View Full Version : Broncos Gameday Thread: Broncos vs Chargers 10/30/16
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:09 PM
You heard it from MO first--championship.
Edit: I have my years backward defensively. That said, there's really not much difference. I maintain that opinion.
Until they hit a hard hitting team and got completely shut down, and couldn't do the same on defense. It was the result of that game that led Elway to decide the team needed to be remade. Greater focus on defense and toughness.
They DID do the same on defense, despite HALF the defensive starters being on IR: Elway himself publicly (and rightly) said our D "kept us in the game." Sadly, the D had no control over safeties and Ints (though they did hold Seattle to a single first down followed by a FG on each of those drives,) much less pick-sixes and TD kick returns. The ONLY first half TD the D allowed was courtesy of a phantom end zone PI on Carter to create 1st and G at the 1.
The offensive line just got punched in the mouth and couldn't respond, even against a basic four-man rush (which let Seattle drop SEVEN men in coverage to handle the passing a game of a team incapable of running; even Manning can only do so much against that when throwing off his back foot every time.) That hasn't changed and—after THREE STRAIGHT SEASONS (really more; it was little bettter in 2012 and 2011)—there's NO excuse for that. It's not like we don't know; since the 2013 SB, no media discussion of the Broncos has been complete without commenting on our pathetic "blocking."
Even at half-strength, the D wasn't the problem in SB XLVIII: The problem was not even managing a FIRST DOWN until the middle of the SECOND quarter. Seattles D was good, but not THAT good. They weren't underrated, our one-dimensional offense was overrated, because if 5-6 men can't block 4 with any consistent success, neither running nor passing can succeed any better. You don't get to play SBs against the 3-13 2013 'Skins (whom we trailed 21-7 at home at one point, thanks to a pair of turnovers.) The D did fine until down 29-0; it's hard to criticize them "allowing" another 14 pts in 2 quarters after leaving their guts on the field in the first half.
We disagree.
Yea, MO, we got it. Siemian sucked in college, so even if he's the only first year starter in Broncos history to go more than 130 passes without an INT, or any of those other firsts for a first year Broncos starter, there are quite a few, he clearly doesn't belong, because he sucked in college. I'm with you, we would have been so much better with the turnover machine formerly known as Mark Sanchez.
Hawgdriver
10-30-2016, 10:14 PM
Frustrating I get, but it's basically an average offense right now, operating behind a very, very bad offensive line.
Sounds awful. :biggrin:
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:15 PM
Yea, MO, we got it. Siemian sucked in college, so even if he's the only first year starter in Broncos history to go more than 130 passes without an INT, or any of those other firsts for a first year Broncos starter, there are quite a few, he clearly doesn't belong, because he sucked in college. I'm with you, we would have been so much better with the turnover machine formerly known as Mark Sanchez.
Lol. OK. Because those are the arguments I'm using to show that Siemian has played bad in the last three games he's played. Good one.
I disagree with your assessment of Trevor Siemian the professional. I have given him praise when he deserves it and I will criticize him when he deserves it. Today, he deserves criticism, and for three straight games he's deserved criticism. It's not my problem you can't handle that.
FanInAZ
10-30-2016, 10:19 PM
?
Through 7 games:
This year 167 points, 2287 yards
Last year 168 points, 2455 yards
The offense is about the same. Neither is clearly better than the other.
The biggest difference for me is that this year we have an O that we have reason to be will get better as the season progress. Last year we were just hoping that either Manning could survive until the end, or Oz would come off the bench & make us proud. Oz proved himself to be just good enough to keep us from imploding while Manning got healthy in the middle of the season.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:22 PM
The biggest difference for me is that this year we have an O that we have reason to be will get better as the season progress. Last year we were just hoping that either Manning could survive until the end, or Oz would come off the bench & make us proud. Oz proved himself to be just good enough to keep us from imploding while Manning got healthy in the middle of the season.
Explain your stance on this year's offense getting better. The starting running back is done and the offensive line is bad. I don't see the running game getting too much better. Last year, Anderson got healthy for the end of the season.
Lol. OK. Because those are the arguments I'm using to show that Siemian has played bad in the last three games he's played. Good one.
I disagree with your assessment of Trevor Siemian the professional. I have given him praise when he deserves it and I will criticize him when he deserves it. Today, he deserves criticism, and for three straight games he's deserved criticism. It's not my problem you can't handle that.
Maybe this is confirmation bias, but I contend Siemians struggles now are mainly due to trying to do things a lot faster than he should, because he realizes he must. He's learning the bad reflexes, instincts and habits I don't want plaguing Lynch for the rest of his career. If a year of Orton 2.0 is the price we pay to avoid a decade of Plummer 2.0, I'm content with that.
Just... PLEASE spend some first day draft picks on linemen next year; ILBs (especially 3-4 ILBs) aren't in such demand we can't get a good one later.
Lol. OK. Because those are the arguments I'm using to show that Siemian has played bad in the last three games he's played. Good one.
I disagree with your assessment of Trevor Siemian the professional. I have given him praise when he deserves it and I will criticize him when he deserves it. Today, he deserves criticism, and for three straight games he's deserved criticism. It's not my problem you can't handle that.
I would love your sharply tuned NFL mind to give us a nice comparison of Siemian's first seven games to those of the first round QBs of the last six or seven years or so. Forget compared to seventh rounders or even second or third rounders, just the first rounders.
I guess the fact that the Broncos have had so few QBs the last thirty years, with what 20 years of that time with HOF QBs at the helm, and only having a few first time starters under center. It's easy for Broncos fans to lose perspective and try and grade a first year starter the same way they would a HOF QB or even just a four or five year vet.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:30 PM
I would love your sharply tuned NFL mind to give us a nice comparison of Siemian's first seven games to those of the first round QBs of the last six or seven years or so. Forget compared to seventh rounders or even second or third rounders, just the first rounders.
I guess the fact that the Broncos have had so few QBs the last thirty years, with what 20 years of that time with HOF QBs at the helm, and only having a few first time starters under center. It's easy for Broncos fans to lose perspective and try and grade a first year starter the same way they would a HOF QB or even just a four or five year vet.
I don't care where he was drafted. He was named starter of an NFL team. I care about his performance on the field. And in the last three games it's been sub par.
wayninja
10-30-2016, 10:37 PM
Did people really think that having Manning and Osweiler leave would turn the 31st worst passing game in the league become a top five offense overnight?
I expected to proceed in that direction at least.
It's funny, four weeks ago, the criticism was that the Broncos should be throwing deep, even if receivers were double or triple covered, because you have to throw it up and let receivers make plays. Now, it's criticism when the ball was thrown up into double coverage, and resulted in big completions.
You got me there. I hope they never throw deep again this season.
Glad I talked this out. They say if you talk about something you will feel better.
Nice.
Hawgdriver
10-30-2016, 10:38 PM
Tned makes a fair point that Siemian should be compared to other young, inexperienced quarterbacks because he hasn't fully marinated and has expectations of improvement, to which MO replies, don't care, improve. I agree with both.
I don't care where he was drafted. He was named starter of an NFL team. I care about his performance on the field. And in the last three games it's been sub par.
I agree that where he's drafted doesn't matter, which is why I'm asking how his first seven starts compare to other first time starters.
So, how does he compare to other first time starters?
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:44 PM
I agree that where he's drafted doesn't matter, which is why I'm asking how his first seven starts compare to other first time starters.
So, how does he compare to other first time starters?
Who cares? I'm not hoping for a nice story. I'm hoping for a good quarterback, regardless of what career start it is.
