB. I really hope he wasn't healthy all season and he is now. Because his tendancy to throw INT's this season will cost this team in the playoffs.

Changing to Manning when they did appeared to give the team confidence, how will that work when he's starting and is the reason we are losing? I hope the change in our O-line helps solve that problem and that it stays that way throughout the playoffs and Super bowl.

wayninja
01-03-2016, 11:24 PM
I am disturbed by the way this game went.

1. Brock got blamed for our WR and Oline's problems. If I were him any home team discount I was considering just went out the window. Some here are claiming his price just went down but if I'm Osweiler's agent staying in Denver just got more expensive.

2. Manning still looked like the same Manning to me. And it was against a pathetic Chargers defense who prepared to face Osweiler. Once teams know they are facing Manning again plan on 9 guys in the box and everybody at the LOS. Our running game looked better before Manning took over not just when he was in. Our team just kept giving the ball to the Charger's on a silver platter.

I for one did not come away from this game feeling better about our chances. I feel worse this year than I did last year going into the playoffs and I was sure last year that we were going to lose. I'll be pleasantly surprised if we win the 1st playoff game. I don't expect to, especially with Manning at QB. I really hope he wasn't healthy all season and he is now. Because his tendancy to throw INT's this season will cost this team in the playoffs.

Changing to Manning when they did appeared to give the team confidence, how will that work when he's starting and is the reason we are losing? I hope the change in our O-line helps solve that problem and that it stays that way throughout the playoffs and Super bowl.

Who blamed Os for the line and WR's?

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:24 PM
I'm not saying all of the turnovers were Brock's fault. He did some good things, but either way you slice it the offense crapped the bed. Manning was the spark they needed.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still really high on Brock. I just think he experienced some growing pains. I'm eager to see what he looks like after they invest in the offensive line and give him an offseason with the 1's.I expect to see him doing that for a different team next year.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 11:27 PM
I expect to see him doing that for a different team next year.

Well then, you'll likely be surprised.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:30 PM
I I'm happy we got the win. I'm happy for Manning. I just wish they would have benched Schofield earlier so we could have seen Oz with Polumbus and TE help.like 6 weeks ago would have been nice.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:33 PM
We don't disagree. You are simply talking about principle, and I am talking this specific case. We agree in principle, and I think we agree on this specific case.

I didn't mean to imply that the outcome is the only thing that ever matters... but in this specific case, it's hard to make an argument against it. It wasn't some foolish, untimely, poorly thought out decision that somehow bounced correctly into Denver's lap. It was designed to produce the exact effect that it had, so the outcome, in this case, is a very strong argument that the decision was the correct one.I believe the outcome of this decision is yet to be determined. If Manning fails spectacularly in the playoffs then this was the wrong decision. Because at the time it was made Brock was still playing better than Manning had in most of his games this season.
.
You can't start Brock, and you can't really bench Manning in the playoffs. So we will have to see if this decision worked or whether it was a complete FUBAR by Kubiak.

Simple Jaded
01-03-2016, 11:33 PM
Gary "clacker balls" Kubiak.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:34 PM
Who blamed Os for the line and WR's?Being Benched was blaming him for it.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-03-2016, 11:35 PM
Gary "clacker balls" Kubiak.

That's right...big ol' steelies.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 11:42 PM
I expect to see him doing that for a different team next year.

And with Manning retiring we are now the browns.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:43 PM
And with Manning retiring we are now the browns.Pretty much. Or we can go spend 25 Million a year on Brees or Stafford and have no defense like the Broncos of the 80's. Except without Elway as the QB to carry us to a decent record.

NightTerror218
01-03-2016, 11:45 PM
Pretty much. Or we can go spend 25 Million a year on Brees or Stafford and have no defense like the Broncos of the 80's. Except without Elway as the QB to carry us to a decent record.

How many retread QBS have won the SB?

Tned
01-03-2016, 11:46 PM
Through the years, one thing is constant in Broncos Country. Some people can cause piss to fall from any silver lined cloud....

