Must Read: Nobody Listened on draft night - Now you have no choice

[Tned]

I know there is a lot of frustration amongst us Broncos fans about Lynch possibly being a bust.

This is avvery good article by Ryan Koenigsberg at BSN that you should read.



While the world was crafting tweets about Paxton Lynch being the next great Broncos quarterback and giggling at goofy gifs, Mel Kiper was on ESPN saying this.


“He needs two to three years to transition from the no huddle… I’m not taking anything away from Paxton Lynch; physically, athletically, arm strength wise, hard worker, he’s got it all… but he’s got a lot to learn… He’s coming into the league knowing nothing about an NFL offense. He needs a year, two years, three years to sit, watch and learn, and that’s got to be the plan for the Denver Broncos and Paxton Lynch. You force him in right away, and it’s not going to work.”


After falling on deaf ears at the time, that comment has aged like a fine wine. John Elway has always said he wants to “win from now on,” and maybe Paxton Lynch has always been more a part of the “on” than the “now.”


Check out the rest at:

http://bsndenver.com/heres-the-thing-about-paxton-lynch/

[dogfish]

he has made zero progress. . . I'm gonna go ahead and say he probably just sucks. . .

[Tned]

he has made zero progress. . . I'm gonna go ahead and say he probably just sucks. . .

If you look at the history of first round picks, especially those picked outside the top five, the vast majority of them are some form of bust. With Lynch, it's too early to say, because he's still learning basic concepts, so it's hard to see how he will play when those things he didn't learn in college become second nature for him.

[MOtorboat]

Very similar personality to Osweiler. That's maybe the most concerning of the whole ordeal, IMO. How does Elway get attracted to these aloof personalities?

[Hawgdriver]

he has made zero progress. . . I'm gonna go ahead and say he probably just sucks. . .

Agree. No progress with the execution of the NFL QB position. Stealing resources and hurting team's winning chances.

Siemian gets injured? Sloter looks like the more promising backup.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000659100/article/jerry-jones-regrets-not-overpaying-to-get-paxton-lynch

If this would have worked out for Jones, would Romo still have been there this year, or would Jones have had to go with Lynch, 2, 3 years, before he adjusted to the NFL? The Broncos were not the only ones who wanted Lynch.

[Tned]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000659100/article/jerry-jones-regrets-not-overpaying-to-get-paxton-lynch

If this would have worked out for Jones, would Romo still have been there this year, or would Jones have had to go with Lynch, 2, 3 years, before he adjusted to the NFL? The Broncos were not the only ones who wanted Lynch.

At the time, Jones thought he was drafting for two to three years down the road.

[ShaneFalco]

so why did he pick him again?

since Broncos obviously need a QB now.

[Joel]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000659100/article/jerry-jones-regrets-not-overpaying-to-get-paxton-lynch

If this would have worked out for Jones, would Romo still have been there this year, or would Jones have had to go with Lynch, 2, 3 years, before he adjusted to the NFL? The Broncos were not the only ones who wanted Lynch.
Better question: If Jones got his wish with Lynch, does this still happen?




4*
135
Dallas Cowboys (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Dallas_Cowboys_season)
Dak Prescott (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dak_Prescott) †
QB (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarterback)
Mississippi State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Mississippi_State_Bulldogs_football_team)
SEC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeastern_Conference)


4*
136
Denver Broncos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Denver_Broncos_season)
Devontae Booker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devontae_Booker)
RB (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_back)
Utah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Utah_Utes_football_team)
Pac-12 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pac-12_Conference)

[Cugel]

he has made zero progress. . . I'm gonna go ahead and say he probably just sucks. . .

The problem with Paxton is that he's never FLASHED anything. Normally young QBs suck, suck, suck, FLASH. They sometimes make plays that make coaches say "wow! If we can get him to do that every play we've really got something!"

Only you don't see that with Trevor (or Paxton either). You saw that last year with Dak Prescott, this year from Mitch Trebisky. But, none of the Denver QBs has done anything like that - except Kyle Slotter.

I'm looking forward to seeing him start game 4 to see if he can continue to perform at a high level.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

so why did he pick him again?

since Broncos obviously need a QB now.

I believe the plan was rife with Sanchez until Lynch was ready, but Trevor stole the job.

[NightTerror218]

Wow everyone wants lynchs head now? A bust?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Wow everyone wants lynchs head now? A bust?

He'll get another year. Hopefully McCoy is around for a few years

[Jsteve01]

Very similar personality to Osweiler. That's maybe the most concerning of the whole ordeal, IMO. How does Elway get attracted to these aloof personalities? I'm really not sure where the aloof personality tag is coming from. The kids are goofball. All of his teammates love playing with him in college. You look at him on the sideline and gets along well with his teammates and with Trevor. It is what we thought it was. Everyone hoped that he would come along quicker than he has. But most quarterbacks will say it's year three in a new system before they completely feel comfortable.

Shanahan used to say that about his quarterbacks all the time. So you've got a guy that number one transitioned out of a spread no-huddle offense in college. Learned a new offense West Coast and now is learning a new offense again. I'm not ready to say one way or another whether he's going to get it or not. That last practice against San Francisco looked like he was really making strides.

[Poet]

I figured he needed a year or two, and that the aforementioned third year was an exaggeration. Now it appears that the third year is the best case scenario.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I'm really not sure where the aloof personality tag is coming from. The kids are goofball. All of his teammates love playing with him in college. You look at him on the sideline and gets along well with his teammates and with Trevor. It is what we thought it was. Everyone hoped that he would come along quicker than he has. But most quarterbacks will say it's year three in a new system before they completely feel comfortable.

Shanahan used to say that about his quarterbacks all the time. So you've got a guy that number one transitioned out of a spread no-huddle offense in college. Learned a new offense West Coast and now is learning a new offense again. I'm not ready to say one way or another whether he's going to get it or not. That last practice against San Francisco looked like he was really making strides.

Did you see the last practice against SF or are basing your opinion off what was reported?

[Northman]

Practice can totally be misleading though.

[topscribe]

so why did he pick him again?

since Broncos obviously need a QB now.
Probably because the Broncos were picking #32, and all the "now" QBs had been snatched up.
All that were left were (looking ahead) good backup prospects, except Lynch, whose immense
*physical* talents gave him the blue-chip potential. At that point in the draft, he was the only
obvious choice.

[Tned]

I figured he needed a year or two, and that the aforementioned third year was an exaggeration. Now it appears that the third year is the best case scenario.

My brother, I tried to tell you, but did you listen... :whoknows:

[Tned]

Did you see the last practice against SF or are basing your opinion off what was reported?

I heard a few minutes of Sandy Clough last night and he was talking about how you need to take any results from a practice in shorts with a grain of salt.

[Poet]

My brother, I tried to tell you, but did you listen... :whoknows:

It gets competitive between us. Sometimes I am stubborn. I'll true to make it less a competition, but we're proud men...and this is the internet.

[Tned]

It gets competitive between us. Sometimes I am stubborn. I'll true to make it less a competition, but we're proud men...and this is the internet, and it pains me to admit that Tned is always right.

I fixed your post. Somehow the internet cut off that last part... ;)

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

"And this is the internet" :lol:

[Poet]

I fixed your post. Somehow the internet cut off that last part... ;)

Blame Comcast.

[Poet]

"And this is the internet" :lol:

Go Broncos, you monster!

[Joel]

Probably because the Broncos were picking #32, and all the "now" QBs had been snatched up.
All that were left were (looking ahead) good backup prospects, except Lynch, whose immense
*physical* talents gave him the blue-chip potential. At that point in the draft, he was the only
obvious choice.
Hence the problem with insisting on a "now" player at any position, even QB. We had a number of other critical holes that needed upgrades just as badly: MULTIPLE starting offensive line positions that are CRITICAL for ANY young QBs success, not to mention the lack of a dominant complete package TE that can be just as indispensable to inexperienced QBs. And guys like that were there at #31 (remember: Deflategate cost the Cheats a pick, not that tye missed it.)

Selling out on a 1st round QB in a draft where only a couple guys were even considered POTENTIAL starters, with a sharp drop after them, was a needless gamble: It's hard to imagine any situation LESS desperate than "Reigning World Champs," so we had no need to immediately swing for the fences rather than shoring up other weaknesses with studs, while waiting for our pitch(er) in a later draft.

Pulling the trigger on a 1st round QB when there really weren't any—and trading away a pick to move up so we could—put us in a bind where drafting a legit franchise QB prospect this year would have left us with a lot of egg and three seasons worth of 1st round QB contract on our faces, but trying to shore up those other holes now risked repeating the same mistake: Reaching to fill a position in a draft that's very weak at that spot, and bypassing equally necessary but superior talent to do it.

[MOtorboat]

I'm really not sure where the aloof personality tag is coming from. The kids are goofball. All of his teammates love playing with him in college. You look at him on the sideline and gets along well with his teammates and with Trevor. It is what we thought it was. Everyone hoped that he would come along quicker than he has. But most quarterbacks will say it's year three in a new system before they completely feel comfortable.

Shanahan used to say that about his quarterbacks all the time. So you've got a guy that number one transitioned out of a spread no-huddle offense in college. Learned a new offense West Coast and now is learning a new offense again. I'm not ready to say one way or another whether he's going to get it or not. That last practice against San Francisco looked like he was really making strides.