Hawgdriver
10-30-2016, 10:45 PM
I agree that where he's drafted doesn't matter, which is why I'm asking how his first seven starts compare to other first time starters.
So, how does he compare to other first time starters?
I'll field this one.
Kinda similarly. Adequate in the 6 games he's played, but trending downward. Too soon to abandon project, but seeing signs that should be concerning. Will need to improve to continue to play in league.
Tned makes a fair point that Siemian should be compared to other young, inexperienced quarterbacks because he hasn't fully marinated and has expectations of improvement, to which MO replies, don't care, improve. I agree with both.
We all want improvement, but for instance the Orton 2.0 comment is asinine, as Siemian is playing light years better than Orton's first seven games.
I'm just trying to bring a little perspective to the discussion. Most posters on here have completely lost site of the fact you can't compare a first time starter to five and ten year veterans.
If you want to evaluate his play, you need to compare his play to how first year starter typically perform.
wayninja
10-30-2016, 10:46 PM
Who cares? I'm not hoping for a nice story.
Everyone dies.
NightTerror218
10-30-2016, 10:46 PM
Booker also Injured shoulder and returned. I bet that affected him.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:47 PM
I mean, I just don't care how his numbers stack up to Geno Smith and E.J. Manuel or Carson Wentz and Dak Prescott. None of that matters in my evaluation of him as the Denver Broncos quarterback.
I'll field this one.
Kinda similarly. Adequate in the 6 games he's played, but trending downward. Too soon to abandon project, but seeing signs that should be concerning. Will need to improve to continue to play in league.
Agreed.
I mean, I just don't care how his numbers stack up to Geno Smith and E.J. Manuel or Carson Wentz and Dak Prescott. None of that matters in my evaluation of him as the Denver Broncos quarterback.
Sorry, didn't realize you thought it was a Disney movie where a 16 year old miraculously makes an NFL squad and becomes MVP QB before he had a license.
In the REAL world, it's almost unheard of for a first year starter to tear it up or even play "average."
Slick
10-30-2016, 10:51 PM
Yea, MO, we got it. Siemian sucked in college, so even if he's the only first year starter in Broncos history to go more than 130 passes without an INT, or any of those other firsts for a first year Broncos starter, there are quite a few, he clearly doesn't belong, because he sucked in college. I'm with you, we would have been so much better with the turnover machine formerly known as Mark Sanchez.
Stats don't tell the whole story. He was extremely lucky to go 130 passes without a pick.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:53 PM
Agreed.
Sorry, didn't realize you thought it was a Disney movie where a 16 year old miraculously makes an NFL squad and becomes MVP QB before he had a license.
In the REAL world, it's almost unheard of for a first year starter to tear it up or even play "average."
Well, he's worse than the other two first-year starters this year, since you want to compare him so badly.
BroncoWave
10-30-2016, 10:56 PM
Stats don't tell the whole story. He was extremely lucky to go 130 passes without a pick.
Definitely. He has like 2 picks dropped every week. He is the luckiest mofo in the world not to have more picks than he does.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 10:56 PM
Dak Prescott just made a play Trevor Siemian hasn't been able to do. Why this matters, I don't know, but Tned wants to compare first year starters.
And there's another one.
FanInAZ
10-30-2016, 10:59 PM
Explain your stance on this year's offense getting better. The starting running back is done and the offensive line is bad. I don't see the running game getting too much better. Last year, Anderson got healthy for the end of the season.
I said we have reason to believe that it will get better because we don't have a broken down veteran QB we pretty much knew would probably retire at the end of the season. Instead, we have a young QB that has the potential to improve beyond what he is today. We also have Booker who has looked really good since taking over for Anderson who hopefully won't be as inconsistent as Anderson has been. As far as our OL, yes that's still a problem, but younger players with more speed, agility & less wear & tear are going to manage better.
BroncoWave
10-30-2016, 11:00 PM
Dak Prescott just made a play Trevor Siemian hasn't been able to do. Why this matters, I don't know, but Tned wants to compare first year starters.
And there's another one.
I'm hard.
wayninja
10-30-2016, 11:00 PM
I'm hard.
Dear lord. TMI.
Hawgdriver
10-30-2016, 11:01 PM
We all want improvement, but for instance the Orton 2.0 comment is asinine, as Siemian is playing light years better than Orton's first seven games.
I'm just trying to bring a little perspective to the discussion. Most posters on here have completely lost site of the fact you can't compare a first time starter to five and ten year veterans.
If you want to evaluate his play, you need to compare his play to how first year starter typically perform.
I don't agree that Orton 2.0 is asinine. Orton was an adequate-ish quarterback. I disagree to the extent it is pure disparagement. I'll need to see more from Siemian before I can agree he's better than Orton.
I'd be pissed if we paid Trevor $72mm and this is what we get.
My book on Siemian is still being written, and I'm hoping to see good things going forward. The poor showing of the offensive line does Siemian no favors.
BroncoWave
10-30-2016, 11:06 PM
Dear lord. TMI.
Dak throws the GW TD!
http://i.imgur.com/X9DLci9.gif?noredirect
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-30-2016, 11:17 PM
?
Through 7 games:
This year 167 points, 2287 yards
Last year 168 points, 2455 yards
The offense is about the same. Neither is clearly better than the other.
And this was about the point last when Manning went in the toilet, correct; somewhere between games 8-9?
pnbronco
10-30-2016, 11:17 PM
I yelled my head off and it was nerve racking. When we saw the stretcher we had no idea what had happened. We started looking for the coaches wondering if Kubes had collapsed. Then we figured it was Coach Phillips but we didn't know what had happened and I got really scared. Finally someone saw on their phone that he had been hit.....
The game felt really jerky....I knew we were the better team but dang we did keep making major mistakes that could of cost us the game. I have a soft spot for Booker....he's a rookie so I wasn't as upset with him and those around me were. I though he was trying to get that TD instead of protecting the ball. Siemian did not have a good day at all. The pick that went in for a TD was like a punch in the stomach but he could of had a lot more.
I had heard that CJ is like a coach out there with him, helping him read the defense....so I'll give him a pass that he was out there without his security blanket, but he has to get better. Our O line has to find a way to give him time....it was ugly today.
Really glad the Juwan got the TD. Really glad that T. Davis had a good game. Glad that Doss found a way to help with both Talib out and then Webster. I just hope that Marshall get better soon....the D felt off today...but then their coach was carted off too. So happy that Roby had that INT for a TD....it just changed the whole atmosphere. So happy that we won!!!
pnbronco
10-30-2016, 11:24 PM
And this was about the point last when Manning went in the toilet, correct; somewhere between games 8-9?
It was Denver vs Chiefs.....Nov 15, 2015. Peyton looked horrible and that game was a pile of you know what in Denver.
MOtorboat
10-30-2016, 11:26 PM
And this was about the point last when Manning went in the toilet, correct; somewhere between games 8-9?
Well, we don't know what's going to happen the next few weeks, so up to this point I would disagree with your assessment.
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-30-2016, 11:30 PM
Well, we don't know what's going to happen the next few weeks, so up to this point I would disagree with your assessment.
Fair enough
BroncoWave
10-31-2016, 12:41 AM
https://i.imgur.com/vbjJCgb.jpg
dogfish
10-31-2016, 12:45 AM
obi wade kenobi?
Magnificent Seven
10-31-2016, 01:04 AM
Broncos Won and it's Raiders week! Let's focus on Raiders.