Get a grip, guys. #1 seed in the AFC and the number one defense in football. Granted, it will be hard to resign all that great defensive talent, but the good news is that we are so deep, that even losing a few of the starters, we will still have one of the most talented D's in football.

gregbroncs
01-03-2016, 11:46 PM
How many retread QBS have won the SB?
Steve Young did it with the Niners. only one that comes to the top of my head though.

Tned
01-03-2016, 11:47 PM
How many retread QBS have won the SB?

Only on teams with great D's have won with crappy QBs -- TB/Bal.

Simple Jaded
01-03-2016, 11:59 PM
That's right...big ol' steelies.

We're talking balls a cat couldn't scratch.

Joel
01-04-2016, 12:09 AM
Irate? Really? Might want to head over to Websters or another site to check out the meaning, or get your eyes checked.I'm aware of the words meaning, and after getting benched that's how he looked to me the first two times we had the ball. Then we started scoring and he perked up; winning's a phenomenal palliative. That doesn't mean that when the dust clears, adrenaline fades and contract negotiations begin after the season he won't remain steamed that he got benched because of Sanders and Anderson dropping balls and Schofield getting owned all game, all season.

We'll see what happens; I must believe Oz is the guy next year and will be paid accordingly, and further believe he's got a great chance of being a great franchise QB once we've had another whole offseason to build him a line like we should've done for Manning the past four years, so Oz isn't running for his life and rushing throws until all the bad habits that develops become too ingrained too deeply to break.

Oz has been waiting his turn for a long time though, only to see Manning jerk it back from him each time Oz thought he was FINALLY going in; that clip of him yanking off his helmet in disgust after we took a huge lead (over the Raiders, IIRC) yet Manning insisted on going back out on the next drive really does sum up his "career" so far. It would be understandable if he took this as just more of the same (especially with Kubiaks halftime comments to sideline reporters:)

Is Manning REALLY retiring, or just teeing up yet another ball for Charlie Brown to "kick"? Maybe he's as tired as anyone of Monty Peytons Flying Circus.

GEM
01-04-2016, 12:20 AM
Through the years, one thing is constant in Broncos Country. Some people can cause piss to fall from any silver lined cloud....

Get a grip, guys. #1 seed in the AFC and the number one defense in football. Granted, it will be hard to resign all that great defensive talent, but the good news is that we are so deep, that even losing a few of the starters, we will still have one of the most talented D's in football.

I'm excited about #1 seed. I just think if they made the Schofield change for Oz, he would have had great results. The talk over the next 2 weeks wont be about the Broncos or the defense...it will be all about Manning. That disappoints me.

Joel
01-04-2016, 12:20 AM
Steve Young did it with the Niners. only one that comes to the top of my head though.
Define "retread." If we just mean guys other teams drafted, there've been a few more, including Favre with the Packers and Plunkett with the Raiders. Hell, Denver didn't draft Elway: We traded for him, the same way those other teams got their championship QBs.

If, on the other hand, we mean QBs on the downside of great careers with other teams, the record's consistently and terribly bad, from Namath to Montana to Favre. I think Denver actually has the distinction of being the ONLY team to reach a SB with a starting QB who started a previous SB for a different team (twice over: Before Manning, Craig Morton started SB V for Dallas, lost the job to Staubach, went to Denver, then lost the SB to Dallas and Staubach.)

The harsh truth is that when a team dumps a QB—even a champion—in his mid-thirties, there's usually a(t least one) good reason. Best case scenario, the guy probably loses his next season because still adjusting to a new coach, roster and philosophy (each of which are also adjusting to him,) and that's at a time in his career when he doesn't HAVE many seasons left before he's just too old to be effective. We were lucky to get 4 (or 3) out of post-surgical Manning.

MOtorboat
01-04-2016, 12:21 AM
And Joel's back to bitch.

Awesome.

Poet
01-04-2016, 12:22 AM
Joel, Manning brought his philosophy, doesn't that mitigate the luck?

Simple Jaded
01-04-2016, 12:23 AM
And Joel's back to bitch.

Awesome.

At least we get to learn the meaning of "unlucky", "irate" and "retread".