I'm not worried about interactions with teammates, especially those interactions at the end of a meaningless preseason game (albeit, you could argue yesterday's game wasn't meaningless, but at the same time also point out that the dude is allowed to joke and laugh even if he didn't perform well as he's not required to sulk for days on end because of that. That's ridiculous).

What I am worried about is self-awareness (http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/19/denver-broncos-san-francisco-49ers-preseason-game/):


“I thought I did pretty well,” Lynch said.

You didn't do well Paxton. You need to improve. Maybe he was putting on a front for the media, or maybe he really doesn't grasp the magnitude of the situation, I don't know. I'm just not sure about his attitude.

It reminds me of the Osweiler press conference where he told reporters that they could go watch his tape, where we can clearly see he was horrible in Houston last year. Or when he wasn't prepared to enter a blowout (famously captured by CBS cameras).

I'll be clear that I have no idea if he's "aloof" in his personal life, or if he's intelligent, and frankly I don't really care about his wonderlic. But, as a fan in terms of the team and the magnitude of situations, he comes off aloof as did Osweiler at times. And my question is, what is attracting Elway to these quarterbacks?

[Tned]

Hence the problem with insisting on a "now" player at any position, even QB. We had a number of other critical holes that needed upgrades just as badly: MULTIPLE starting offensive line positions that are CRITICAL for ANY young QBs success, not to mention the lack of a dominant complete package TE that can be just as indispensable to inexperienced QBs. And guys like that were there at #31 (remember: Deflategate cost the Cheats a pick, not that tye missed it.)

Selling out on a 1st round QB in a draft where only a couple guys were even considered POTENTIAL starters, with a sharp drop after them, was a needless gamble: It's hard to imagine any situation LESS desperate than "Reigning World Champs," so we had no need to immediately swing for the fences rather than shoring up other weaknesses with studs, while waiting for our pitch(er) in a later draft.

Pulling the trigger on a 1st round QB when there really weren't any—and trading away a pick to move up so we could—put us in a bind where drafting a legit franchise QB prospect this year would have left us with a lot of egg and three seasons worth of 1st round QB contract on our faces, but trying to shore up those other holes now risked repeating the same mistake: Reaching to fill a position in a draft that's very weak at that spot, and bypassing equally necessary but superior talent to do it.

They didn't sell out, they gave up either a late third or early 4th I believe to move up to pick him. Was it a reach? Maybe, but they weren't the only team considering reaching for Lynch.

Whether they had picked Lynch or picked a QB in the 2nd/3rd, they needed to draft a QB last year. At the moment, it looks like they missed on Lynch.

Let's not forget that right now the Broncos are in a pretty fortunate place, since their 7th round pick is as good or better than any QB drafted in the first round outside of the top 12, not named Rodgers, since 2000.

Too many fans just can't grasp the fact that if you aren't drafting a blue chip QB that goes in the first few picks, the odds are it will be a busted pick or mediocre QB.

Before too much blame is thrown around at Elway, I think people need to start educating themselves on how low the success rate is on first round QBs.

There are NO legit franchise QB prospects unless you are drafting in the top 3 AND it's a GREAT QB class. Most years you are lucky to have one sure thing franchise QB.

[Tned]

And my question is, what is attracting Elway to these quarterbacks?

A lack of options. Hindsight is simple, foresight on QBs is not. History has shown us that time and again.

[MOtorboat]

A lack of options. Hindsight is simple, foresight on QBs is not. History has shown us that time and again.

Right. I understand that fully. And I pretty much hate the "we should have drafted X guy" two years after the draft. But I'm talking about consistent themes in the attitudes and personalities of quarterbacks drafted high by Elway (and granted, you can pull the small sample size question on my critiques, because it's just two). There's also consistent themes about physical traits, as well. Is there a theme to the two guys he's tried to draft high? Can we learn anything from that? Does he have a blind spot for this specific type of quarterback, does the organization have a blind spot for this specific type of quarterback?

[Bronco4ever]

You wonder how much sunshine the coaching staff and Elway have blown up Lynch's butt if he thinks he played well. Last night PL was also asked about missing the first read and then taking off running. He made it sound like the staff encouraged him to do that instead of actually trying to go through his progressions. It seems like he's been coddled enough to think he's doing exactly what they want him to do. He's going to have a rude awakening when he's not named the starter.

[Shazam!]

The Broncos had massive QB void left by PFM.

I just think that if the plan was to wait for Lynch to be ready in 2019 or 2020 that is pure stupidity.

[Northman]

Im with MO, it goes beyond whether a team "feels" the need or expectancy to draft a certain position. Its the "type" of player we are drafting. I know, i know i was high on Brock coming out of college but its hard not to notice the attitudes of these two guys. While i was surprised that Denver was interested in Dak in hindsight i kind of wish we had taken him, mainly because of his demeanor and calm attitude. its fine to have or want projects but if the players themselves dont have the right mental aptitude than the possibility of growth is greatly reduced (see Jay Cutler).

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Hence the problem with insisting on a "now" player at any position, even QB. We had a number of other critical holes that needed upgrades just as badly: MULTIPLE starting offensive line positions that are CRITICAL for ANY young QBs success, not to mention the lack of a dominant complete package TE that can be just as indispensable to inexperienced QBs. And guys like that were there at #31 (remember: Deflategate cost the Cheats a pick, not that tye missed it.)

Selling out on a 1st round QB in a draft where only a couple guys were even considered POTENTIAL starters, with a sharp drop after them, was a needless gamble: It's hard to imagine any situation LESS desperate than "Reigning World Champs," so we had no need to immediately swing for the fences rather than shoring up other weaknesses with studs, while waiting for our pitch(er) in a later draft.

Pulling the trigger on a 1st round QB when there really weren't any—and trading away a pick to move up so we could—put us in a bind where drafting a legit franchise QB prospect this year would have left us with a lot of egg and three seasons worth of 1st round QB contract on our faces, but trying to shore up those other holes now risked repeating the same mistake: Reaching to fill a position in a draft that's very weak at that spot, and bypassing equally necessary but superior talent to do it.

Compared with his past performances he did play well. Yes he ran too soon, but at least they didn't result in negative plays.

[Tned]

Right. I understand that fully. And I pretty much hate the "we should have drafted X guy" two years after the draft. But I'm talking about consistent themes in the attitudes and personalities of quarterbacks drafted high by Elway (and granted, you can pull the small sample size question on my critiques, because it's just two). There's also consistent themes about physical traits, as well. Is there a theme to the two guys he's tried to draft high? Can we learn anything from that? Does he have a blind spot for this specific type of quarterback, does the organization have a blind spot for this specific type of quarterback?

Here are the 43 QBs (if I didn't miss any) drafted in first round since 2000:

I'm leaving Lynch, Goff, Wentz, Mariotta and Winston out, because it's too early to know on these five. For the other 38 QBs drafted in the first rounds since 2000. This is how I group them.

Elite (or near) level QBs.

Ben Roethlisberger 11th pick
Eli Manning 1st pick
Aaron Rodgers 24th pick
Philip Rivers 4th pick
Matt Ryan 3rd pick
Andrew Luck 1st pick

Good or better level QBs.

Michael Vick 1st pick
Joe Flacco 18th pick
Carson Palmer 1st pick
Cam Newton 1st pick (maybe should be higher, hard to pinpoint)

Inconsistent or "average" tier QBs

Alex Smith 1st pick
Jay Cutler 11th pick
Ryan Tannehill 8th pick
Robert Griffin III 2nd pick (he arguably should be lower - injury or talent?)
Teddy Bridgewater 32 pick (too early to peg, could go up or down from here)

Below average to mediocre

EJ Manuel 16th
Chad Pennington 18th pick
Patrick Ramsey 32nd pick
Rex Grossman 22nd pick
Kyle Boller 19th pick
Byron Leftwich 7th pick
J.P. Losman 22nd pick
Jason Campbell 25th pick
Vince Young 3rd pick)
Josh Freeman 17th pick
Mark Sanchez 5th pick
Tim Tebow 25th pick
Christian Ponder 12th pick
Jake Locker 8th pick
Blake Bortles 3rd pick

Complete busts

Joey Harrington 3rd pick
David Carr 1st pick (could argue 60-70 sacks a year is reason)
Matt Leinart 10th pick
Brady Quinn 22nd pick
JaMarcus Russell 1st pick
Sam Bradford 1st pick
Blaine Gabbert 10th pick
Brandon Weeden 22nd pick

[MOtorboat]

Here are the 43 QBs (if I didn't miss any) drafted in first round since 2000:

I'm leaving Lynch, Goff, Wentz, Mariotta and Winston out, because it's too early to know on these five. For the other 38 QBs drafted in the first rounds since 2000. This is how I group them.

Elite (or near) level QBs.

Ben Roethlisberger 11th pick
Eli Manning 1st pick
Aaron Rodgers 24th pick
Philip Rivers 4th pick
Matt Ryan 3rd pick
Andrew Luck 1st pick

Good or better level QBs.

