PDA

View Full Version : NYTime: Is Orton going to improve?



gkubiak74
11-11-2009, 04:57 PM
This is a blog I read every Wednesday. Today, he went after Orton a little....but, he may have a point.

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/week-9-passer-ratings-orton-seeks-his-level/#more-26495

http://www.nflstatanalysis.net/

Northman
11-11-2009, 05:00 PM
I can answer that. No, Orton will not turn into Peyton Manning.

dogfish
11-11-2009, 05:06 PM
I can answer that. No, Orton will not turn into Peyton Manning.

thank you, northstradamus!


:D

gkubiak74
11-11-2009, 05:08 PM
I still think we'd be better off with Jay

Dirk
11-11-2009, 05:09 PM
northstradamus!

:lol::lol:

That's perfect!!

Northman
11-11-2009, 05:10 PM
I still think we'd be better off with Jay

Yea, if only he wanted to stay here. Bummer.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 05:12 PM
Welcome to the boards!! :welcome:


What people seem to miss is how a QB . . . any QB . . . performs with time and
a semblance of a running game (first six games) and how he performs without it
(last two).

Even if Orton was at the top of his game Monday (which he wasn't by any
stretch), he still would have struggled. Again, any QB would.


P.S. We would be better off with Elway in his prime, too. But we don't have
Elway in his prime, and we don't have Jay. Just saying . . .

-----

Superchop 7
11-11-2009, 05:21 PM
I have no problem with Orton in the backup role.

He is who we think he is.

But we "have" to find the next great QB.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 05:23 PM
I have no problem with Orton in the backup role.

He is who we think he is.

But we "have" to find the next great QB.

I do wonder though, if McDaniels doesn't have the same perspective on QBs as Shanahan did on RBs. Meaning he believes he can get by with lower talent. I don't know that, yet. But it does make me wonder since he did try to trade for Cassle.

dogfish
11-11-2009, 05:26 PM
I do wonder though, if McDaniels doesn't have the same perspective on QBs as Shanahan did on RBs. Meaning he believes he can get by with lower talent. I don't know that, yet. But it does make me wonder since he did try to trade for Cassle.

they don't call him the QB whisperer for nothin'. . . .

NightTrainLayne
11-11-2009, 05:27 PM
I do wonder though, if McDaniels doesn't have the same perspective on QBs as Shanahan did on RBs. Meaning he believes he can get by with lower talent. I don't know that, yet. But it does make me wonder since he did try to trade for Cassle.

I've wondered the same thing. .. .good news is that Shanny had a good deal of success with that RB "system".

Dirk
11-11-2009, 05:27 PM
If Cassle was here he would be able to stretch the field.

I still think McD needs to let Orton throw it down field. Int or not, keeps the defenses honest if he at least goes for it once in a while.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 05:39 PM
If Cassle was here he would be able to stretch the field.

I still think McD needs to let Orton throw it down field. Int or not, keeps the defenses honest if he at least goes for it once in a while.

I agree on your second paragraph, although McDaniels addressed that today,
and both he and Orton addressed it last week. McDaniels said in his presser
that Pittsburgh's safeties were playing 30-35 yards deep a lot. And they both
said Baltimore's safeties were playing deep.

McDaniels also said that they did plan to throw it deep a couple times, but it
"wasn't there."

As I mentioned elsewhere, I would have loved to see them pass it on the first
play of the game. That is when the play action would have worked, because
the first play is usually a running play, and it would have been totally
unexpected. And even if it fell incomplete, it would have delivered the
message that the Broncos WILL do it.

IMHO.

-----

gkubiak74
11-11-2009, 05:41 PM
Welcome to the boards!! :welcome:


What people seem to miss is how a QB . . . any QB . . . performs with time and
a semblance of a running game (first six games) and how he performs without it
(last two).

Even if Orton was at the top of his game Monday (which he wasn't by any
stretch), he still would have struggled. Again, any QB would.