GEM
01-04-2016, 12:24 AM
Put him on ignore. Funny how he turns into the center of attention because people make him the center of attention. Ignore his posts snd scroll through replies to him.

MOtorboat
01-04-2016, 12:36 AM
At least we get to learn the meaning of "unlucky", "irate" and "retread".

Osweiler was anything but irate. He was classy and said the right things. So did Manning. Both have been all class.

And calling one of the all time greats a retread is absolute pure idiocy. A retread is Fitzpatrick in New York. Not a Hall of Famer who is 7-2 as a starter this season and then came in to clinch the No. 1 seed in the playoffs.

Kubiak's in a tough place, but I don't see how there's any way Manning doesn't start.

wayninja
01-04-2016, 12:36 AM
Being Benched was blaming him for it.

That's a pretty shallow conclusion.

wayninja
01-04-2016, 12:39 AM
I believe the outcome of this decision is yet to be determined. If Manning fails spectacularly in the playoffs then this was the wrong decision. Because at the time it was made Brock was still playing better than Manning had in most of his games this season.
.
You can't start Brock, and you can't really bench Manning in the playoffs. So we will have to see if this decision worked or whether it was a complete FUBAR by Kubiak.

You might be jumping the gun a bit, we don't technically even know who the starter is on Jan 17. Kubiak can absolutely start Osweiler since he knows the strategy succeeded at least once. Even Manning himself admits he's not 100% and doesn't know who the starter even SHOULD be.

Even if Manning does start and we lose that doesn't automatically mean Brock would have won. I was only speaking about this game, not future games, I'm not a crystal ball.

NightTerror218
01-04-2016, 12:49 AM
Through the years, one thing is constant in Broncos Country. Some people can cause piss to fall from any silver lined cloud....

Get a grip, guys. #1 seed in the AFC and the number one defense in football. Granted, it will be hard to resign all that great defensive talent, but the good news is that we are so deep, that even losing a few of the starters, we will still have one of the most talented D's in football.

I miss you

silkamilkamonico
01-04-2016, 12:50 AM
Who gives a flying f what happens at QB moving forward to next year and beyond. It will work itself out.

IMO the coaching staff simply made the change at QB to try and get something started on offense. What were they supposed to do, hope it works out and find themselves down 2 possessions halfway into the fourth? We had a great opportunity to set ourselves up for the postseason and had to win this game and the coaches made a decision to go after it and it worked.

The ironic thing about this season is we had terrible QB play early, and because of all the issues on offense, Osweiler was a great change because he was good at things Manning wasn't and it complimented what this offense could (or really could not) do at the time. His arm and mobility was something that was sorely lacking and it filled a void in what our oline wasn't able to do at the time. Fast forward to today and the things Manning is good at like presence and even moreso getting the ball out early was exactly what the offense needed in their struggle to hold the line.

BTW - we have a pretty great fn defense. Both QB's can do some good things and will not be the focus of winning the games in the playoffs. The coaches have the opportunity of putting the offense in a situation to win games with a lights out defense and home field advantage. If you continue to obsessive over what's happening at the QB position you are missing out on a pretty special thing that's happening on the defensive side.

7DnBrnc53
01-04-2016, 12:52 AM
I think that the Broncos need to go back to OZ. What happened today was a mirage. Even if they win that first playoff game with Manning (on Sunday the 17th at 4:45. Just saw the playoff schedule), Manning may be exposed the next week if the Chiefs come to town. Remember what happened the last time.

I am happy for the win, but I am pissed off at how it came about. Our skill position players better wake up and stop making key mistakes.

Dapper Dan
01-04-2016, 12:54 AM
I think the guys played poorly for Oz on purpose so he could be benched and we could resign him for less next year.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-04-2016, 12:57 AM
We're talking balls a cat couldn't scratch.

Balls big enough to shade his toes.

wayninja
01-04-2016, 12:59 AM
Os has played pretty decently in his role as backup, but I really don't understand all the insistence that he must be the right guy for the job in the post season. I know Manning has played pretty damn poorly for a while now, but it's just impossible for me to completely ignore his career. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, I don't know, but there something inside of me that resists the notion that (assuming healthy) you should sit a 5 time league MVP over a guy who's completed 5 full NFL games and is 3-2 in them.