Michael Vick 1st pick
Joe Flacco 18th pick
Carson Palmer 1st pick
Cam Newton 1st pick (maybe should be harder, hard to pinpoint)

Inconsistent or "average" tier QBs

Alex Smith 1st pick
Jay Cutler 11th pick
Ryan Tannehill 8th pick
Robert Griffin III 2nd pick (he arguably should be lower - injury or talent?)
Teddy Bridgewater 32 pick (too early to peg, could go up or down from here)

Below average to mediocre

EJ Manuel 16th
Chad Pennington 18th pick
Patrick Ramsey 32nd pick
Rex Grossman 22nd pick
Kyle Boller 19th pick
Byron Leftwich 7th pick
J.P. Losman 22nd pick
Jason Campbell 25th pick
Vince Young 3rd pick)
Josh Freeman 17th pick
Mark Sanchez 5th pick
Tim Tebow 25th pick
Christian Ponder 12th pick
Jake Locker 8th pick
Blake Bortles 3rd pick

Complete busts

Joey Harrington 3rd pick
David Carr 1st pick (could argue 60-70 sacks a year is reason)
Matt Leinart 10th pick
Brady Quinn 22nd pick
JaMarcus Russell 1st pick
Sam Bradford 1st pick
Blaine Gabbert 10th pick
Brandon Weeden 22nd pick

We're not talking about the same thing.

[Tned]

We're not talking about the same thing.

Not really. You are saying that Elway's failures are by repeating the same mistake. I'm pointing out that while you are connecting dots which I don't believe are there, you are losing sight of what a long shot ANY first round QB is. It's not that Elway picked one, and possibly two losers that might have some similarities, but instead that virtually all QBs drafted outside the first couple spots are far, far, far more likely than not to be failures.

[Joel]

The didn't sell out, they gave up either a late third or early 4th I believe to move up to pick him. Was it a reach? Maybe, but they weren't the only team considering reaching for Lynch....

Let's not forget that right now the Broncos are in a pretty fortunate place, since their 7th round pick is as good or better than any QB drafted in the first round outside of the top 12, not named Rodgers, since 2000.

Too many fans just can't grasp the fact that if you aren't drafting a blue chip QB that goes in the first few picks, the odds are it will be a busted pick or mediocre QB.

Before too much blame is thrown around at Elway, I think people need to start educating themselves on how low the success rate is on first round QBs.

There are NO legit franchise QB prospects unless you are drafting in the top 3 AND it's a GREAT QB class. Most years you are lucky to have one sure thing franchise QB.
That first statement seems to contradict the rest.


Whether they had picked Lynch or picked a QB in the 2nd/3rd, they needed to draft a QB last year. At the moment, it looks like they missed on Lynch.
Why did they "need" to draft a QB then? The eventual and current starter was already on the roster, even if he hadn't proven anything yet, plus they had an experienced (if unreliable) vet as the projected starter. Why couldn't they have re-stocked the trenches with someone better than Schofield, Okung and Sly, and/or found a better coverage LB than Todd Davis? Because if the odds against even a 1st round QB are 93%, what are they in a draft so weak at QB that 4th round prospects go at #26?

As reigning World Champs, we had NOTHING left to prove, and little chance of finding a franchise QB picking DEAD LAST in a weak QB draft. Surely winning the SB earned us at least a year to wait for a better chance at a franchise QB (and there could hardly be a worse one.) Was Goodell going to disband the team or something?

[Tned]

That first statement seems to contradict the rest.

Maybe you think so because of my typo having "the" instead of "they." Please explain why you think it's a contradiction. It absolutely is not.



Why did they "need" to draft a QB then? The eventual and current starter was already on the roster, even if he hadn't proven anything yet, plus they had an experienced (if unreliable) vet as the projected starter. Why couldn't they have re-stocked the trenches with someone better than Schofield, Okung and Sly, and/or found a better coverage LB than Todd Davis? Because if the odds against even a 1st round QB are 93%, what are they in a draft so weak at QB that 4th round prospects go at #26?

As reigning World Champs, we had NOTHING left to prove, and little chance of finding a franchise QB picking DEAD LAST in a weak QB draft. Surely winning the SB earned us at least a year to wait for a better chance at a franchise QB (and there could hardly be a worse one.) Was Goodell going to disband the team or something?


No team is going to bet the farm on a 7th round pick that spent his entire rookie season running the scout team and has one NFL snap, a kneel down. Don't get me wrong, I heard he was graded VERY high on the kneel down, but still...

Come on, that wasn't a serious question about "why" they needed to draft a QB, so I'm not going to waste anymore time answering it than the two sentences above.

[Poet]

Not really. You are saying that Elway's failures are by repeating the same mistake. I'm pointing out that while you are connecting dots which I don't believe are there, you are losing sight of what a long shot ANY first round QB is. It's not that Elway picked one, and possibly two losers that might have some similarities, but instead that virtually all QBs drafted outside the first couple spots are far, far, far more likely than not to be failures.

In your opinion, is it possible that it's unlikely to get a top guy, while also flocking towards a certain type of QB/personality/thing?

The conversation is fascinating - I think you could both be correct.

[Tned]

In your opinion, is it possible that it's unlikely to get a top guy, while also flocking towards a certain type of QB/personality/thing?

The conversation is fascinating - I think you could both be correct.

Yes, but since the odds are so bad anyway, some would argue that chance theory would indicate repeatedly drafting players with similar qualities, rather than a more random nature, could result in a greater probability of successful outcome.

[Poet]

Yes, but since the odds are so bad anyway, some would argue that chance theory would indicate repeatedly drafting players with similar qualities, rather than a more random nature, could result in a greater probability of successful outcome.

Wouldn't it be cool to 'know'?

[Tned]

Wouldn't it be cool to 'know'?

Not as cool as winning. Have you spotted the common thread that runs through all the successful QBs drafted in the first round?

[Poet]

Not as cool as winning. Have you spotted the common thread that runs through all the successful QBs drafted in the first round?

I just meant in the sense of 'knowing' what the answer to our situation was.

[Tned]

I just meant in the sense of 'knowing' what the answer to our situation was.

Gotcha, but have you spotted the common thread?

[Poet]

Gotcha, but have you spotted the common thread?

Good coaching. Arguably exceptional coaching. Everything else seems to be able to be overcome. Guys have overcome poor WRs, RB's, and even offensive lines. It seems impossible to be a good QB without good coaching.

[Tned]

Good coaching. Arguably exceptional coaching. Everything else seems to be able to be overcome. Guys have overcome poor WRs, RB's, and even offensive lines. It seems impossible to be a good QB without good coaching.

Is the difference between Smith/Harrington/Russel/Bradford/Young/Bortles/RG3 and Luck/Ryan/Newton/Manning just good coaching?


Would Luck suck if he was drafted by Detroit? Would Harrington have been great if drafted by Indy?

[Simple Jaded]

Nobody here can say they weren't warned, and clearly Lynch is starting over with new offense. But hey, keep stubbornly insisting that the same old lazy analysis still applies. Calling a QB a bust 16 months into his career was stupid before college football ruined everything.

If teams can't be more patient than fans and "analysts" then they have no business drafting college spread QB's.

In the end you'll learn nothing, come January 2018 there will be countless calls for the Broncos to draft another spread QB, and 15 months into his career there will countless more calls to do it again.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

[Poet]

Is the difference between Smith/Harrington/Russel/Bradford/Young/Bortles/RG3 and Luck/Ryan/Newton/Manning just good coaching?


Would Luck suck if he was drafted by Detroit? Would Harrington have been great if drafted by Indy?

Some of those guys were doomed. RG3 was frail. Harrington admitted that he didn't have the mental toughness to be a QB - he liked writing poetry and playing classical piano. I think coaching is probably the biggest thing a young guy can get. What do you think?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Gotcha, but have you spotted the common thread?

The only thread I see is they can play from the pocket/read defenses.

I would put Derek Carr in the good list, along with Winston. I'm also persuaded they will both be considered elite within the next two years

[Simple Jaded]

Winston came into the NFL reading defenses.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Nobody here can say they weren't warned, and clearly Lynch is starting over with new offense. But hey, keep stubbornly insisting that the same old lazy analysis still applies. Calling a QB a bust 16 months into his career was stupid before college football ruined everything.

If teams can't be more patient than fans and "analysts" then they have no business drafting college spread QB's.

In the end you'll learn nothing, come January 2018 there will be countless calls for the Broncos to draft another spread QB, and 15 months into his career there will countless more calls to do it again.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

I agree, I'm willing to give him another year. I never contended he shouldn't get that time, nor have I ever called him a bust. My contention was that it was silly to suggest he was ready to play

[Tned]

Some of those guys were doomed. RG3 was frail. Harrington admitted that he didn't have the mental toughness to be a QB - he liked writing poetry and playing classical piano. I think coaching is probably the biggest thing a young guy can get. What do you think?

No question that a great prospect can be harmed/ruined by a bad situation, coaching and otherwise. For instance, would David Carr have turned out differently if he was on the Patriots rather than impersonating a crash dummy on an expansion Texan's team?

However, I would still contend that most of the boom/bust aspects go beyond that and just that it's massively hard to project how a college QB will perform in the NFL, especially when they didn't run a pro system, like Luck did in college.