P.S. We would be better off with Elway in his prime, too. But we don't have
Elway in his prime, and we don't have Jay. Just saying . . .

-----


I think we're going to need to draft a QB soon. Baltimore and Pitt dared Orton to throw the ball down the field and he just can't do it.

gkubiak74
11-11-2009, 05:44 PM
If Cassle was here he would be able to stretch the field.

I still think McD needs to let Orton throw it down field. Int or not, keeps the defenses honest if he at least goes for it once in a while.


Right now, I would have to say Cassel is not looking like a starting caliber quarterback.

CoachChaz
11-11-2009, 05:46 PM
I like Orton, but if I had to choose between him and Cassel...I take Cassel.

That being said...it is what it is. No way we can tell where we'd be with Cutler or Cassel or anyone else. We all know and have known that Kyle isnt the long term answer to this. is Brandstater? Probably not. So all we can do is deal with what we have until some team wants to trade a diamond in the rough (Henne, Kolb) or a rookie falls into our laps.

CoachChaz
11-11-2009, 05:47 PM
Right now, I would have to say Cassel is not looking like a starting caliber quarterback.

Put Manning, Brady, Brees...anyone behind that KC line and tell me how many of them look like a starter. kind of hard to be successful when you have 1.5 seconds to get rid of the ball

topscribe
11-11-2009, 05:48 PM
I think we're going to need to draft a QB soon. Baltimore and Pitt dared Orton to throw the ball down the field and he just can't do it.

As I mentioned, Pittsburgh had their safeties playing 30-35 yards deep, and
Orton and McDaniels said Baltimore's safeties were playing deep. That is hardly
daring a QB to throw it deep. There is only one reason for safeties to play so
deep: to keep a QB from throwing deep.

-----

topscribe
11-11-2009, 05:52 PM
Put Manning, Brady, Brees...anyone behind that KC line and tell me how many of them look like a starter. kind of hard to be successful when you have 1.5 seconds to get rid of the ball

Well put. We timed the pass plays in the Baltimore game, and Orton had an
average of 2.1 seconds to get rid of the ball.

Anyone who thinks a QB can be successful with so little time to throw the ball
all game long knows very little about football.

-----

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 05:58 PM
If Cassle was here he would be able to stretch the field.

I still think McD needs to let Orton throw it down field. Int or not, keeps the defenses honest if he at least goes for it once in a while.

I'm not impressed with Cassle, and don't think he has a stronger arm than Orton.

I don't think its a coincidence that our running game wasn't bad last year with 7 RBs put on IR, and this year the running game is being stuffed by teams stuffing the OL. There's only been ONE piece to that puzzle that has changed.

Orton is also really bad at throwing on the run (which, using your example, Cassle is a good scrambler)... So that just makes it even easier for teams to stuf that inside without having to worry about Orton breaking on the run and beating them.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 06:00 PM
Put Manning, Brady, Brees...anyone behind that KC line and tell me how many of them look like a starter. kind of hard to be successful when you have 1.5 seconds to get rid of the ball

yes and no. Guys like Brady, Brees, and Manning (especially manning) get rid of the ball and their completion ratio against the blitz is HUGE. They LOVE it when teams blitz them because they know it leaves the man open and they are good at knowing where that man is.

So as a result, teams don't blitz them as often.... thus the QB does help the OL quite a bit.

GEM
11-11-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm not impressed with Cassle, and don't think he has a stronger arm than Orton.

I don't think its a coincidence that our running game wasn't bad last year with 7 RBs put on IR, and this year the running game is being stuffed by teams stuffing the OL. There's only been ONE piece to that puzzle that has changed.

Orton is also really bad at throwing on the run (which, using your example, Cassle is a good scrambler)... So that just makes it even easier for teams to stuf that inside without having to worry about Orton breaking on the run and beating them.