Are people seeing something that is so obvious that I'm not? Brock has more physical tools. Manning has more mental tools. It's not as obvious to me which is the clear best choice as it is to some.

Joel
01-04-2016, 01:10 AM
Joel, Manning brought his philosophy, doesn't that mitigate the luck?
It largely did under Fox, at least against your regularly scheduled programming; once the playoffs started and we couldn't just bludgeon random teams to death with a first ballot HoFer it got a lot harder to win as a team. And Kubiak's not a defensive cheerleader: He's got his own very complex and distinct offensive ideas, which have proven hard to integrate with Mannings equally complex ones. Not that I ever advocated luck; for the most part, we make our own luck (or fail to do so.)

TimHippo
01-04-2016, 01:13 AM
This is Mannings team. Sit down Os.
One last ride!

Foochacho
01-04-2016, 01:28 AM
Os has outplayed Manning this season. He has flaws but Mannings season has looked shitty. He didn't tear it up tonight either. We as a team scored and played better, but the same can be said for brock coming in as mannings replacement earlier. If we get the chiefs in the playoffs ill be worried. Manning got worked by them and im not confident in him. You would think playing the colts would light a fire under him but he always shits thebed instead. I can see thr chiefs making manning nervous after getting worked. I don't believe the chiefs are as good as advertised either. But they have a good defense and manning better bring some confidence. His playoff performances so far don't inspire much confidence in me.

I'm torn because manning can play really great but he has let us down alot. Brock is what he is but his play against the patriots, bengals, steelers (first half), and end of chiefs game (all teams we may face) make me feel slightly more comfortable with giving it to him. But it will be peyton no doubt. So he better get it together for a few games cause we need it and he needs a redemption.

BroncoNut
01-04-2016, 01:42 AM
What a troll have you even been around since manning has been out? He comes in for half a game and here comes his fanatics. Calm your tits, please. Let us broncos fans enjoy "our team" victory.
Did you just tell beef to calm his tits, or some little old lady? Either way pretty funny

Simple Jaded
01-04-2016, 01:45 AM
Balls big enough to shade his toes.

gCHQzk2okoc

BroncoNut
01-04-2016, 01:52 AM
Who gives a flying f what happens at QB moving forward to next year and beyond. It will work itself out.

IMO the coaching staff simply made the change at QB to try and get something started on offense. What were they supposed to do, hope it works out and find themselves down 2 possessions halfway into the fourth? We had a great opportunity to set ourselves up for the postseason and had to win this game and the coaches made a decision to go after it and it worked.

The ironic thing about this season is we had terrible QB play early, and because of all the issues on offense, Osweiler was a great change because he was good at things Manning wasn't and it complimented what this offense could (or really could not) do at the time. His arm and mobility was something that was sorely lacking and it filled a void in what our oline wasn't able to do at the time. Fast forward to today and the things Manning is good at like presence and even moreso getting the ball out early was exactly what the offense needed in their struggle to hold the line.

BTW - we have a pretty great fn defense. Both QB's can do some good things and will not be the focus of winning the games in the playoffs. The coaches have the opportunity of putting the offense in a situation to win games with a lights out defense and home field advantage. If you continue to obsessive over what's happening at the QB position you are missing out on a pretty special thing that's happening on the defensive side.

Defense can't win games without a viable offense. I'm gonna climb on board with Foochacho or whatever his name is and agree that if it's going to be Manning I have concerns on the way he's been playing this season and how he performs in big games. I wouldn't have a problem with oz with that line of thinking but either way, the afccg is gonna have a tough time in the sb unless it's the steelers imo

Joel
01-04-2016, 01:59 AM
Osweiler was anything but irate. He was classy and said the right things. So did Manning. Both have been all class.
I don't know WHAT Oz said ON THE SIDELINE OUR FIRST TWO POSSESSIONS AFTER HE WAS BENCHED, because I can't read lips well, but feel free to share. His body language and expression indicated great displeasure though, and I don't think it was over his own play, since only one of our five turnovers can be fairly placed on him. Notwithstanding his POSTGAME response to a question about his minimal role in the turnovers, I'm quite sure he was already aware of it.