Take Siemian. He didn't expect to be drafted. He was all set to start a job up in Chicago or someplace like that. He landed in a good situation, where he could learn behind Manning, run the scout team, and then circumstances gave him an opportunity. Now, granted, you and I have polar opposite views on how good/bad his first season starting was, and what potential he has, but I think we can both agree that if he landed in Cleveland or another perennial loser, he likely would have washed in and out of the NFL. This was a taylor made situation for him, much like Romo got in Dallas and other surprise stories.

Anyway, now I'm just rambling, because I realized it's GOT time and can no longer concentrate on football.

[Simple Jaded]

I agree, I'm willing to give him another year. I never contended he shouldn't get that time, nor have I ever called him a bust. My contention was that it was silly to suggest he was ready to play

I'm willing to annually draft another QB too, just look at my sig, my contention is people seem to be holding shit QB's to "bust" standards that were stupid decades ago. And yes, Lynch is a shit QB, 99% of college spread QB's are shit...they know nothing about playing QB in the NFL.

That's life in the NFL now, so if fans wanna second guess John Elway second guess his decision to change systems on these QB's.

[Poet]

No question that a great prospect can be harmed/ruined by a bad situation, coaching and otherwise. For instance, would David Carr have turned out differently if he was on the Patriots rather than impersonating a crash dummy on an expansion Texan's team?

However, I would still contend that most of the boom/bust aspects go beyond that and just that it's massively hard to project how a college QB will perform in the NFL, especially when they didn't run a pro system, like Luck did in college.

Take Siemian. He didn't expect to be drafted. He was all set to start a job up in Chicago or someplace like that. He landed in a good situation, where he could learn behind Manning, run the scout team, and then circumstances gave him an opportunity. Now, granted, you and I have polar opposite views on how good/bad his first season starting was, and what potential he has, but I think we can both agree that if he landed in Cleveland or another perennial loser, he likely would have washed in and out of the NFL. This was a taylor made situation for him, much like Romo got in Dallas and other surprise stories.

Anyway, now I'm just rambling, because I realized it's GOT time and can no longer concentrate on football.

I felt bad for Carr because he really never looked like he was bad at the game - he looked like he was a professional at getting beaten up.

It is hard to project - and I think that good coaching makes the difference because talented teachers can get the best out of people, and show them how to play the game. SOmetimes a QB gets lucky and they end up on a shit team with a talented OC, or QB coach, etc.

TS landed in the best possible situation for him. We agree on that. Hopefully we can either build a team so good that QB play is almost (almost) tertiary, or a team so good that it maximizes his ability and lets him overachieve. Maybe, if that happens, he'll get every last bit out of his ability, which most players don't seem to do. I do hope the line improves for him - I never wished hurt on the man.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Winston came into the NFL reading defenses.

Indeed, so did Luck.

[Joel]

Maybe you think so because of my typo having "the" instead of "they." Please explain why you think it's a contradiction. It absolutely is not.
Isn't it? You start by conceding Lynch may have been a reach, but one several other teams were considering, then the rest is all about how


There are NO legit franchise QB prospects unless you are drafting in the top 3 AND it's a GREAT QB class. Most years you are lucky to have one sure thing franchise QB.
Well, #26 isn't in the top three, and by all accounts it was an AWFUL QB class, so if the odds are long even against top 3 picks in great QB classes, how long are they for the FINAL 1st round pick in a BAD QB class? Long enough it's not worth giving up a 3rd rounder, which is a quality pick even at the end of the round, just for the transitory satisfaction of saying there's a warm body under center today despite the near certainty he'll be bagging other peoples groceries tomorrow. Why not let Siemian or someone else be that temporary placeholder, take a legit 1st round talent at one of the blocking positions your eventual franchise QB will need to survive his rookie season, and wait for a draft that DOESN'T suck at QB, where you DON'T have the very last pick of each round?


No team is going to bet the farm on a 7th round pick that spent his entire rookie season running the scout team and has one NFL snap, a kneel down. Don't get me wrong, I heard he was graded VERY high on the kneel down, but still...
I'd rather do that than bet the farm on giving up a 3rd round pick to move up just 5 spots for a late 1st round QB in a crap QB draft, knowing even the #1 overall pick is more likely bust than boom. The late 1st rounder is only marginally more likely to be a franchise QB than the 7th rounder, but costs a 1st AND 3rd round pick. That's a starting to All Pro level player AND a quality backup at a premier position (or even starter at a supplementary position) sacrificed for a guy who more than likely won't even be on the team in three years.

Just to say, "THIS is the guy," immediately instead of a year or two later. Despite the chance of that statements accuracy will be much higher if you pick your pitch instead of swinging for the fences on your very first one.


Come on, that wasn't a serious question about "why" they needed to draft a QB, so I'm not going to waste anymore time answering it than the two sentences above.
It was a completely serious question: Failing to draft a 1st round QB wouldn't have aborted our season, and not just because there's always the remote possibility of finding a Siemian or even a Prescott in a later round. Although, with that in mind, just because we didn't take a QB in the 1st wouldn't have meant we couldn't have taken one later, and if the argument against that is "but nearly all good QBs are top 3 picks" we're back to "then why did we NEED to take one at #26 in a BAD QB class?"

[Simple Jaded]

Indeed, so did Luck.

I think Rosen does too.

[Joel]

No question that a great prospect can be harmed/ruined by a bad situation, coaching and otherwise. For instance, would David Carr have turned out differently if he was on the Patriots rather than impersonating a crash dummy on an expansion Texan's team?
I've certainly said just that often enough; maybe ask the guy who's made 2 Pro Bowls in just 3 seasons with Oakland whether he's really that MUCH better than his brother? Are Peyton and Eli really that MUCH better than their dad, or was it just that they weren't the only ones wearing bags on their heads to watch his "team" play? Opposing pass rushers have publicly said they made a point of not hitting Archie that hard, because they knew he was screwed and didn't want to literally and figuratively pile on the poor guy. Then he switched places with Oliver Luck yet nothing changed: Because neither elite QB was the problem in Houston or NO.

I agree with Kinger that it's mostly coaching, except that I think blockers to relieve the pressure from pass rushers and provide run support to relieve pressure from EVERYTHING ELSE are at least as important. I can't recall any recent QB "overcoming" bad lines; compensating, yes, but that tends to go more like stud talents such as Romo and Luck sacrificing their bodies for the better part of a decade just for a shot at a low playoff seed that forecloses any shot at drafting a stud LT next year.

Meanwhile, guys like Flacco become champions because their GMs don't expect them to be a one man offense.

[dogfish]

Blame Comcast.

it's probably joe's fault. . . :coffee:

[dogfish]

Nobody here can say they weren't warned, and clearly Lynch is starting over with new offense. But hey, keep stubbornly insisting that the same old lazy analysis still applies. Calling a QB a bust 16 months into his career was stupid before college football ruined everything.

If teams can't be more patient than fans and "analysts" then they have no business drafting college spread QB's.

In the end you'll learn nothing, come January 2018 there will be countless calls for the Broncos to draft another spread QB, and 15 months into his career there will countless more calls to do it again.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

would you trade lynch even-up for deshaun watson, right now?

[Tned]

I felt bad for Carr because he really never looked like he was bad at the game - he looked like he was a professional at getting beaten up.

It is hard to project - and I think that good coaching makes the difference because talented teachers can get the best out of people, and show them how to play the game. SOmetimes a QB gets lucky and they end up on a shit team with a talented OC, or QB coach, etc.

TS landed in the best possible situation for him. We agree on that. Hopefully we can either build a team so good that QB play is almost (almost) tertiary, or a team so good that it maximizes his ability and lets him overachieve. Maybe, if that happens, he'll get every last bit out of his ability, which most players don't seem to do. I do hope the line improves for him - I never wished hurt on the man.

Or, the third possibility that I pointed out to North (I think) earlier as well, which is that Siemian continues on from the success of his first year starting and continues to get better and it's not a matter of him "overachieving" or building a team around him where QB play isn't crucial.

I've been amazed at how much benefit of the doubt people have given Lynch, and none of the same given to Siemian, that has proven he can do so much more than not only Lynch, but so many of the first round QBs I posted above.

[Tned]

Isn't it? You start by conceding Lynch may have been a reach, but one several other teams were considering, then the rest is all about how


Well, #26 isn't in the top three, and by all accounts it was an AWFUL QB class, so if the odds are long even against top 3 picks in great QB classes, how long are they for the FINAL 1st round pick in a BAD QB class? Long enough it's not worth giving up a 3rd rounder, which is a quality pick even at the end of the round, just for the transitory satisfaction of saying there's a warm body under center today despite the near certainty he'll be bagging other peoples groceries tomorrow. Why not let Siemian or someone else be that temporary placeholder, take a legit 1st round talent at one of the blocking positions your eventual franchise QB will need to survive his rookie season, and wait for a draft that DOESN'T suck at QB, where you DON'T have the very last pick of each round?


I'd rather do that than bet the farm on giving up a 3rd round pick to move up just 5 spots for a late 1st round QB in a crap QB draft, knowing even the #1 overall pick is more likely bust than boom. The late 1st rounder is only marginally more likely to be a franchise QB than the 7th rounder, but costs a 1st AND 3rd round pick. That's a starting to All Pro level player AND a quality backup at a premier position (or even starter at a supplementary position) sacrificed for a guy who more than likely won't even be on the team in three years.