You can put it directly on Orton's shoulders or you can be realistic and see that not all of it is him. Some is the OLine not being as good this year (Hamilton=huge liability) and the fact that our whole system has gone from the very successful ZBS (which is ok with smaller lineman) to a power system that needs larger lineman. Some has to do with it being 2 new backs, one being a rookie and the other being a vet who has had numerous years off with injury.

There has been more than one thing that changed.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 06:10 PM
You can put it directly on Orton's shoulders or you can be realistic and see that not all of it is him. Some is the OLine not being as good this year (Hamilton=huge liability) and the fact that our whole system has gone from the very successful ZBS (which is ok with smaller lineman) to a power system that needs larger lineman. Some has to do with it being 2 new backs, one being a rookie and the other being a vet who has had numerous years off with injury.

There has been more than one thing that changed.

you are right. I do NOT put the entire problem with our offense on Orton's shoulders. I don't at all.

But I do feel that the respect (or the lack of respect) for Orton's ability to beat them DOES make it MUCH much harder on our running game and our OL.

GEM
11-11-2009, 06:13 PM
you are right. I do NOT put the entire problem with our offense on Orton's shoulders. I don't at all.

But I do feel that the respect (or the lack of respect) for Orton's ability to beat them DOES make it MUCH much harder on our running game and our OL.

Agreed.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 06:43 PM
I've wondered the same thing. .. .good news is that Shanny had a good deal of success with that RB "system".

very true. I hope we could expect the same level of success at the QB position... although I personally would not like the idea of taking that approach at that particular position.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:03 PM
Orton throwing on the run:

Check out 0:57, 2:53, and 3:30 in this clip:

p8M1Cmf9ipY

-----

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 07:05 PM
I bet if I had the time adn the equipment, I could make a lowlight film of the same thing. Highlight films are the best of everything. I saw a LOT of highlight films of that little RB from OK we had a few years back (can't remember his name).

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:10 PM
I bet if I had the time adn the equipment, I could make a lowlight film of the same thing. Highlight films are the best of everything. I saw a LOT of highlight films of that little RB from OK we had a few years back (can't remember his name).

Nice intelligent rebuttal.

Starting with a negative opinion of Orton, I saw 64 different videos of him and
several of his games. It was the kind of research they did in the article, the
first part of which I posted here (http://broncosforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=815308&postcount=71).

It was this kind of research that changed my mind on him. And he hasn't
disappointed me.

-----

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 07:11 PM
hmmm.. alright. But am I wrong on making a lowlight film? I can on anyone and everyone. Just as you can on highlight films. Sorry,b ut Ijust tdon't take a highlight film as something serious. Its all the fluff.

But..

ITs.. watching the games has been whats disappointed me

BroncoJoe
11-11-2009, 07:12 PM
... As I mentioned elsewhere, I would have loved to see them pass it on the first play of the game. ...
-----

We did pass it on the first play of the game. 10+ yd gain to Eddie IIRC.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 07:16 PM
Nice intelligent rebuttal.

Starting with a negative opinion of Orton, I saw 64 different videos of him and
several of his games. It was the kind of research they did in the article, the
first part of which I posted here (http://broncosforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=815308&postcount=71).

It was this kind of research that changed my mind on him. And he hasn't
disappointed me.

-----

Yes.. I read the article. I'm going to guess that if I don't change my mind after reading teh article, that I'm somehow closed minded...right? Because the article is the end-all to the truth and the end-all to the opinions??

sorry. Until I"m proved wrong from what I've seen of Orton on the field, then the stats and highlight films just wont' change it. I can SEE the play on the field. Football is not a game taht stats tell the story....EVER. The QB rating is the perfect example of just how LOUSY it is to tell a QBs play based on some 'rating' or numbers. Its not baseball.

So.... I'll stand by my statement until I"m proved wrong.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:16 PM
We did pass it on the first play of the game. 10+ yd gain to Eddie IIRC.

I meant deep.