And calling one of the all time greats a retread is absolute pure idiocy. A retread is Fitzpatrick in New York. Not a Hall of Famer who is 7-2 as a starter this season and then came in to clinch the No. 1 seed in the playoffs.
Again, it depends on what one means by the statement (and, since someone suggested I had "defined" the term, I'd like it noted for the record that I did NOT affirm a particular definition, only note that different people may and often do define it differently.)


Kubiak's in a tough place, but I don't see how there's any way Manning doesn't start.
Agreed. Among the problems many parts is that it's very hard to be sure 1) how much the injury affected his play prior to benching, 2) how much the rib and other injuries affected it instead, 3) how much healthier he is now and 4) how much healthier he'll be in two more weeks. And that's just the stuff specific to Manning, without even considering the many questions specific to Oz. I know which call I'd make, but am kinda glad I don't have to make it.

MOtorboat
01-04-2016, 02:29 AM
No, you didn't affirm anything in either your first, or your second argument, you insinuated.

Stand by your spam, Joel. It would be refreshing.

Joel
01-04-2016, 02:48 AM
No, you didn't affirm anything in either your first, or your second argument, you insinuated.

Stand by your spam, Joel. It would be refreshing.
I implied my PERSONAL definition, yes, but only in the context of noting different people define the term differently. For example, it was a response to someone defining Steve Young as a "retread" because he didn't start in SF; if THAT'S the definition, several retreads have won SBs: But why was it brought up in a "Who the **** is our QB" thread? Which Broncos "retread" do you think prompted the comment: Manning, Oz or Siemian? Better question:

Are the Elway, Young or Favre TRADES remotely similar to signing Manning as a FREE AGENT? Or is that more like the final years of HoFers like Unitas, Namath, Moon, Montana and Favre? And, if the latter, what is the combined SB record of those FIVE HoFers with their new teams? Undefeated—but only technically.

Cugel
01-04-2016, 03:54 AM
Fans need to realize that nothing that happens the rest of this season is going to change the fact that Osweiler will be the QB of the future next season. Peyton starting in the playoffs is simply because he gives the team the best chance to win now.

I don't think any team has won the SB with a first year starter. If any QB has done it, it's still intensely rare and unlikely.

Joel
01-04-2016, 04:02 AM
Brady was a first year starter when he won his first. Not a rookie, but neither is Oz (in fact, he's been in the league two years longer than Brady had.)

Poet
01-04-2016, 04:04 AM
It largely did under Fox, at least against your regularly scheduled programming; once the playoffs started and we couldn't just bludgeon random teams to death with a first ballot HoFer it got a lot harder to win as a team. And Kubiak's not a defensive cheerleader: He's got his own very complex and distinct offensive ideas, which have proven hard to integrate with Mannings equally complex ones. Not that I ever advocated luck; for the most part, we make our own luck (or fail to do so.)

Alrighty.

Manning wasn't a retread, though. When he was cleared to play, most of us realized he had a lot of football left in him. He made that demonstrative. When I think retread I think journeyman QB. Even some of those turn out pretty well. Rich Gannon and Trent Green come to mind. In a way Kurt Warner and Carson Palmer are or were retreads, too. And both of those Cardinal teams either were or are SB contenders. Just food for thought.

Karrin.feser5@gmail.com
01-04-2016, 05:17 AM
There is no question as to who the QB will be in the playoffs. When Peyton stepped on the field for the second half the entire offensive was once again in sync. It was as though Peyton had never missed 7 games and was once again the Sheriff.

Timmy!
01-04-2016, 05:37 AM
Peyton /thread

Whoever is last plz kill the lights. TIA

Dzone
01-04-2016, 05:39 AM
Whoever is last plz kill the lights. TIA

what the heay the nights in diapers

Timmy!
01-04-2016, 05:39 AM
Wait 16 pages? Lol. Dear sweet 8lb baby Jesus these next 14 days are gonna amusing

Timmy!
01-04-2016, 05:45 AM
For the record, im 98% sure Amber peed herself a little when 18 came in.

chazoe60
01-04-2016, 06:51 AM
Fans need to realize that nothing that happens the rest of this season is going to change the fact that Osweiler will be the QB of the future next season. Peyton starting in the playoffs is simply because he gives the team the best chance to win now.