Just to say, "THIS is the guy," immediately instead of a year or two later. Despite the chance of that statements accuracy will be much higher if you pick your pitch instead of swinging for the fences on your very first one.


It was a completely serious question: Failing to draft a 1st round QB wouldn't have aborted our season, and not just because there's always the remote possibility of finding a Siemian or even a Prescott in a later round. Although, with that in mind, just because we didn't take a QB in the 1st wouldn't have meant we couldn't have taken one later, and if the argument against that is "but nearly all good QBs are top 3 picks" we're back to "then why did we NEED to take one at #26 in a BAD QB class?"

As I said in the other thread, all of your "logic" falls apart, because you haven't grasped the simple fact that NFL scouts and GM's simply can't tell the difference between a Carr and Russel. If they could, then Russel wouldn't have gone first, and Carr in the second round. Leaf in the first, and Brady in the 6th. Romo and Warner undrafted, but Harrington, RG3, Vince Young and Bradford in the top three spots.

So, yes, with only Siemian and Sanchez on the roster, they absolutely needed to draft a QB.

[Simple Jaded]

would you trade lynch even-up for deshaun watson, right now?

**** no!

Can you imagine if Lynch went 3-10 last night?

[Northman]

would you trade lynch even-up for deshaun watson, right now?

Watson really hasnt shown anything at this point but if you are going to go with a scrambling QB might as well go with one who does it much better. But Houston just wouldnt be that stupid either,,, I think? :confused::laugh:

[HORSEPOWER 56]

In some cases, Paxton looks like he's actually regressed some. What I mean is, he's thinking too much and it scares him, I think. The first time he saw action (vs Tampa Bay when TS got hurt) he looked promising. He moved the offense and just seemed to go out and play. He wasn't great, but he wasn't nearly as bad as he's been since. I dunno if he'll ever be the QBOTF but whatever his problem, it's totally between his ears.

Siemian has outplayed him and deserves the start. I hope he can stay healthy.

On a side note, I love watching Sloter throw the ball. His release is awesome. Almost no wind up, nice overhead delivery with tons of zip. Even though it was vs 3rd stringers, he made big boy throws again on Saturday. I think the dude has a future in this league even if it's somewhere else. I really wish Kelly was healthy. I'd have loved to see what he's got.

[Tned]

This seems like the best thread to put this in. Here's a good read by Mike Klis that chronicles every step of the QB competition starting with Week 16 of last year to today:


Paxton Lynch had his moments during the competition. There were two times – the last two weeks of the Broncos offseason program, and two practices against the San Francisco 49ers last week – when it looked like the first-round draft pick was worthy of becoming No. 1.

But for the most part, when the pads went on in training camp, and during the Broncos’ first two preseason games, Lynch demonstrated he’s a talented quarterback who needs more time to figure out how to process and develop a feel for the NFL passing game.

...

January 7: A Broncos contingency led by Elway and team president Joe Ellis interviewed Atlanta Falcons offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan for their head coaching position.
Shanahan stated in his interview that he believes the team could win with Siemian. He wound up helping the Falcons reach the Super Bowl and became head coach of the 49ers.

...

July 27: On the first day of training camp, Siemian again started with the first team, but Lynch continued to practice well. It’s when the team started practicing in full pads on July 30 that Siemian began to separate from Lynch.



http://www.9news.com/mobile/article/sports/nfl/denver-broncos/chronology-of-broncos-qb-competition-how-it-will-lead-to-siemian/73-465841914

[topscribe]

This seems like the best thread to put this in. Here's a good read by Mike Klis that chronicles every step of the QB competition starting with Week 16 of last year to today:



http://www.9news.com/mobile/article/sports/nfl/denver-broncos/chronology-of-broncos-qb-competition-how-it-will-lead-to-siemian/73-465841914
It's just too early to declare Lynch a bust, as some have been implying. As I have been saying,
give him another year. He just might surprise.

Many also have it very wrong about Siemian, IMO. I personally believe he will surprise this year.

[Tned]

It's just too early to declare Lynch a bust, as some have been implying. As I have been saying,
give him another year. He just might surprise.

Many also have it very wrong about Siemian, IMO. I personally believe he will surprise this year.

Agreed on both points.

[Tned]

It's just too early to declare Lynch a bust, as some have been implying. As I have been saying,
give him another year. He just might surprise.

Many also have it very wrong about Siemian, IMO. I personally believe he will surprise this year.

Siemian could easily become the best QB the Broncos have ever drafted.

[topscribe]

Siemian could easily become the best QB the Broncos have ever drafted.
I hope so because actually that's not saying much (excluding Lynch, about whom we really don't yet know).
The Broncos didn't draft our best QBs, who include Elway (of course), Morton, Plummer, Charley Johnson,
and Tripucka (not necessarily in that order). But don't forget Chad Kelly. If he ever gets the pieces put
together between his ears, he does have a whole lot of talent . . .

EDIT: I forgot to list Manning, who most definitely ranks among our (two) finest, of course.

[Cugel]

Or, the third possibility that I pointed out to North (I think) earlier as well, which is that Siemian continues on from the success of his first year starting and continues to get better and it's not a matter of him "overachieving" or building a team around him where QB play isn't crucial.

I've been amazed at how much benefit of the doubt people have given Lynch, and none of the same given to Siemian, that has proven he can do so much more than not only Lynch, but so many of the first round QBs I posted above.

Look. Nobody in the NFL - no GM, no scout, no personnel department ever thought Trevor Siemian was a Franchise starting QB in this league. NOBODY. That's why he was undrafted. We also know that in the history of the NFL it's a VERY SHORT list of SB QBs who were undrafted. Kurt Warner is pretty much it.

And yet there are something like 10 undrafted QBs taken every single year. That means at least 170 QBs taken since Tom Brady went in the 6th round in 2000. Yet none of them ever played in a SB and few have any chance to ever start a SB.

So, everybody assumes based on the history of the NFL that it's just not going to happen. Nothing that Trevor has shown so far changes that estimation.

Trevor is the kind of QB we've seen before in Alex Smith and Kyle Orton. Guy overachieves and becomes the starter - mostly because their team lacks alternative choices. Then for some reason fans love the guy because he's a "hard work" guy, an "over achiever", a "lunch pail" kind of guy.

Which, outside of idiot fan sentiment is pretty much worthless. The NFL is a "do good" league, not a "try hard" league. Talent - consistently applied will beat the "Little Engine Who Could" every single time. But, fans and NFL players themselves don't like it. They don't like the fact that a Von Miller could pretty much coast for his entire NFL career and still have a job in the NFL. He would never have been SB MVP, if he hadn't put in the total commitment, but he could still play in this league based on pure talent.

That's why Paxton will remain on the roster long after he's proven he's a complete bust. Pure athletic talent.

At some point we have to see signs that the kid can be a real leader on the field and take the team to a SB. Only we've seen no such signs and there's no indication he will ever be that kind of QB.

We saw that kind of play last year from Dak Prescott and this year from Mitch Trebisky, but neither Trevor nor Paxton has ever shown it.

[topscribe]

Look. Nobody in the NFL - no GM, no scout, no personnel department ever thought Trevor Siemian was a Franchise starting QB in this league. NOBODY. That's why he was undrafted. We also know that in the history of the NFL it's a VERY SHORT list of SB QBs who were undrafted. Kurt Warner is pretty much it.

And yet there are something like 10 undrafted QBs taken every single year. That means at least 170 QBs taken since Tom Brady went in the 6th round in 2000. Yet none of them ever played in a SB and few have any chance to ever start a SB.

So, everybody assumes based on the history of the NFL that it's just not going to happen. Nothing that Trevor has shown so far changes that estimation.

Trevor is the kind of QB we've seen before in Alex Smith and Kyle Orton. Guy overachieves and becomes the starter - mostly because their team lacks alternative choices. Then for some reason fans love the guy because he's a "hard work" guy, an "over achiever", a "lunch pail" kind of guy.

Which, outside of idiot fan sentiment is pretty much worthless. The NFL is a "do good" league, not a "try hard" league. Talent - consistently applied will beat the "Little Engine Who Could" every single time. But, fans and NFL players themselves don't like it. They don't like the fact that a Von Miller could pretty much coast for his entire NFL career and still have a job in the NFL. He would never have been SB MVP, if he hadn't put in the total commitment, but he could still play in this league based on pure talent.

That's why Paxton will remain on the roster long after he's proven he's a complete bust. Pure athletic talent.

At some point we have to see signs that the kid can be a real leader on the field and take the team to a SB. Only we've seen no such signs and there's no indication he will ever be that kind of QB.

We saw that kind of play last year from Dak Prescott and this year from Mitch Trebisky, but neither Trevor nor Paxton has ever shown it.
I hope you don't ignore evidence in you law practice like you do here. All kinds of documentation
have been posted showing Trevor's present skills and his potential. You might review it and then
be a bit more specific with your rebuttals, than bringing up other quarterbacks. Trevor is not
Orton nor Alex Smith nor Kurt Warner. He is his own man and should be judged according to his
own merits.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned among the plethora of evidence in these threads: Trevor
blew out his ACL in the last game of his college career. That might have a lot to do with his
being drafted so low.