Who cares? I'm not hoping for a nice story. I'm hoping for a good quarterback, regardless of what career start it is.
Except you KNOW it doesn't work like that: No one—not Elway, not Manning: NO ONE—is an All Pro rookie QB. Or as second-year players making their first career starts, if we want to be technical (but since Siemian only had a SINGLE snap last year, and it was a kneel down, he's a de facto rookie.)
We all WANT a QB who looks like a steady vet 6˝ games into his career, but EXPECTING it's unreasonable, wherever he was drafted and whatever Prescott, Wentz or whoever have done in their half-season "careers." Vince Young and RGIII were Pro Bowl rookies who looked like franchise players, too—until the rest of the league had enough tape to figure them out, at which point they came crashing back to earth for good, as so many before them.
One consequence of the NFL steadily passing more and more practically since its birth 90 years ago is that the days of just throwing a raw but talented rookie QB out there and riding him deep into the playoffs are long gone. He may plow through three divisions worth of good, bad and indifferent teams to GET there when no one knows his tendencies, but once the regular season weeds out all the chafe and there's plenty of tape... well, how long were the 2012 'Skins and 2011 Colts in the playoffs? Answer: Only slightly longer than the 2006 Titans.
Todays league demands teams DEVELOP QBs, so the question for Siemian, Lynch or any other green QB (especially behind an AWFUL line) is their PROGRESSION rather than whether they're up to the standards of the seasoned vets they're not. If we'd rode with Butt Fumble, or even benched Siemian AND Lynch for Davis, the standard would be different. What we've seen from Siemian so far strongly supports the coaches' assessment he was a better bet than anyone else, including vets.
MOtorboat
10-31-2016, 02:49 AM
Except you KNOW it doesn't work like that: No one—not Elway, not Manning: NO ONE—is an All Pro rookie QB. Or as second-year players making their first career starts, if we want to be technical (but since Siemian only had a SINGLE snap last year, and it was a kneel down, he's a de facto rookie.)
We all WANT a QB who looks like a steady vet 6˝ games into his career, but EXPECTING it's unreasonable, wherever he was drafted and whatever Prescott, Wentz or whoever have done in their half-season "careers." Vince Young and RGIII were Pro Bowl rookies who looked like franchise players, too—until the rest of the league had enough tape to figure them out, at which point they came crashing back to earth for good, as so many before them.
One consequence of the NFL steadily passing more and more practically since its birth 90 years ago is that the days of just throwing a raw but talented rookie QB out there and riding him deep into the playoffs are long gone. He may plow through three divisions worth of good, bad and indifferent teams to GET there when no one knows his tendencies, but once the regular season weeds out all the chafe and there's plenty of tape... well, how long were the 2012 'Skins and 2011 Colts in the playoffs? Answer: Only slightly longer than the 2006 Titans.
Todays league demands teams DEVELOP QBs, so the question for Siemian, Lynch or any other green QB (especially behind an AWFUL line) is their PROGRESSION rather than whether they're up to the standards of the seasoned vets they're not. If we'd rode with Butt Fumble, or even benched Siemian AND Lynch for Davis, the standard would be different. What we've seen from Siemian so far strongly supports the coaches' assessment he was a better bet than anyone else, including vets.
I didn't say he had to be all-world.
He's got to not throw pick-sixes and fumble when he gets sacked, and that includes all of his awful, awful decisions that didn't get intercepted, complete 60-ish percent of his passes and be able to complete passes past 10 yards. I know your bar is low as a Tebow fan, but mine is not. He needs to play better and I don't give a shit whether he was drafted two years ago or four.
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 02:50 AM
. . .so the question for Siemian . . . is [his] PROGRESSION
This is my takeaway from your post as your 'call to action' type statement. His progression, or lack of it, is what concerns me. It's not all on the line. I need to see a sharp Siemian next week, I'm starting to have doubts about his NFL viability. Still, it's possible with this defense and an improved consistent offense to make a deep run. . .but that would be in spite of Siemian, not because---and that's not what you want from your starting QB.
This is my takeaway from your post as your 'call to action' type statement. His progression, or lack of it, is what concerns me. It's not all on the line. I need to see a sharp Siemian next week, I'm starting to have doubts about his NFL viability. Still, it's possible with this defense and an improved consistent offense to make a deep run. . .but that would be in spite of Siemian, not because---and that's not what you want from your starting QB.
That's fair. I personally think he's doing as well as (if not better than) can be expected under the circumstances: Still learning on the fly with no time to set up or go through receiver progressions, and no consistent running game to keep him in 3rd and manageable (or rather, avoid 3rd and longs that let pass rushers pin their ears back against garbage protection.) It's hard to get too mad at him for fumbling and throwing picks UNDER PRESSURE: That's how that works. When Von routinely strip-sack QBs and/or forces them to dump passes right into Talibs hands, we don't laugh at the bum QB, we give Von, Ware, Barrett, Ray and Wolfe due credit.
Our line's just got to stop making mediocre players look like Von-Ware-Wolfe (Happy Halloween.)
Stats don't tell the whole story. He was extremely lucky to go 130 passes without a pick.
Yes, no question he had some picks dropped, but you guys do realize that happens to every QB, right? How many times do we see one of our DBs or LBs smack their temples and then look at their hands after they dropped a pick? It happens.
Look at the way Osweiler is playing and the fact the Broncos tried to pay him $15 or $16 million a year. There are very few young QBs that start off as good as Wentz and Prescott, which is why they set both the rookie passes without an INT (to start career) and Prescott set the passes without an INT to start a career (rookie or not) records. It's VERY hard to be good from the get go.
All of that said, it's easy to lay it all on luck, but the fact remains in what 50 odd years of Broncos history, that streak was the 4th (possibly 3rd, I lost track) longest in Broncos history. Luck comes into play, like how it ended on bad luck when a receivers stone hands led to a tipped ball pick.
Well, he's worse than the other two first-year starters this year, since you want to compare him so badly.
Yes, he is. No question. On the other hand, you do know how rare their performances are, right? You do realize why they are nearly the number one and number two stories in the NFL this year, right? How did Luck look his first year? How about Manning? How about Brees? How about Winston? How about Goff? How about ______ (fill in the blank with a first or second round QB taken in the last decade plus).
This is my takeaway from your post as your 'call to action' type statement. His progression, or lack of it, is what concerns me. It's not all on the line. I need to see a sharp Siemian next week, I'm starting to have doubts about his NFL viability. Still, it's possible with this defense and an improved consistent offense to make a deep run. . .but that would be in spite of Siemian, not because---and that's not what you want from your starting QB.
Agreed. Right now, he's following an Osweiler path. Looked pretty good and real signs of promise his first two or three games, and then start showing enough flaws to be concerning. There has been a definite drop off since his injury. Whether that got in his head, or he's still dealing with it or it's unrelated, I have no idea, but he's not been as accurate.
The good news is that waiting in the wings is the guy that most of us think can be the Broncos franchise QB for years to come. Based on his game and a half, he clearly isn't ready. so if nothing else, hopefully Siemian can be the anti-2015 QB, which is not be a turnover machine and give the Broncos defense a fighting chance. If he improves and gives Lynch a real fight for the job long term, then it's just a bonus for the Broncos.
I don't agree that Orton 2.0 is asinine. Orton was an adequate-ish quarterback. I disagree to the extent it is pure disparagement. I'll need to see more from Siemian before I can agree he's better than Orton.
I'd be pissed if we paid Trevor $72mm and this is what we get.
My book on Siemian is still being written, and I'm hoping to see good things going forward. The poor showing of the offensive line does Siemian no favors.