I don't think any team has won the SB with a first year starter. If any QB has done it, it's still intensely rare and unlikely.

Tom Brady did it. Maybe Kurt Warner too.

Tned
01-04-2016, 08:06 AM
I'm aware of the words meaning, and after getting benched that's how he looked to me the first two times we had the ball. Then we started scoring and he perked up; winning's a phenomenal palliative. That doesn't mean that when the dust clears, adrenaline fades and contract negotiations begin after the season he won't remain steamed that he got benched because of Sanders and Anderson dropping balls and Schofield getting owned all game, all season.

I realize the futility in engaging you, but oh, well...

Ok, he looked irate the first few times we had the ball, and then when we started scoring, he perked up.

Question: Did you even watch the game?

The Broncos scored the first time they had the ball with Manning in the game. The first series Manning was in, the Broncos scored, so I'm not sure where you can even come up with him being irate the first few times, but having "perked up" after the Broncos started scoring.

Tned
01-04-2016, 08:11 AM
Fans need to realize that nothing that happens the rest of this season is going to change the fact that Osweiler will be the QB of the future next season. Peyton starting in the playoffs is simply because he gives the team the best chance to win now.

I don't think any team has won the SB with a first year starter. If any QB has done it, it's still intensely rare and unlikely.

He's the future of the Broncos is they can sign him. I don't think it's close to a given that he's the future QB, because we might be outbid by teams desperate for a QB that have tons of cap space.

The Broncos have a lot of key free agents they are going to need to sign and only so much money to do it.

TXBRONC
01-04-2016, 08:26 AM
Neither did they when they were drafted or first starting, use your head Wave.

You need to be specific. :D

silkamilkamonico
01-04-2016, 10:44 AM
I don't know WHAT Oz said ON THE SIDELINE OUR FIRST TWO POSSESSIONS AFTER HE WAS BENCHED, because I can't read lips well, but feel free to share. His body language and expression indicated great displeasure though, and I don't think it was over his own play, since only one of our five turnovers can be fairly placed on him. Notwithstanding his POSTGAME response to a question about his minimal role in the turnovers, I'm quite sure he was already aware of it.

You don't know jack ---- about what someone else is "thinking' based on their body language. That's a ridiculous insinuation. I'm sure the guy was upset about how the game was going on the offensive side of the ball. Nothing more nothing less. But we don't know.



Again, it depends on what one means by the statement (and, since someone suggested I had "defined" the term, I'd like it noted for the record that I did NOT affirm a particular definition, only note that different people may and often do define it differently.)
No. A HoF QB is not a "retread". That's just football knowledge stupidity.

wayninja
01-04-2016, 10:55 AM
Fans need to realize that nothing that happens the rest of this season is going to change the fact that Osweiler will be the QB of the future next season.

This is confusing. Wouldn't that make him the quarterback of the present?

Cugel
01-04-2016, 10:57 AM
Tom Brady did it. Maybe Kurt Warner too.

Do either of you think that Brock Osweiler is REMOTELY the QB that Brady or Warner are? Both are first ballot Hall of Famers. Warner will be inducted along with Brett Favre this August. If you see Brock Osweiler ever wearing the gold jacket I'd like to know what drugs you're taking.

If not, then it's pretty irrelevant to mention Tom Brady. Brock Osweiler isn't in the same galaxy as Tom Brady.

Hopefully he'll be a good QB next season. He might be bad or he might be mediocre. My bet right now is on mediocre to good. But nothing he's done makes me think "Wow! Canton get that bust ready!"

So, yes, the Broncos chances are better with Peyton Manning. Not great perhaps, because they still have a putrid OL and Joe Thomas is still sitting in Cleveland, where they just fired the GM who was willing to deal him.