[Tned]

Look. Nobody in the NFL - no GM, no scout, no personnel department ever thought Trevor Siemian was a Franchise starting QB in this league. NOBODY. That's why he was undrafted. We also know that in the history of the NFL it's a VERY SHORT list of SB QBs who were undrafted. Kurt Warner is pretty much it.

Siemian was drafted, a seventh round pick. As to undrafted, Romo and Warner are the two big names in terms of undrafted QBs making good.

There are other positions, such as Chris Harris and Rod Smith.

While it's an uphill battle when you are a late draft pick/undrafted, once a player gets on the field, then it's their performance that determines how far they go. If not for that, Harris wouldn't be our starting CB.


And yet there are something like 10 undrafted QBs taken every single year. That means at least 170 QBs taken since Tom Brady went in the 6th round in 2000. Yet none of them ever played in a SB and few have any chance to ever start a SB.


Ok, how many QBs drafted in any round during that same 17 years. How many of them have played in a SB?


So, everybody assumes based on the history of the NFL that it's just not going to happen. Nothing that Trevor has shown so far changes that estimation.

Trevor is the kind of QB we've seen before in Alex Smith and Kyle Orton. Guy overachieves and becomes the starter - mostly because their team lacks alternative choices. Then for some reason fans love the guy because he's a "hard work" guy, an "over achiever", a "lunch pail" kind of guy.


The Orton comparison is laughable and ill informed. Anyone that watched Orton as a first year starter knows that his play wasn't comparible to Siemian's. Broncos fans throw him out because he was OUR QB and are comparing a 5th/6th year vet to a first year starter. Come on.


Which, outside of idiot fan sentiment is pretty much worthless. The NFL is a "do good" league, not a "try hard" league. Talent - consistently applied will beat the "Little Engine Who Could" every single time. But, fans and NFL players themselves don't like it. They don't like the fact that a Von Miller could pretty much coast for his entire NFL career and still have a job in the NFL. He would never have been SB MVP, if he hadn't put in the total commitment, but he could still play in this league based on pure talent.


You brought up idiot fan sentiment, I wasn't going to go there and still won't, I'll just leave it as your analysis being "flawed" on many fronts.


That's why Paxton will remain on the roster long after he's proven he's a complete bust. Pure athletic talent.


I've never said otherwise. Talk of trading is ridiculous. He would have virtually no trade value. Nobody is going to give up a high draft pick for a QB that is looking more and more like a bust. It's in the Broncos best interest to see if he can develop into a starter during his second/third season.


At some point we have to see signs that the kid can be a real leader on the field and take the team to a SB. Only we've seen no such signs and there's no indication he will ever be that kind of QB.

We saw that kind of play last year from Dak Prescott and this year from Mitch Trebisky, but neither Trevor nor Paxton has ever shown it.


All indications are that Siemian is a leader and has his teammates behind him. If Lynch had started last year and had Trevor's performance, we would all be excited about his potential.

Time will tell where we go from here. Neither of our opinions will have any impact on his or the team's future.

[Joel]

As I said in the other thread, all of your "logic" falls apart, because you haven't grasped the simple fact that NFL scouts and GM's simply can't tell the difference between a Carr and Russel. If they could, then Russel wouldn't have gone first, and Carr in the second round. Leaf in the first, and Brady in the 6th. Romo and Warner undrafted, but Harrington, RG3, Vince Young and Bradford in the top three spots.
No, I get that it's hard to know beforehand which NFL QB is a bust and which a boom, because (as stated in a post just a few days ago) that difference is actually MUCH smaller than it looks from the stands or living room. Again, as noted in that other post, there are 128 teams in Division 1 FBS alone, each with DOZENS of draft eligible players annually, but only 224+supplemental draft picks: Anyone and everyone who doesn't wash out in JHS or HS, fail to impress a college scout enough to win a scholarship or fail to earn enough college playing time to catch an NFL scouts eye just to get an UDFA contract is an elite physical specimen. The guys actually drafted are that much better, and the 1st rounders? Gods among men. The problem is they're among 1695 fellow gods, half of whom you, me and ESPN dismiss as "backup quality, at best." If the physical margin between All Pro and All Washed up weren't so slim at that level, things like mentality, coaching and "intangibles" wouldn't matter.

All that said, and once again, any pro scout worth his clipboard can tell you whether a given class is deep, broad or neither at a given position, and anyone who can count knows the FINAL pick in each round is far less auspicious than that mystical "top three" where all the great QBs lie. Personally, I think there's room in between, with guys like Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees, but you're unlikely to find guys like that in a QB class as shallow and narrow as last years even at #1 or #2, let alone #26. Does it happen? Sure; anything's possible. But betting the franchise on a hard eight just because it MIGHT hit is as dangerous as it is needless.


So, yes, with only Siemian and Sanchez on the roster, they absolutely needed to draft a QB.
Or else...?

[Tned]

Or else...?

They made a mistake.

[pnbronco]

That's what I said....he's so raw and maybe the head connects with the talent and maybe it doesn't. He's had a really steep learning curve. IMO his talent has kept him from having to learn how to study all the time. Since we are at the beginning of year 2....I'll wait and see.

[Joel]

I realize it must continue until one of them either proves himself the franchise QB or bombs out completely, but the Lynch vs. Siemian debate is getting old because it still boils down to the same old low floor, high ceiling vs. high floor, low ceiling argument.

People don't dislike Siemian so much for what he did last year as because they never expect much more from him: In their minds, he's already near or at his ceiling, so this is as good as it gets, and not good enough long term, while Lynch still has miles of improvement within reach.

Likewise, people don't dislike Lynch so much for what he failed to do last year as because he's not progressing enough fast enough: In their minds, he's already squandered all that physical potential and is a known (low) quantity, while Siemian's improved enough to make them question whether he's reached his limit.

It's still too soon for either assessment, especially when we're still rebuilding our line from the ground up, with a new OC and playbook. We can demand instant gratification all day long, but it's not going to happen because that's not how DEVELOPMENT works. It's like, oh, I dunno; winning a SB with a first ballot HoFer under center and expecting to replace him with another just four months later. :tongue:

[Tned]

That's what I said....he's so raw and maybe the head connects with the talent and maybe it doesn't. He's had a really steep learning curve. IMO his talent has kept him from having to learn how to study all the time. Since we are at the beginning of year 2....I'll wait and see.

Ditto. I was going to be ecstatic if he was ready year two, based on how much he had to learn coming out of Memphis with the spread, plays being called in or shown on boards, etc. I read/heard enough about him taking 2-3 years to be ready to start in the NFL, so I was never one of those fans that became disappointed/dejected when he wasn't ready last year or this year.

[Tned]

I realize it must continue until one of them either proves himself the franchise QB or bombs out completely, but the Lynch vs. Siemian debate is getting old because it still boils down to the same old low floor, high ceiling vs. high floor, low ceiling argument.

People don't dislike Siemian so much for what he did last year as because they never expect much more from him: In their minds, he's already near or at his ceiling, so this is as good as it gets, and not good enough long term, while Lynch still has miles of improvement within reach.

Likewise, people don't dislike Lynch so much for what he failed to do last year as because he's not progressing enough fast enough: In their minds, he's already squandered all that physical potential and is a known (low) quantity, while Siemian's improved enough to make them question whether he's reached his limit.

It's still too soon for either assessment, especially when we're still rebuilding our line from the ground up, with a new OC and playbook. We can demand instant gratification all day long, but it's not going to happen because that's not how DEVELOPMENT works. It's like, oh, I dunno; winning a SB with a first ballot HoFer under center and expecting to replace him with another just four months later. :tongue:

All talk of Siemian ceiling at this point is worth about as much and smells worse than bilge water at this point. Nobody knows what Siemian's ceiling is, because clearly the scouts got it wrong, just like they did with Romo, Harris, Rod Smith, Warner, etc.

Does that mean he will become the next Tom Brady? No. Does it mean he could be the next Romo or Brady or other top 10-15 QB, absolutely he could.

Anyone that continues to throw ceiling out is simply showing their limited football IQ. This isn't Madden, this is real, and the NFL history is littered with talent that the scouts missed.

[turftoad]

Ditto. I was going to be ecstatic if he was ready year two, based on how much he had to learn coming out of Memphis with the spread, plays being called in or shown on boards, etc. I read/heard enough about him taking 2-3 years to be ready to start in the NFL, so I was never one of those fans that became disappointed/dejected when he wasn't ready last year or this year.

Plus he's had 3 different offenses is 3 years. Time will tell I guess.

[Tned]

Plus he's had 3 different offenses is 3 years. Time will tell I guess.

Lynch was never asked to call/repeat a play in the huddle in college, didn't take plays from under center, rarely threw deep. He had HUGE learning curve.

[Joel]

They made a mistake.
That's a pretty brown and mild "absolutely need." What would have been the consequences of that "mistake"?