It is because those people making the comparison are not comparing Siemian's first seven starts to Orton's first seven starts, but instead comparing Siemian's first seven starts to their memory of Orton when he was a seven year veteran (or whatever he was when he came to Denver).
It's just a very flawed comparison, since for instance, you don't even know if the dink and dunk is because Siemian can't or won't throw down field, or if Kubiak wants him to stick to the short, west coast style passing attack.
How often as football fans, Broncos or otherwise, have we heard them talk about how a coach had to cut down his playbook for a rookie/first time starting QB? Or, how they changed the playbook to take away half the field, so the young QB would only have to focus on progressions on half the field? Being a first time starter in this league is hard, which is why so many rookie and second year (first time starters) get benched or are way negative in the TD to INT ratio.
So, until there is more than 6.5 games of history, it's silly to make any comparisons as to what type of QB he is, because at this point, none of us know.
VonDoom
10-31-2016, 08:55 AM
ESPN Stats & Info @ESPNStatsInfo 14h14 hours ago
The @Broncos defense pressured Philip Rivers on 31 of his 51 dropbacks (61%), highest pressure pct for any defense in a game this season
capt. Jack
10-31-2016, 09:24 AM
Trevor throws a nice ball, seems pretty cool. But he has had alot of picks dropped by the the opposition so far.
Hopefully he has a good game this week end.
We gotta beat the Raiders.
:)
Northman
10-31-2016, 09:28 AM
Probably wont beat the Raiders on the road but it would be nice.
Slick
10-31-2016, 09:29 AM
Yes, no question he had some picks dropped, but you guys do realize that happens to every QB, right? How many times do we see one of our DBs or LBs smack their temples and then look at their hands after they dropped a pick? It happens.
Look at the way Osweiler is playing and the fact the Broncos tried to pay him $15 or $16 million a year. There are very few young QBs that start off as good as Wentz and Prescott, which is why they set both the rookie passes without an INT (to start career) and Prescott set the passes without an INT to start a career (rookie or not) records. It's VERY hard to be good from the get go.
All of that said, it's easy to lay it all on luck, but the fact remains in what 50 odd years of Broncos history, that streak was the 4th (possibly 3rd, I lost track) longest in Broncos history. Luck comes into play, like how it ended on bad luck when a receivers stone hands led to a tipped ball pick.
No one can say anything negative about the kid without you coming to his rescue. He's the QB of the Denver Broncos and he's going to be criticized.
I'm not even roasting him. Denver is 6-2 and I'm happy about that. We're on to Oakland.
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 09:30 AM
That's fair. I personally think he's doing as well as (if not better than) can be expected under the circumstances: Still learning on the fly with no time to set up or go through receiver progressions, and no consistent running game to keep him in 3rd and manageable (or rather, avoid 3rd and longs that let pass rushers pin their ears back against garbage protection.) It's hard to get too mad at him for fumbling and throwing picks UNDER PRESSURE: That's how that works. When Von routinely strip-sack QBs and/or forces them to dump passes right into Talibs hands, we don't laugh at the bum QB, we give Von, Ware, Barrett, Ray and Wolfe due credit.
Our line's just got to stop making mediocre players look like Von-Ware-Wolfe (Happy Halloween.)
And the acromioclavical ligament separation. I've had one of those. It's impossible to expect him to be at 100%, he's sacrificing himself for the team. IDC if you are an NFL player...if you aren't cyborg or bionic, it will affect upper body mechanics and accuracy.
So he's a trooper and his circumstances are not ideal. So what. He needs to get better because he's not producing, even when his performance is curved.
And Happy Halloween to you too buddy.
capt. Jack
10-31-2016, 09:35 AM
Probably wont beat the Raiders on the road but it would be nice.
Yeah, but It would be sweet! It would be a statement for us to Beat the Raiders and takeover sole possession of First place in the west.
:)
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 09:38 AM
It is because those people making the comparison are not comparing Siemian's first seven starts to Orton's first seven starts, but instead comparing Siemian's first seven starts to their memory of Orton when he was a seven year veteran (or whatever he was when he came to Denver).
I looked up Orton's first seven starts and made my own conclusion that it's a fair comparison, 2005-ish raw rookie Orton + some 2007 Orton to 2016 1-yr NFL time Siemian, all things considered. Orton took the 11-5 Bears to the playoffs that year, or Orton benefitted from the Bears defense to survive to the playoffs, however you look at it.
Did you compare them?
wayninja
10-31-2016, 10:33 AM
Guys, it's completely superficial to compare anything to anything. There are reasons for poor play, so you should just lower your expectations. Unless it's Orton or Tebow, and then it's asinine.
I think I'm really getting the hang of this.
Northman
10-31-2016, 10:37 AM
Here we go about Tebow, the guy who cant make any squad in the NFL.
wayninja
10-31-2016, 10:41 AM
Oh, we are comparing him to present day? Sorry, I meant for the comparison to be historical. I withdraw the comment.
In that case, comparing him to a retired Orton does seem asinine.
Northman
10-31-2016, 10:45 AM
Oh, we are comparing him to present day? Sorry, I meant for the comparison to be historical. I withdraw the comment.
In that case, comparing him to a retired Orton does seem asinine.
Thank you. Glad you have seen the error of your ways.
VonDoom
10-31-2016, 01:32 PM
Wade Phillips @sonofbum 5m5 minutes ago
Thanks and I appreciate everyone's concern -I am ok today and back to work at what I love --I get the big hit award for the week!
I looked up Orton's first seven starts and made my own conclusion that it's a fair comparison, 2005-ish raw rookie Orton + some 2007 Orton to 2016 1-yr NFL time Siemian, all things considered. Orton took the 11-5 Bears to the playoffs that year, or Orton benefitted from the Bears defense to survive to the playoffs, however you look at it.
Did you compare them?
Yes, and certainly when you compare the first four games of their careers, there is no comparison. I haven't rechecked. How did you conclude they are comparative.
VonDoom
10-31-2016, 02:14 PM
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 3m3 minutes ago
Wade Phillips "just got the heck knocked out of him" Sunday, Kubiak said. "Sore, but he's feeling good."
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 2m2 minutes ago
Kubiak, on Phillips: "He's himself today." Kubiak said he's trying to get Phillips to go home & rest, but Wade doesn't want to do that.
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 2m2 minutes ago
Kubiak, on the offense: "We have the ability to be better in some spots... we've played well at times up front, need to get more consistent"
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 2m2 minutes ago
Kubiak, on the offense: "We're not even close to what we need to be. We know that."
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 1m1 minute ago
Kubiak: A.J. Derby was ready to play physically ... "my expectations are to get him prepared to play this week. I think we can do that."
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 51s51 seconds ago
Devontae Booker's shoulder is "sore," but Kubiak says the fact he returned is a positive sign.
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 38s39 seconds ago
Kubiak, on having a 24-7 pass-run ratio in the first half: "We wanted to start the game aggressively ... you want to get back to balance."
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 47s48 seconds ago
Kubiak: "The key to being balanced in football is getting first downs and staying on the field."
Troy Renck @TroyRenck 22s23 seconds ago
#Broncos Kubiak said "balance on offense comes through ball movement" The three 3-and-outs followed first drive. Team got out of whack
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 1m1 minute ago
Kubiak said some of Siemian's decision-making Sunday wasn't as good as it has been.
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 02:15 PM
Yes, and certainly when you compare the first four games of their careers, there is no comparison. I haven't rechecked. How did you conclude they are comparative.