Buff
01-04-2016, 10:59 AM
Do either of you think that Brock Osweiler is REMOTELY the QB that Brady or Warner are? Both are first ballot Hall of Famers. Warner will be inducted along with Brett Favre this August. If you see Brock Osweiler ever wearing the gold jacket I'd like to know what drugs you're taking.

If not, then it's pretty irrelevant to mention Tom Brady. Brock Osweiler isn't in the same galaxy as Tom Brady.

Hopefully he'll be a good QB next season. He might be bad or he might be mediocre. My bet right now is on mediocre to good. But nothing he's done makes me think "Wow! Canton get that bust ready!"

So, yes, the Broncos chances are better with Peyton Manning. Not great perhaps, because they still have a putrid OL and Joe Thomas is still sitting in Cleveland, where they just fired the GM who was willing to deal him.

I dare you to make one post that doesn't mention Joe Thomas.

Cugel
01-04-2016, 11:04 AM
This is confusing. Wouldn't that make him the quarterback of the present?

No.

This is simple really:

#1 - Does Peyton's experience make him the best chance for the Broncos to win in the playoffs, this season, if he's healthy?

Yes.

#2 - Is Peyton Manning going to be the Broncos QB of the future at age 40 next season? No.

Well, if Peyton isn't going to be here next season, who's the QB?

Brock Osweiler, right?

There's not even a choice. The Broncos are going to have the 28th pick of the draft or worse. There might not even be a franchise QB available in the draft next season. So, no chance to find a QB in the draft.

And will there be a FA QB available better than Osweiler? No.

(You can forget about Drew Brees, he's under contract (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/drew-brees/)and his cap hit for 2016 is $30 Million including pro-rated signing bonus).

Anyway he's not coming here to the "high powered" Kubiak offense to hand the ball off 30-35 times a game like Kubiak wants.

TXBRONC
01-04-2016, 11:07 AM
I like to base most of my decisions based on Phil Simms' commentary.

I can tell. I can really tell.

Cugel
01-04-2016, 11:08 AM
I dare you to make one post that doesn't mention Joe Thomas.

I can easily do an entire post without mentioning Joe Thomas once!
. . . .
DAMN! :tsk:

TXBRONC
01-04-2016, 11:17 AM
Fans need to realize that nothing that happens the rest of this season is going to change the fact that Osweiler will be the QB of the future next season. Peyton starting in the playoffs is simply because he gives the team the best chance to win now.

I don't think any team has won the SB with a first year starter. If any QB has done it, it's still intensely rare and unlikely.

Mentally he can pick any defense apart but I have serious doubts that he can physically deliver.

TimHippo
01-04-2016, 11:31 AM
(You can forget about Drew Brees, he's under contract (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/drew-brees/)and his cap hit for 2016 is $30 Million including pro-rated signing bonus).
.

The $30 million cap hit is for New Orleans only. This is exactly why New Orleans will likely cut him. They save $20 million off the cap by cutting him. The team that signs him would only be responsible for the cap associated with his new contract.

OrangeHoof
01-04-2016, 11:32 AM
I honestly want to see a hybrid based on conditions. We'll get Pittsburgh, KC or Houston in Round 2 and Ozzie has had some success against the first two. Let him start and see if he develops a hot hand like he did to start the Pittsburgh game. Why? He's got a better deep ball than Manning and is also a better cold-weather QB. Plus, the opponent will be preparing for Manning, not Ozzie, so they'll be unprepared at the start and it might give Denver an early lead.

Second half, we send a rested Peyton out there when audibling and execution are most important. After the game, Kubiak declares he doesn't know who is starting. Manning announces that, win or lose, this will be his final season.

In the conference championship game, probably against New England, we should try the same thing unless the weather is near-perfect like it was for the AFCCG two years ago. Then, it's Manning all the way. But if it is snowy and 10 degrees, we start with Ozzie knowing there is Manning in reserve should he be needed.

In the Super Bowl, at Santa Clara, assuming temps are good and field conditions are too, it's Manning all the way who marches off the field with another Super Bowl MVP and the scribes have another "going out on top" story to match Elway, Bettis and Lewis. Best thing Manning can do is get the Farewell Tour started so the league decides Denver will get all the calls during the playoffs.