-----

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:19 PM
Yes.. I read the article. I'm going to guess that if I don't change my mind after reading teh article, that I'm somehow closed minded...right? Because the article is the end-all to the truth and the end-all to the opinions??

sorry. Until I"m proved wrong from what I've seen of Orton on the field, then the stats and highlight films just wont' change it. I can SEE the play on the field. Football is not a game taht stats tell the story....EVER. The QB rating is the perfect example of just how LOUSY it is to tell a QBs play based on some 'rating' or numbers. Its not baseball.

So.... I'll stand by my statement until I"m proved wrong.

Do you know what factors go into a QB rating?

And I guess you missed that I formed my opinion from what I SAW.

You know what is ironic? So many people seem to be jumping off the Orton
bandwagon after this game against the Steelers. Does anybody remember
Roethlisberger's QB rating for the game in the Super Bowl in January 2006?
22.6, IIRC? A lot of people jumped off his bandwagon at that time, too.

But then, it doesn't make a difference how much Orton has won and how
much he will win. There will be those who set their jaws and talk about how
he should be a "backup," just as they did Plummer after he led the Broncos to
three straight playoff years, and was the last QB here to go to the playoffs.

Oh well . . . whatever. :tsk:

-----

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 07:32 PM
Do you know what factors go into a QB rating?

And I guess you missed that I formed my opinion from what I SAW.

Oh well . . . whatever. :tsk:

-----

yes.. I do know what goes into a QB rating. I also know that its one of the LEAST respected numbers used when talking to people IN football. They've said it themselves a hundred times. An example that every Bronco fan knows... the Cinci game. That ONE pass at the end, raised Orton's QB rating by nearly 40 points! ONe pass? a luck pass? Thats the point. The QB rating NEVER tells how the QB played...its just numbers. Numbers NEVER EVER tell the whole story.

I didn't miss where YOU formed your opinion based on what YOU saw. But that doesn't mean I don't see what I see. I see, obviously, something much different than you do. I know you'll take this as an insult, and I honestly don't mean it as one....but you telling me about all this 'research' you've done means NOTHING to me, other than it makes YOU happy to know thats how you formed your opinion. Its not going to change Mine...because I don't know what kind of research you did, and certainly don't know/feel that you have the back-round to dissect anything you see (and honestly, despite our disputes, I don't mean that as taking a jab at you, personally).

I do feel that you have a tendency to get emotionally attached to the Denver starting QB. Thats not a bad thing, always. But we had these discussions on Plummer in the past,and you told me what you saw, and what you watched with him in college, and blah blah blah. But it STILL didn't show me anything other than what I saw on game day.

Same with Orton. You can show me these papers filled with numbers and give me some stats and definitions of 'progression'...but that doesn't mean I'm not confident that Orton is just an average NFL QB, and will be serving as a "ok for now" player on the roster until... UNTIL... we find another to finally take his place. Right now we have a LOT of people/positions to fill, so I don't see us spending a high pick on a QB. But that doesn't mean we don't NEED one. Doesn't mean Orton is more than what he is... a place-holder or an "until" type player. He just isn't the long-term answer. If you aren't a long term answer, you are a rental.

Thats my opinion on him, and these papers filled with the stats, useless QB ratings and highlight films aren't going to convince me that he's better than what I can SEE of him when he plays.

KCL
11-11-2009, 07:35 PM
I still think we'd be better off with Jay

oh no....here we go....:eek:

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:38 PM
I do feel that you have a tendency to get emotionally attached to the Denver starting QB. Thats not a bad thing, always. But we had these discussions on Plummer in the past,and you told me what you saw, and what you watched with him in college, and blah blah blah. But it STILL didn't show me anything other than what I saw on game day.


Once again, you have made me the topic. Again. And again.

No, I just become disgusted with myopic people who bashed Plummer when he
was leading the Broncos to the playoffs and bashed Orton even during the 6-0
stretch.

So why don't you dispense of the psychoanalysis and just discuss the issues?