I looked at season stats for 2005 for Orton, considered he didn't benefit from the 1 year of coaching than Siemian did so looked at his 2007 (next NFL snaps), factored in Lovie Smith and lack of WR talent. Orton's stats for first few games are undeniably bad, but as you say, it's not exactly apples to apples since Orton was greener than Siemian. My ultimate opinion is that they are young game managers (not being derogatory) that show potential to be genuine NFL starters with seasoning.
VonDoom
10-31-2016, 02:22 PM
Nicki Jhabvala @NickiJhabvala 3m3 minutes ago Colorado, USA
Broncos game balls: Riley Dixon, Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders, T.J. Ward, Bradley Roby, Jared Crick
Andrew Mason @MaseDenver 3m3 minutes ago
Kubiak: Nelson "did a really good job" running the defense ... Doss, "it's a big game in Doss' career ... looking for him to build off that"
Probably wont beat the Raiders on the road but it would be nice.
Not with that attitude!
I looked at season stats for 2005 for Orton, considered he didn't benefit from the 1 year of coaching than Siemian did so looked at his 2007 (next NFL snaps), factored in Lovie Smith and lack of WR talent. Orton's stats for first few games are undeniably bad, but as you say, it's not exactly apples to apples since Orton was greener than Siemian. My ultimate opinion is that they are young game managers (not being derogatory) that show potential to be genuine NFL starters with seasoning.
You really have to look at his '05 starts. Yes, Siemian had some advantages from a year playing on the scout team, but you certainly can't discount Orton's first year of starting in '05.
wayninja
10-31-2016, 02:59 PM
Probably wont beat the Raiders on the road but it would be nice.
Beating them on the road before they enter the stadium is actually a pretty good strategy.
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 03:20 PM
You really have to look at his '05 starts. Yes, Siemian had some advantages from a year playing on the scout team, but you certainly can't discount Orton's first year of starting in '05.
Do you mean you have to ignore his 2007 stats and pretend Siemian didn't have a year of NFL coaching?
Do you mean you have to ignore his 2007 stats and pretend Siemian didn't have a year of NFL coaching?
It would be a lot more appropriate than ignoring Orton's first 15 starts.
Broncos are going to tax that ass. Broncos by 35.
Hawgdriver
10-31-2016, 03:45 PM
It would be a lot more appropriate than ignoring Orton's first 15 starts.
Who said anything about that?
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-31-2016, 03:48 PM
Broncos are going to tax that ass. Broncos by 35.
Did you mean "tap"? We're not the Denver Democrats King.
😂
Did you mean "tap"? We're not the Denver Democrats King.
��
No, I mean tax. We're going to California to tax that ass.
wayninja
10-31-2016, 04:06 PM
No, I mean tax. We're going to California to tax that ass.
But shouldn't ass taxing be a question for state and local principalities? If not, we really need a flat ass tax.
To wit, I'm not in favor of huge ass taxes.
I might be in the wrong thread.
But shouldn't ass taxing be a question for state and local principalities? If not, we really need a flat ass tax.
To wit, I'm not in favor of huge ass taxes.
I might be in the wrong thread.
The Broncos flat tax that ass and huge tax that ass.
That ass will be taxed.
VonDoom
10-31-2016, 06:27 PM
Did you mean "tap"? We're not the Denver Democrats King.
��
I assumed he meant wax dat ass but tax is funnier
Did you mean "tap"? We're not the Denver Democrats King.
Well, I certainly hope GRABBING ass isn't the game plan. You're supposed to be keeping that on the down low for the next eight days. ;)
Lynch12
11-01-2016, 08:17 AM
This is the first game where i havent really been happy with Siemien's decision making on the field. He is playing really crappy today, even on the long bomb to Sanders had to be made by Sanders which was a great catch.
Noway, Trevor is just fine throwing deep, it's the offensive line fault that he throws it horrible deep, it's the offensive linemen fault that he chooses to check it down for 2 yards on 3rd and 8 95% of the time. Smh
Lynch12
11-01-2016, 08:20 AM
Jesus Christ Siemian.
Like folks have been saying.... Trevor could very well have 10-15 ints this year already if the defenders caught the balls.
Like folks have been saying.... Trevor could very well have 10-15 ints this year already if the defenders caught the balls.
True, and Lynch would have that many if he was starting and twice that many sacks. Oh yea, and I would be a hot chic if God gave me a vag.
Noway, Trevor is just fine throwing deep, it's the offensive line fault that he throws it horrible deep, it's the offensive linemen fault that he chooses to check it down for 2 yards on 3rd and 8 95% of the time. Smh
P.s. Are you Lynch's bootie call in real life? Trying to understand the groupie like love.
wayninja
11-01-2016, 12:10 PM
P.s. Are you Lynch's bootie call in real life? Trying to understand the groupie like love.
Sorry, but I find this very ironic. Just sayin'.
Sorry, but I find this very ironic. Just sayin'.
I'm not sure that's the correct use of "irony" which actually means opposite of something. So, I think if you were to sayy something like, "hey, T, you must have been an English major" due to my constant typo laiden posts, it would be ironic.
I think would you wanted here was something like, "T, isn't that kind of the pot calling the kettle black?"
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:14 PM
I'm not sure that's the correct use of "irony" which actually means opposite of something. So, I think if you were to sayy something like, "hey, T, you must have been an English major" due to my constant typo laiden posts, it would be ironic.
I think would you wanted here was something like, "T, isn't that kind of the pot calling the kettle black?"
Ironic doesn't just mean opposite. It can also mean amusingly contrary or incongruous. I think it fits. Pot kettle black also works.
Ironic doesn't just mean opposite. It can also mean amusingly contrary or incongruous. I think it fits. Pot kettle black also works.
Great, I'll be sure to let Websters know you changed the definition. ;)
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:22 PM
Great, I'll be sure to let Websters know you changed the definition. ;)
Uh.. sure... feel free...
a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result.
plural noun: ironies
"the irony is that I thought he could help me"
synonyms: paradox, incongruity, incongruousness
"the irony of the situation"
I'll let you get back to telling everyone how wrong they are on siemian and word usage, since that's like, your thing.
Ironic doesn't just mean opposite. It can also mean amusingly contrary or incongruous. I think it fits. Pot kettle black also works.
See, if my statement was "ironic" it would be posting that to someone who has been bashing Lynch. So, if someone was being highly critical of Lynch, and I came along and said, "are you Lynch's bootie call in real life? Trying to understand the groupie like love" then my statement would have been "ironic."
Uh.. sure... feel free...
a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result.
plural noun: ironies
"the irony is that I thought he could help me"
synonyms: paradox, incongruity, incongruousness
"the irony of the situation"
I'll let you get back to telling everyone how wrong they are on siemian and word usage, since that's like, your thing.
My bad, I read that as congruous, not incongruous, so yes, opposite. Point being, your attempt at a little dig was actually "ironic" since you used "ironic" in a way opposite of what it actually means. :salute:
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:32 PM
Ok, T, whatever works for you. At least you know what I was trying to say. Please proceed.
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:34 PM
My bad, I read that as congruous, not incongruous, so yes, opposite. Point being, your attempt at a little dig was actually "ironic" since you used "ironic" in a way opposite of what it actually means. :salute:
I hope this now turns into page after page about how I'm secretly the booty call of webster.
Also, I like how incongrous is now a synonym for opposite. I'll notify webster... ;)
I hope this now turns into page after page about how I'm secretly the booty call of webster.