As it happens, having to start Austin Davis for a couple games while Siemians arm was hanging by a tendon, but we lost one of those games anyway, so, worst case: A SINGLE loss in a year when we missed the playoffs anyway. Boo hoo, we moved up two draft spots. :tongue:

No way to predict Siemian though, so let's take that off the table: What if we hadn't drafted Lynch AND Siemian hadn't stepped into the breach? Absolute worst case scenario is 0-16, but that's pretty unlikely. We'd still have our D, and DT and Sanders, and CJ for half the season, and Austin Davis isn't a BAD QB, just not especially GOOD, nor experienced. Most likely we're looking at around 6-10±a game; now maybe Jaded gets his wish for Watson, or we're into Mahomes territory; if we're really QB hungry and/or have a really bad record we could even try to trade up THEN, not from #31 to #26 for a drafts third QB, but into the elite top three for Trubisky.

I'm just not seeing the dolorously dire disaster of failing to immediately reach for a franchise QB with a low pick in a bad QB draft.

[Tned]

That's a pretty brown and mild "absolutely need." What would have been the consequences of that "mistake"?

You are asking me to prove a negative or the like.

Where we stand today, with the benefit of hindsite, there would have been no negative consequence, as they would still have Siemian and likely would have drafted a QB this year.

That does not in anyway make it less of a mistake, however, to not draft a QB when your HOF starter and his heir apparent are both gone.

Sorry, it's just common sense and clearly what was the right thing to do football wise.

You have no legs in your argument on this one.


As it happens, having to start Austin Davis for a couple games while Siemians arm was hanging by a tendon, but we lost one of those games anyway, so, worst case: A SINGLE loss in a year when we missed the playoffs anyway. Boo hoo, we moved up two draft spots. :tongue:


Yes, hindsight is 20/20, which is proof by all those first round bust QBs. The only boo hoo is crying over your logic fail, which hurts me to see.


No way to predict Siemian though, so let's take that off the table: What if we hadn't drafted Lynch AND Siemian hadn't stepped into the breach? Absolute worst case scenario is 0-16, but that's pretty unlikely. We'd still have our D, and DT and Sanders, and CJ for half the season, and Austin Davis isn't a BAD QB, just not especially GOOD, nor experienced. Most likely we're looking at around 6-10±a game; now maybe Jaded gets his wish for Watson, or we're into Mahomes territory; if we're really QB hungry and/or have a really bad record we could even try to trade up THEN, not from #31 to #26 for a drafts third QB, but into the elite top three for Trubisky.


Well, shit, why bother worrying about a QB any year, because you know, heck, worst case is only 0-16 and we might get one of those top QBs that is more likely to be a bust than anything.

Once again, how many can't miss QBs have we seen enter the draft since 2000??? :confused:


I'm just not seeing the dolorously dire disaster of failing to immediately reach for a franchise QB with a low pick in a bad QB draft.

Clearly, but that's on you.

[Canmore]

Siemian could easily become the best QB the Broncos have ever drafted.

I think it is possible. A lot depends on a whole slew of variables, but I feel the biggest is can we protect Trevor Siemian? As king is so fond of saying; Trevor threw almost a quarter of his TD passes in one game. Well, he was healthy!

[Canmore]

Look. Nobody in the NFL - no GM, no scout, no personnel department ever thought Trevor Siemian was a Franchise starting QB in this league. NOBODY. That's why he was undrafted. We also know that in the history of the NFL it's a VERY SHORT list of SB QBs who were undrafted. Kurt Warner is pretty much it.

And yet there are something like 10 undrafted QBs taken every single year. That means at least 170 QBs taken since Tom Brady went in the 6th round in 2000. Yet none of them ever played in a SB and few have any chance to ever start a SB.

So, everybody assumes based on the history of the NFL that it's just not going to happen. Nothing that Trevor has shown so far changes that estimation.

Trevor is the kind of QB we've seen before in Alex Smith and Kyle Orton. Guy overachieves and becomes the starter - mostly because their team lacks alternative choices. Then for some reason fans love the guy because he's a "hard work" guy, an "over achiever", a "lunch pail" kind of guy.

Which, outside of idiot fan sentiment is pretty much worthless. The NFL is a "do good" league, not a "try hard" league. Talent - consistently applied will beat the "Little Engine Who Could" every single time. But, fans and NFL players themselves don't like it. They don't like the fact that a Von Miller could pretty much coast for his entire NFL career and still have a job in the NFL. He would never have been SB MVP, if he hadn't put in the total commitment, but he could still play in this league based on pure talent.

That's why Paxton will remain on the roster long after he's proven he's a complete bust. Pure athletic talent.

At some point we have to see signs that the kid can be a real leader on the field and take the team to a SB. Only we've seen no such signs and there's no indication he will ever be that kind of QB.

We saw that kind of play last year from Dak Prescott and this year from Mitch Trebisky, but neither Trevor nor Paxton has ever shown it.

Trevor was not undrafted. While he was nearly Mr. Irrelevant, he went in the 7th round.

I don't think Trevor is Alex Smith or Kyle Orton. Are they in the record books? Trevor is!

[Tned]

I think it is possible. A lot depends on a whole slew of variables, but I feel the biggest is can we protect Trevor Siemian? As king is so fond of saying; Trevor threw almost a quarter of his TD passes in one game. Well, he was healthy!

True, but his 18/10 2.1 int% was pretty darn good in 14 games as a first year starter.

Prescott 23/4
Wentz 16/14
Mariotta (last year) 19/10
Winston 22/15

[topscribe]

Trevor was not undrafted. While he was nearly Mr. Irrelevant, he went in the 7th round.

I don't think Trevor is Alex Smith or Kyle Orton. Are they in the record books? Trevor is!
Orton suffered somewhat a similar experience to Trevor. He was actually pretty good until he incurred his high ankle sprains . . .

[Joel]

All talk of Siemian ceiling at this point is worth about as much and smells worse than bilge water at this point. Nobody knows what Siemian's ceiling is, because clearly the scouts got it wrong, just like they did with Romo, Harris, Rod Smith, Warner, etc.

Does that mean he will become the next Tom Brady? No. Does it mean he could be the next Romo or Brady or other top 10-15 QB, absolutely he could.

Anyone that continues to throw ceiling out is simply showing their limited football IQ. This isn't Madden, this is real, and the NFL history is littered with talent that the scouts missed.
I don't know; can't recall even Siemians worst critics ever saying, "this was less than we were promised." The question is does he take it to the next level, then the next and so on, and for how long, or does he plateau sooner than later? Everyone pretending to know after just 14 starts has simply prejudged him one way or the other, but the question's valid. Just as it's still valid after a single season to wonder if Lynch will eventually "flip the switch" that lets him fully exploit his tremendous innate physical abilities by developing well honed skill. And "failure is always an option:" Siemian could plateau AND Lynch might never have his epiphany, leaving us back at square one.

As noted elsewhere (in a post I'm oddly referencing a lot today,) I agree the whole floor/ceiling thing is overstated, because the gap between studs and duds only LOOKS gaping from a distance: NONE of these guys would've won a starting college job unless they could play very well, let alone been drafted by an NFL team, even in the final round. The question at this stage isn't "do you have the physical tools," because that's a given: It's "what else ya got...?"

Coaching and supporting casts (which I guess includes coaching) is often much of the answer to that question. I felt a lot better with Kubes running the show because I knew EVERY starting QB he's EVER had was voted to the Pro Bowl at least once, even guys like Griese, Plummer and Schaub. Technically Siemian too, as an alternate, which may not sound like much, but bearing in mind the above about the already rarefied talent, and that he was a 7th rounder making his NFL debut behind garbage protection, that's a big accomplishment. More than many far more experienced and physically gifted QBs ever manage.

All I'm saying is that Team Lynch and Team Siemian see different things because they're LOOKING for different things, and neither perspective is truly "wrong," just different, so they'll keep right on talking past each other until someone settles the argument on the field.

Siemian fans will never convince Lynch fans that Siemian has Elways cannon, toughness and nimbleness—but no Siemian fan is TRYING to make that argument.

Lynch fans will never convince Siemian fans that Lynch has Mannings vision, knowledge and accuracy—but no Lynch fan is trying to make THAT argument.

All the while one side is fixated on how their guy looks more like an NFL starter NOW, while the other's just as myopically focused on how their guy looks more capable of becoming an NFL starter LATER. So it comes down to each side saying, "you're guys not enough like our guy," while the other replies, "and thank God for that!"

[Joel]

You are asking me to prove a negative or the like.
You made a positive assertion: Denver NEEDED to (immediately) draft Mannings successor when Oz left. I'm not asking you prove a thing but your own positive statement.


Where we stand today, with the benefit of hindsite, there would have been no negative consequence, as they would still have Siemian and likely would have drafted a QB this year.

That does not in anyway make it less of a mistake, however, to not draft a QB when your HOF starter and his heir apparent are both gone.

Sorry, it's just common sense and clearly what was the right thing to do football wise.

You have no legs in your argument on this one.

Yes, hindsight is 20/20, which is proof by all those first round bust QBs. The only boo hoo is crying over your logic fail, which hurts me to see.
Right; again, I concede there was no way to know Siemian would play nearly as well as he did last year (and ample reason to expect otherwise.) The point is that wouldn't have guaranteed 0-16 absent Lynchs 79.2 passer rating and 1-1 starting record, and even if it HAD, that wouldn't have been the end of the world either. This time last year, most of us were resigned to rolling with Butt Fumble for good or ill, but I don't recall anyone slitting their wrists or (worse) becoming Raiders fans over it.