-----

KCL
11-11-2009, 07:39 PM
Right now, I would have to say Cassel is not looking like a starting caliber quarterback.

not behind that good for nothing line...with a decent line I think he could
look like a starting QB...Now who was that team he use to play for :whistle:

KCL
11-11-2009, 07:40 PM
Put Manning, Brady, Brees...anyone behind that KC line and tell me how many of them look like a starter. kind of hard to be successful when you have 1.5 seconds to get rid of the ball

DING DING DING...I believe we have a winner here!

Ravage!!!
11-11-2009, 07:43 PM
Once again, you have made me the topic. Again. And again.

No, I just become disgusted with myopic people who bashed Plummer when he
was leading the Broncos to the playoffs and bashed Orton even during the 6-0
stretch.

So why don't you dispense of the psychoanalysis and just discuss the issues?

-----

Top.. I didn't make YOU the issue any more than you did when you said people "set their jaws"... you are suggesting they are being too stubborn to change their minds, and I'm suggesting YOU get emotionally attached, thus, YOU can't change yours. Quite making every post I make about YOU when the issues is wha tI"m talking about. Just because I'm able to see that emotional involvment clouds the perspectives, does NOT make it an insult. QUIT pulling this JUNK you ALWAYS do, trying to make me be the bad guy when My post to you was COMPLETELY civil.

I tell you what. I"m tired of your persistent attempts to bait and goat me into fighting with you despite simply posting a response. I'm out.

Continue to post, continue your crusade on the Orton issues, and good luck with it. :coffee:

KCL
11-11-2009, 07:44 PM
Top and Ravage...would you two please ****.

damn the filter.

:boxing:

Poet
11-11-2009, 07:47 PM
Top and Ravage...would you two please ****.

damn the filter.

:boxing:

Top could totally do better.

KCL
11-11-2009, 07:49 PM
Top could totally do better.

Nope you're thinking of the wrong thing...but I didn't want to bypass the filter and get in trouble...:D

topscribe
11-11-2009, 07:49 PM
Top.. I didn't make YOU the issue any more than you did when you said people "set their jaws"... you are suggesting they are being too stubborn to change their minds, and I'm suggesting YOU get emotionally attached, thus, YOU can't change yours. Quite making every post I make about YOU when the issues is wha tI"m talking about. Just because I'm able to see that emotional involvment clouds the perspectives, does NOT make it an insult. QUIT pulling this JUNK you ALWAYS do, trying to make me be the bad guy when My post to you was COMPLETELY civil.

I tell you what. I"m tired of your persistent attempts to bait and goat me into fighting with you despite simply posting a response. I'm out.

Continue to post, continue your crusade on the Orton issues, and good luck with it. :coffee:

Right. Disagreeing with you and documenting my arguments is baiting, while
your unsupported, derisive remarks are just fine. It was your civil comments
that got you banned over on Mania, I guess?

All I have done is to argue against those who have posted their unsupported
views on Orton, to which I disagreed. I have posted documentation after
documentation, and now Orton is proving me right.

Just as Plummer did. :coffee:



This is it for me, too (probably to the relief of some witnessing mods).



-----

Tned
11-11-2009, 08:39 PM
Yea, if only he wanted to stay here. Bummer.

Which requires the obligatory response of, "if only the coach wanted Cutler here. Bummer."

Medford Bronco
11-11-2009, 08:46 PM
Yea, if only he wanted to stay here. Bummer.

Only if McD bought some more crying towels for him:lol:

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:13 PM
Which requires the obligatory response of, "if only the coach wanted Cutler here. Bummer."


:rolleyes:

Oh Noes! somebody called me with a trade offer and i listened. But then 3 weeks later my Qb couldnt get over it and wanted the trade anyway and didnt want to get over it. Boo hoo.

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:14 PM
Only if McD bought some more crying towels for him:lol:

Crying towels? More like baby wipes. :lol:

MOtorboat
11-11-2009, 09:16 PM
I didn't read the thread. Or the article.