Also, I like how incongrous is now a synonym for opposite. I'll notify webster... ;)
A=B=C
Contradictory is a synonym of incongruous, and opposite is a synonym of contradictory, so therefore, opposite is a synonym of incongruous... ;) :fight:
But, you may raise the :yield: at any time...
:popcorn:
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:44 PM
A=B=C
Contradictory is a synonym of incongruous, and opposite is a synonym of contradictory, so therefore, opposite is a synonym of incongruous... ;) :fight:
But, you may raise the :yield: at any time...
:popcorn:
Synonyms for incongruous
adj out of place; absurd
bizarre
inappropriate
contradictory
incoherent
incompatible
alien
conflicting
discordant
disparate
distorted
divergent
extraneous
fantastic
fitful
foreign
illogical
improper
inapt
inconsistent
irreconcilable
irregular
jumbled
lopsided
rambling
twisted
unavailing
unbalanced
unbecoming
unconnected
uncoordinated
uneven
unintelligible
unpredictable
unrelated
unsuitable
unsuited
incongruent
disconsonant
inapropos
mismatched
out of keeping
shifting
I'm looking... but I don't see opposite in the list? I wonder why Webster didn't include associative property derivatives like you did? :confused:
It's so weird, because on it's face, everyone knows that "absurd/out of place" is the same thing as "opposite".
Synonyms for incongruous
adj out of place; absurd
contradictorystar
Please continue.
wayninja
11-01-2016, 01:51 PM
Please continue.
No need to continue, until you quote something that has the word opposite in it. Until then, you are arguing contradictory and incongruous. So...
Or are you trying to make a leap that isn't actually there? Which would be weird for someone accusing ME of changing definitions...
I mean, I don't mean to opposite you. I feel like this thread is a bit opposite from it's original purpose.
Just to further your logic..
Ornery is a synonym of opposite. Rotten is a synonym of Ornery. So opposite = rotten. Everyone knows that!
Excuse me, I need to go throw out some opposite vegetables!
Hawgdriver
11-01-2016, 01:51 PM
Who is the anemic steelworker's favorite singer?
Alanis Morissette.
No need to continue, until you quote something that has the word opposite in it. Until then, you are arguing contradictory and incongruous. So...
Or are you trying to make a leap that isn't actually there? Which would be weird for someone accusing ME of changing definitions...
I mean, I don't mean to opposite you. I feel like this thread is a bit opposite from it's original purpose.
Just to further your logic..
Ornery is a synonym of opposite. Rotten is a synonym of Ornery. So opposite = rotten. Everyone knows that!
Excuse me, I need to go throw out some opposite vegetables!
It has become a bit opposite of it's originally purpose, which wasn't to bust my nuts, while I'm busting Lynch's nuts. That's a form of _____ blocking and just isn't cool, dude.
wayninja
11-01-2016, 02:00 PM
Who is the anemic steelworker's favorite singer?
Alanis Morissette.
Cause I got one hand in my pocket, and the other one is raining on my wedding day?
wayninja
11-01-2016, 02:01 PM
It has become a bit opposite of it's originally purpose, which wasn't to bust my nuts, while I'm busting Lynch's nuts. That's a form of _____ blocking and just isn't cool, dude.
Well, at least we are back to talking about blocking. About that o-line...
Well, at least we are back to talking about blocking. About that o-line...
Now, that's ironic -- the use of the term blocking along with the Broncos offensive line...
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-01-2016, 05:08 PM
I'm willing to give the offense a mulligan last week because they had one less day to prepare than the Chargers did. Short weeks are always tough
spikerman
11-01-2016, 05:59 PM
I'm willing to give the offense a mulligan last week because they had one less day to prepare than the Chargers did. Short weeks are always tough
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm. A few hours of preparation time wouldn't cause that travesty. This offense has sucked for two years. It's about time these guys found a way to fix it. At this point having a good offense is probably unrealistic, but it would be nice to have one that wasn't embarrassing.
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-01-2016, 06:01 PM
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm. A few hours of preparation time wouldn't cause that travesty. This offense has sucked for two years. It's about time these guys found a way to fix it. At this point having a good offense is probably unrealistic, but it would be nice to have one that wasn't embarrassing.
It's like I always tell little kids, "you gotta lower your expectations".
spikerman
11-01-2016, 06:21 PM
It's like I always tell little kids, "you gotta lower your expectations".
How low should they go for a professional team?
How low should they go for a professional team?
A championship should be the goal.
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-01-2016, 06:35 PM
How low should they go for a professional team?
Everybody gets a trophy situation.
spikerman
11-01-2016, 06:35 PM
A championship should be the goal.
I agree, but this defense willed the team to a SB last year. I just don't think it's possible to do it again. It's time for the offense to carry its own weight.
I agree, but this defense willed the team to a SB last year. I just don't think it's possible to do it again. It's time for the offense to carry its own weight.
The D will stand tall. Don't fret
spikerman
11-01-2016, 06:39 PM
The D will stand tall. Don't fret
My point is it shouldn't have to EVERY week. Eventually it's going to have a bad game. The Broncos coaching staff is supposed to be a collection of offensive geniuses. I'm waiting.
My point is it shouldn't have to EVERY week. Eventually it's going to have a bad game. The Broncos coaching staff is supposed to be a collection of offensive geniuses. I'm waiting.
They dominated 2 weeks ago.
dogfish
11-01-2016, 06:43 PM
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm. A few hours of preparation time wouldn't cause that travesty. This offense has sucked for two years. It's about time these guys found a way to fix it. At this point having a good offense is probably unrealistic, but it would be nice to have one that wasn't embarrassing.
most teams aren't great on both sides of the ball-- there's only so much cap space and so many high draft picks to invest. . . we've chosen to build around defense first, and it's gotten us fantastic results. . . who cares about style points? winning ugly is still winning-- they count just as much. . . and there's value to being a team that knows how to win close games-- it's a good skill to possess once you get to the playoffs. . . if going through some growing pains for a couple of years while we develop a new quarterback is the cost of keeping our championship defense together, i myself am happy to pay it. . . especially if we can keep winning 75% of our games while we do it. . .
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-01-2016, 06:45 PM
It's kind of funny to watch the game and think to myself Rivers is playing well, then see the stat line the next day. He actually played well in reality, but our defense just flat out dominated them.
spikerman
11-01-2016, 06:52 PM
most teams aren't great on both sides of the ball-- there's only so much cap space and so many high draft picks to invest. . . we've chosen to build around defense first, and it's gotten us fantastic results. . . who cares about style points? winning ugly is still winning-- they count just as much. . . and there's value to being a team that knows how to win close games-- it's a good skill to possess once you get to the playoffs. . . if going through some growing pains for a couple of years while we develop a new quarterback is the cost of keeping our championship defense together, i myself am happy to pay it. . . especially if we can keep winning 75% of our games while we do it. . .
Agreed, they won't be great on both sides of the ball, but I think it's reasonable to expect better than this after two years. Whether it's the system or not having the players to run it, this is unsustainable. The team has been on a great run and I'll gladly sacrifice a down year this year for last year's SB win, but eventually the defense will give and it's going to be ugly.
wayninja
11-01-2016, 07:22 PM
I agree, but this defense willed the team to a SB last year. I just don't think it's possible to do it again. It's time for the offense to carry its own weight.
While I agree with the sentiment, it is entirely possible to do it again. It's just not probable. That didn't stop us last year though.
While I agree with the sentiment, it is entirely possible to do it again. It's just not probable. That didn't stop us last year though.