Well, shit, why bother worrying about a QB any year, because you know, heck, worst case is only 0-16 and we might get one of those top QBs that is more likely to be a bust than anything.

Once again, how many can't miss QBs have we seen enter the draft since 2000??? :confused:
2016 wasn't just "any year:" We were reigning World Champs, which meant we had nothing left to prove (yea!) but drafted DEAD LAST in every round (boo!)

That's a suboptimal place to seek a career starter at any position, but a QUARTERBACK, in a year only TWO players are considered even MARGINAL first round talents, and the rest far worse? I play bridge, not blackjack, but even I know there are hands where you absolutely should double down and others where you absolutely should NOT. For the World Champs, the 2016 QB draft was the second kind of hand. We had other needs and there were better picks to fill them, most notably on the offensive line we DESPERATELY need to improve so WHOEVER we pick as our QBotF isn't reduced to the David Carr of the Future. Ask Bob McNair about costly QB "mistakes."


Clearly, but that's on you.
Again: You made a positive statement, and it's the only thing I'm asking you prove.

[Tned]

You made a positive assertion: Denver NEEDED to (immediately) draft Mannings successor when Oz left. I'm not asking you prove a thing but your own positive statement.

Right; again, I concede there was no way to know Siemian would play nearly as well as he did last year (and ample reason to expect otherwise.) The point is that wouldn't have guaranteed 0-16 absent Lynchs 79.2 passer rating and 1-1 starting record, and even if it HAD, that wouldn't have been the end of the world either. This time last year, most of us were resigned to rolling with Butt Fumble for good or ill, but I don't recall anyone slitting their wrists or (worse) becoming Raiders fans over it.


2016 wasn't just "any year:" We were reigning World Champs, which meant we had nothing left to prove (yea!) but drafted DEAD LAST in every round (boo!)

That's a suboptimal place to seek a career starter at any position, but a QUARTERBACK, in a year only TWO players are considered even MARGINAL first round talents, and the rest far worse? I play bridge, not blackjack, but even I know there are hands where you absolutely should double down and others where you absolutely should NOT. For the World Champs, the 2016 QB draft was the second kind of hand. We had other needs and there were better picks to fill them, most notably on the offensive line we DESPERATELY need to improve so WHOEVER we pick as our QBotF isn't reduced to the David Carr of the Future. Ask Bob McNair about costly QB "mistakes."

Again: You made a positive statement, and it's the only thing I'm asking you prove.

Joel, I don't know what to tell you. If you think QB isn't an important enough position to draft, when you have nothing but Mark Sanchez and a 7th rounder with only one kneel down snap in the NFL and who spent the entire rookie year running the scout team, there is nothing else I can say to change your mind.

[Poet]

Joel, I don't know what to tell you. If you think QB isn't an important enough position to draft, when you have nothing but Mark Sanchez and a 7th rounder with only one kneel down snap in the NFL and who spent the entire rookie year running the scout team, there is nothing else I can say to change your mind.

It's worth noting that there were some analysts who said PL might be able to start/need a year. They were wrong, but going off of that projection/opinion, it would be easier to draft PL from a GM standpoint. Even if the team was going to just roll with Sanchez, if they were that comfortable with him, drafting PL is still logical because PL has someone to sit behind, as well as the seventh rounder that you like. Elway went with what was sometimes a steady veteran, a seventh rounder he liked that he thought was under-drafted, and the big talent of PL. He covered all his bases. It was a categorical approach that was logical.

[Tned]

It's worth noting that there were some analysts who said PL might be able to start/need a year. They were wrong, but going off of that projection/opinion, it would be easier to draft PL from a GM standpoint. Even if the team was going to just roll with Sanchez, if they were that comfortable with him, drafting PL is still logical because PL has someone to sit behind, as well as the seventh rounder that you like. Elway went with what was sometimes a steady veteran, a seventh rounder he liked that he thought was under-drafted, and the big talent of PL. He covered all his bases. It was a categorical approach that was logical.

I'm still not sure I believe the Broncos really considered Siemian a viable contender for the job in April. My take is that they had Sanchez and were going to let the rookie take a run at the job, and on the way to the market, Siemian jumped up and took everyone, including the Broncos by surprise.

[Poet]

I'm still not sure I believe the Broncos really considered Siemian a viable contender for the job in April. My take is that they had Sanchez and were going to let the rookie take a run at the job, and on the way to the market, Siemian jumped up and took everyone, including the Broncos by surprise.

I, as a rule, give all benefit of the doubt to JFE, even if it's not reasonable. I think they found out relatively soon how much they liked him, because they had some other options they could have gone with, but didn't. I'm not sure of the timeline, though. Your point is well taken.

[Tned]

I, as a rule, give all benefit of the doubt to JFE, even if it's not reasonable. I think they found out relatively soon how much they liked him, because they had some other options they could have gone with, but didn't. I'm not sure of the timeline, though. Your point is well taken.

Yea, just so hard to know how much of a feel they had from him playing in his rookie preseason, and then the third team/scout reps his rookie year. We know Kubiak loved him as a late round flyer, so it's not inconceivable that Elway and Kubiak thought he could compete for the job.

[Poet]

Yea, just so hard to know how much of a feel they had from him playing in his rookie preseason, and then the third team/scout reps his rookie year. We know Kubiak loved him as a late round flyer, so it's not inconceivable that Elway and Kubiak thought he could compete for the job.

To be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings.

[BroncoJoe]

I, as a rule, give all benefit of the doubt to Joe, even if it's not reasonable.

Thanks, Buddy!

[Joel]

Joel, I don't know what to tell you. If you think QB isn't an important enough position to draft, when you have nothing but Mark Sanchez and a 7th rounder with only one kneel down snap in the NFL and who spent the entire rookie year running the scout team, there is nothing else I can say to change your mind.
If I'm dying of dehydration in a desert and find a bottle of antifreeze I won't drink it just because "I NEED liquid!" If I just chugged a gallon of gatorade I definitely won't: I'll keep searching for an oasis, or dig a well.

[Tned]

If I'm dying of dehydration in a desert and find a bottle of antifreeze I won't drink it just because "I NEED liquid!" If I just chugged a gallon of gatorade I definitely won't: I'll keep searching for an oasis, or dig a well.

You win. That truly is the most asinine analogy of the year. Neh, the decade.

[Joel]

You win. That truly is the most asinine analogy of the year. Neh, the decade.
Not fair: Decade's not over yet.

[Tned]

Not fair: Decade's not over yet.

Feel secure. There is a greater chance of Siemian being elected to the hall of fame than someone making a more asinine analogy than yours in this decade.

[iLands]

Feel secure. There is a greater chance of Siemian being elected to the hall of fame than someone making a more asinine analogy than yours in this decade.

Both will happen ;)

[BroncoJoe]

You win. That truly is the most asinine analogy of the year. Neh, the decade.

Joel's right. The decade isn't over yet and he's still posting. There's plenty of opportunity to come up with a more worthless take.

[Poet]

Joel's analogy would be fairer if it was an expired soda. Not ideal.

However, at the time, PL wasn't considered to be an expired soda, antifreeze, etc. He was gong in the first round. Too much talent to not.

[Tned]

Joel's analogy would be fairer if it was an expired soda. Not ideal.

However, at the time, PL wasn't considered to be an expired soda, antifreeze, etc. He was gong in the first round. Too much talent to not.

Being a more sophisticate type, shall I share the wine version. I think if we talked about reaching for a young wine, and even considering drinking it, when you know it needs time in your cellar or another....

[Poet]

Being a more sophisticate type, shall I share the wine version. I think if we talked about reaching for a young wine, and even considering drinking it, when you know it needs time in your cellar or another....

All wine ages well, no? At least most of it? There's not that certainty with Qb's. Well...they do age.

[topscribe]

All wine ages well, no? At least most of it? There's not that certainty with Qb's. Well...they do age.
I might have agreed with you . . . until Brady . . .

[Poet]

I might have agreed with you . . . until Brady . . .

I meant in the metaphor that they start off young and age well into something, like wine. Brady has aged well...unfortunately.

[Tned]

All wine ages well, no? At least most of it? There's not that certainty with Qb's. Well...they do age.

Nope, some wine is drink now wine. You might get a year out of it and then it's going to star going south, think of that as bringing in a free agent in the prime or twighlight of their career. Other wine is young, and you hope, but don't know, that with time, it will become a good or great wine.

[Valar Morghulis]

Feel secure. There is a greater chance of Siemian being elected to the hall of fame than someone making a more asinine analogy than yours in this decade.

Lol

[Simple Jaded]

Joel's analogy would be fairer if it was an expired soda. Not ideal.

However, at the time, PL wasn't considered to be an expired soda, antifreeze, etc. He was gong in the first round. Too much talent to not.

Antifreeze expires?

[Simple Jaded]

Feel secure. There is a greater chance of Siemian being elected to the hall of fame than someone making a more asinine analogy than yours in this decade.

Challenge accepted.

[Tned]

Challenge accepted.

If anyone's up for the challenge... ;)