I know some are saying it's highly unlikely that the Broncos can win the SB a second year using the same defense heavy performance.
It's as if people forget the bigger factor, which is how hard it is to win back to back Super Bowls PERIOD. Only eight times have teams won back to back Super Bowls and only the Broncos and Pats have done it in the last 20 years.
spikerman
11-01-2016, 07:54 PM
I know some are saying it's highly unlikely that the Broncos can win the SB a second year using the same defense heavy performance.
It's as if people forget the bigger factor, which is how hard it is to win back to back Super Bowls PERIOD. Only eight times have teams won back to back Super Bowls and only the Broncos and Pats have done it in the last 20 years.
I don't know how many people realistically expect a repeat; I don't. It would be great, but like you said, it's pretty unlikely. Instead, I just want to know that these offensive woes aren't going to be what we have to look forward to every year.
I don't know how many people realistically expect a repeat; I don't. It would be great, but like you said, it's pretty unlikely. Instead, I just want to know that these offensive woes aren't going to be what we have to look forward to every year.
Come on. It's the second year of a new head coach. Last year we had a HOF QB barely able to function, and then in the offseason, the heir apparent leaves (which at the moment looks like a good thing). So, the Broncos had to scramble to fill the QB spot, and have a first year QB starting. On top of that, even though some of their biggest free agency moves were on the offensive line, it has not turned out as most of us, nor I'm sure the front office, intended.
So, would I like to see the Broncos capable of scoring 30+ points every game? Sure, but knowing that they focused most of the last five years building one of, if not the best, defenses in the NFL, I'm willing to take the incredible winning percentage, chance to defend the Super Bowl win, and deal with the offense not being quite as potent as would be fun to watch on Sunday.
Then again, that's just me, because I'm a function over form guy, and just care about results, which in the NFL is winning.
spikerman
11-01-2016, 08:22 PM
Hmmm, I don't think you're understanding me at all. I'm not asking for 30 points per game. I'm asking for improvement which, after two years, I am not seeing. Thank God for an unbelievable defense because this is a barely functioning NFL offense and has been for 1.5 years. If they could keep winning like this, I'd be fine, but I just think the defense is eventually going to wear down.
dogfish
11-01-2016, 10:39 PM
Agreed, they won't be great on both sides of the ball, but I think it's reasonable to expect better than this after two years. Whether it's the system or not having the players to run it, this is unsustainable. The team has been on a great run and I'll gladly sacrifice a down year this year for last year's SB win, but eventually the defense will give and it's going to be ugly.
spike, you know i love ya, bud-- so bear with me. . .
are you saying this is a down season?
wayninja
11-01-2016, 10:51 PM
Spike has down season syndrome.
spikerman
11-02-2016, 05:43 AM
spike, you know i love ya, bud-- so bear with me. . .
are you saying this is a down season?
No no no... I'm saying this is great, but it's not sustainable. At some point, after two years, the offense has to be able to stop stepping on its **** week after week and expecting the defense to bail them out.
Valar Morghulis
11-02-2016, 07:27 AM
No no no... I'm saying this is great, but it's not sustainable. At some point, after two years, the offense has to be able to stop stepping on its **** week after week and expecting the defense to bail them out.
I think spike is saying this is a down season and that he hates the Broncos
I Eat Staples
11-02-2016, 11:25 AM
I'm not sure that's the correct use of "irony" which actually means opposite of something. So, I think if you were to sayy something like, "hey, T, you must have been an English major" due to my constant typo laiden posts, it would be ironic.
I think would you wanted here was something like, "T, isn't that kind of the pot calling the kettle black?"
Actually, your English major example would be sarcasm, not irony.
Lynch12
11-02-2016, 12:14 PM
True, and Lynch would have that many if he was starting and twice that many sacks. Oh yea, and I would be a hot chic if God gave me a vag.
I would rather go with the uber talented rookie than the future career back-up. Unless something goes terribly wrong lynch will be a star, Trevor does not have the ability to be a star. He's the ideal back-up. So id take my lumps as lynch grows and if he's qs lucky as Trevor the defenders will keep dropping ints.
Lynch12
11-02-2016, 12:15 PM
P.s. Are you Lynch's bootie call in real life? Trying to understand the groupie like love.
I should be asking you if you are Trevor's **** boy the way you defend him by any means necessary, even if you are trolling to defend him.
Hawgdriver
11-02-2016, 01:05 PM
I would rather go with the uber talented rookie than the future career back-up. Unless something goes terribly wrong lynch will be a star, Trevor does not have the ability to be a star. He's the ideal back-up. So id take my lumps as lynch grows and if he's qs lucky as Trevor the defenders will keep dropping ints.
Lynch is an uber talent? Does he know how to use google navigation, or does he rely on his natural abilities to get from A to B? Because we've seen when he tries to improvise. I'll take the guy using google maps.
Lynch12
11-02-2016, 01:28 PM
Lynch is an uber talent? Does he know how to use google navigation, or does he rely on his natural abilities to get from A to B? Because we've seen when he tries to improvise. I'll take the guy using google maps.
Google maps mean absolutely nothing when you cannot drive. So you keep riding with Trevor and taking 8 hours to get to the destination, I'll roll with lynch who has great natural driving skills but doesn't have his license yet.
wayninja
11-02-2016, 01:33 PM
Google maps mean absolutely nothing when you cannot drive. So you keep riding with Trevor and taking 8 hours to get to the destination, I'll roll with lynch who has great natural driving skills but doesn't have his license yet.
I'm going to high 5 this just for how far the metaphor was ridden beyond all reason.
I also have great natural driving skills, but I have my license.
Northman
11-02-2016, 01:39 PM
Thats because when Lynch took the car for a driving test he wrecked it. He needs a little more of driving school before he takes the wheel.
wayninja
11-02-2016, 01:41 PM
So, does that mean once the car is out of the shop it will ride right again? How long until it's fixed?
Man, I hope we draft some mechanics.
Hawgdriver
11-02-2016, 01:49 PM
Google maps mean absolutely nothing when you cannot drive. So you keep riding with Trevor and taking 8 hours to get to the destination, I'll roll with lynch who has great natural driving skills but doesn't have his license yet.
I don't want a championship defense riding a team bus driven by an unlicensed driver. NFL is the autobahn, not the back forty. I'll take getting there, even if it's 8 hours. Lynch had a chance to show his great natural skills during his joyride but all he did was donuts until the axle broke.
Hawgdriver
11-02-2016, 01:50 PM
Thats because when Lynch took the car for a driving test he wrecked it. He needs a little more of driving school before he takes the wheel.
sigh
I take too long crafting posts.
Actually, your English major example would be sarcasm, not irony.
Actually, both, the "ironic" part of it is that an English major would not be expected to make the typo laden posts that I'm famous for.
Northman
11-02-2016, 01:53 PM
So, does that mean once the car is out of the shop it will ride right again? How long until it's fixed?
Man, I hope we draft some mechanics.
Good point, Schmofield and Okung need to be fired as soon as possible.
I would rather go with the uber talented rookie than the future career back-up. Unless something goes terribly wrong lynch will be a star, Trevor does not have the ability to be a star. He's the ideal back-up. So id take my lumps as lynch grows and if he's qs lucky as Trevor the defenders will keep dropping ints.
The difference between you (Madden mentality) and an NFL front office, is that when they are winning and playoff contenders, they don't bench the guy that gives them the best chance to win and "take their lumps" and lose with the guy they hope will be their future star. The NFL is about winning and to do that, you start the player that gives you the best chance to win now. The only exception (and it's not even 100% exception) to that is when you are not in the playoff race, you will some times start a guy that doesn't give you the best chance to win, but who you want to get experience.
Good point, Schmofield and Okung need to be fired as soon as possible.
As talented as Lynch is, maybe he can play left tackle and protect Siemian's blind side, while gaining valuable on field experience for when he ultimately is ready to play QB in the NFL.
dogfish
11-02-2016, 02:01 PM
i'd guess we're all excited to see what lynch can do when the time is right. . . it's just annoying when dumb fanbois who can't understand context start yammering to put the rookie in, just because. . . it brings up bad memories of the tebow times. . . we don't need that crap around here-- certainly not when we're tied for first place, and second in the conference. . .
Valar Morghulis
11-02-2016, 02:05 PM
I officially hate paxton lynch.
I want a billboard suggesting he is traded in the off season
He looks like a pirate
#hyperbole
wayninja
11-02-2016, 02:06 PM
i'd guess we're all excited to see what lynch can do when the time is right. . . it's just annoying when dumb fanbois who can't understand context start yammering to put the rookie in, just because. . . it brings up bad memories of the tebow times. . . we don't need that crap around here-- certainly not when we're tied for first place, and second in the conference. . .
You make a good point.
We really should bring Tebow back.
Hawgdriver
11-02-2016, 02:08 PM
Unless something goes terribly wrong lynch will be a star
sweet!
sI66hcu9fIs
i'd guess we're all excited to see what lynch can do when the time is right. . . it's just annoying when dumb fanbois who can't understand context start yammering to put the rookie in, just because. . . it brings up bad memories of the tebow times. . . we don't need that crap around here-- certainly not when we're tied for first place, and second in the conference. . .
I agree with your sentiments, though I have one minor correction: I'd say it's more akin to Cutler/Plummer than Tebow... By the time Tebow got the starting job, virtually everyone was ready for a change at QB. Cutler got inserted into a winning team and it basically caused a mutiny (although, for the record, **** Jake Plummer too).
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-02-2016, 02:14 PM
I don't want a championship defense riding a team bus driven by an unlicensed driver. NFL is the autobahn, not the back forty. I'll take getting there, even if it's 8 hours. Lynch had a chance to show his great natural skills during his joyride but all he did was donuts until the axle broke.
Bahahaha!!!
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-02-2016, 02:17 PM
sigh
I take too long crafting posts.
I disagree 😁
dogfish
11-02-2016, 02:26 PM
I agree with your sentiments, though I have one minor correction: I'd say it's more akin to Cutler/Plummer than Tebow... By the time Tebow got the starting job, virtually everyone was ready for a change at QB. Cutler got inserted into a winning team and it basically caused a mutiny (although, for the record, **** Jake Plummer too).
that's fair. . . i was comparing this noob to the tebow freaks, more than making a direct comparison of the QB situations. . .
I agree with your sentiments, though I have one minor correction: I'd say it's more akin to Cutler/Plummer than Tebow... By the time Tebow got the starting job, virtually everyone was ready for a change at QB. Cutler got inserted into a winning team and it basically caused a mutiny (although, for the record, **** Jake Plummer too).
I'll go with it being somewhere in between. Cutler was considered a more polished, pro ready player than Lynch is. There was virtually no talking head/draft prognosticator that was saying Lynch would be ready to start his rookie year, from the get go he's been talked about as a high upside project. Cutler was more pro ready than Lynch is or was considered to be.
wayninja
11-02-2016, 03:52 PM
that's fair. . . i was comparing this noob to the tebow freaks, more than making a direct comparison of the QB situations. . .
Whatever, bring on the Seibois.
dogfish
11-02-2016, 04:17 PM
Whatever, bring on the Seibois.
there aren't any. . .
Valar Morghulis
11-02-2016, 04:24 PM
there aren't any. . .
Lots of seimen though
dogfish
11-02-2016, 04:25 PM
siemian, TJ ward and dekoda watson have been added as team captains (http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Trevor-Siemian-named-captain-for-second-half-of-2016-season/ecd42b30-4c52-47ed-af21-0c1e00c81e3f) for the second half of the year. . . lol, suck it lynch12!
Northman
11-02-2016, 04:34 PM
siemian, TJ ward and dekoda watson have been added as team captains (http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Trevor-Siemian-named-captain-for-second-half-of-2016-season/ecd42b30-4c52-47ed-af21-0c1e00c81e3f) for the second half of the year. . . lol, suck it lynch12!
Lynch12 might just jump off a bridge. Careful with that kind of news Doggie.
wayninja
11-02-2016, 04:35 PM
there aren't any. . .
Oh? I must be reading the wrong thread. I thought there was post after post excusing poor qb play, and when that is done, the word 'boi' is usually affixed to the player in questions name in relation to those doing the defending.
I need to brush up on the lingo.
siemian, TJ ward and dekoda watson have been added as team captains (http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Trevor-Siemian-named-captain-for-second-half-of-2016-season/ecd42b30-4c52-47ed-af21-0c1e00c81e3f) for the second half of the year. . . lol, suck it lynch12!
Wait, Dekoda Watson is a captain? Who the hell is Dekoda Watson again?
Oh? I must be reading the wrong thread. I thought there was post after post excusing poor qb play, and when that is done, the word 'boi' is usually affixed to the player in questions name in relation to those doing the defending.
I need to brush up on the lingo.
You do, because there is a difference in being a fanboi and actually having a high enough football IQ to evaluate performances of players based on many factors, such as number of starts, etc.
Wait, Dekoda Watson is a captain? Who the hell is Dekoda Watson again?
Wyoming's older cousin.
dogfish
11-02-2016, 05:49 PM
Wait, Dekoda Watson is a captain? Who the hell is Dekoda Watson again?
they choose two from offense, two from defense, and two from special teams. . . watson and webster are the ST captains. . .
wayninja
11-02-2016, 06:15 PM
You do, because there is a difference in being a fanboi and actually having a high enough football IQ to evaluate performances of players based on many factors, such as number of starts, etc.
Hahaha! Gotcha.
When you agree it's IQ, when you don't it's fanboism.
I'm hip with the program now.
Hahaha! Gotcha.
When you agree it's IQ, when you don't it's fanboism.
I'm hip with the program now.
Nope. Try again.
spikerman
11-02-2016, 06:53 PM
I think spike is saying this is a down season and that he hates the Broncos
Dammit, you outed me.
dogfish
11-02-2016, 06:57 PM
Dammit, you outed me.
i suspected anyway. . . :coffee:
nonetheless, dave IS a horrible person for blowing your cover. . .
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-02-2016, 07:04 PM
i suspected anyway. . . :coffee:
nonetheless, dave IS a horrible person for blowing your cover. . .
He was already an insolent Brit.
Hawgdriver
11-02-2016, 10:10 PM
He was already an insolent Brit.
Are there other kinds?
Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-02-2016, 10:36 PM
Are there other kinds?
Dead ones
Valar Morghulis
11-03-2016, 01:23 AM
Dead ones Hey, I just woke up, logged on to my favorite internet site, and then logged on to the forum and this is what I wake up to...... Well done gents. I'm impressed. Now all of you can foad, except spike as I might need him alive for another game ticket in the future
Hey, I just woke up, logged on to my favorite internet site, and then logged on to the forum and this is what I wake up to...... Well done gents. I'm impressed. Now all of you can foad, except spike as I might need him alive for another game ticket in the future
I was saying, "Brit-urns"....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Release Candidate 2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.