Sorry about that.

But...I would like to say: there are a lot of people completely out of their gourd, who cannot possibly judge Kyle Orton objectively because they continue to act like scorned lovers. And you know what I'm talking about.

Tned
11-11-2009, 09:25 PM
:rolleyes:

Oh Noes! somebody called me with a trade offer and i listened. But then 3 weeks later my Qb couldnt get over it and wanted the trade anyway and didnt want to get over it. Boo hoo.

Just pointing out that once we go down the road of guessing what happened, there are lots of wild ass guesses that can be made. Isn't it better to say Orton is our QB and Cutler isn't, and not try and lay blame on McD or Cutler or the Invesco groundskeeper or the local bartender or whoever?

tumbana
11-11-2009, 09:27 PM
I doubt it. I think teams have figured him out just like last season.

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:33 PM
Just pointing out that once we go down the road of guessing what happened, there are lots of wild ass guesses that can be made. Isn't it better to say Orton is our QB and Cutler isn't, and not try and lay blame on McD or Cutler or the Invesco groundskeeper or the local bartender or whoever?


Its not fiction that Jay asked his agent for a trade. Its not fiction that Jay did not return phone calls. Its not fiction that Jay couldnt get over the telephone call that McDaniels took regarding a possible trade with Cassel. If you want to argue Jay had a right to be pissed knock yourself out Tned. At the end of the day Jay wanted out and NEVER denied he wanted the trade until it actually happened. That was a 2 week period that he could of come out anytime and say "no, i dont want to be traded" but instead chose to remain quiet and let his agent do all the talking. Bowlen even came out and said that he would grant Jay's request for a trade after not getting a phone call back. Pretty self explanatory if you ask me.

MOtorboat
11-11-2009, 09:36 PM
Its not fiction that Jay asked his agent for a trade. Its not fiction that Jay did not return phone calls. Its not fiction that Jay couldnt get over the telephone call that McDaniels took regarding a possible trade with Cassel. If you want to argue Jay had a right to be pissed knock yourself out Tned. At the end of the day Jay wanted out and NEVER denied he wanted the trade until it actually happened. That was a 2 week period that he could of come out anytime and say "no, i dont want to be traded" but instead chose to remain quiet and let his agent do all the talking. Bowlen even came out and said that he would grant Jay's request for a trade after not getting a phone call back. Pretty self explanatory if you ask me.

But it was McDaniels who originally openly shopped him...:rolleyes:

:lameconspiracytheory:

Tned
11-11-2009, 09:38 PM
Its not fiction that Jay asked his agent for a trade. Its not fiction that Jay did not return phone calls. Its not fiction that Jay couldnt get over the telephone call that McDaniels took regarding a possible trade with Cassel. If you want to argue Jay had a right to be pissed knock yourself out Tned. At the end of the day Jay wanted out and NEVER denied he wanted the trade until it actually happened. That was a 2 week period that he could of come out anytime and say "no, i dont want to be traded" but instead chose to remain quiet and let his agent do all the talking. Bowlen even came out and said that he would grant Jay's request for a trade after not getting a phone call back. Pretty self explanatory if you ask me.

We don't know all the facts, such as he 'only' returned a phone call, so I am not going to argue anything. I just tend to dislike the homer assumptions as to what happened (ex-player did everything wrong, coach/FO did everything right). It's a pet peave of mine. I should have just let it go without comment. My bad.

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:38 PM
But it was McDaniels who originally openly shopped him...:rolleyes:

:lameconspiracytheory:

Honestly, even if he did its irrelevant and only proves Jay just couldnt move on. Doesnt change the fact that the ONLY reason he isnt here is because he requested it which goes back to my original post.

Tned
11-11-2009, 09:39 PM
But it was McDaniels who originally openly shopped him...:rolleyes:

:lameconspiracytheory:

I'm not supporting any lame conspiracy theories, I just don't make lame assumptions based on homerism. Sorry, I'll try and be more-like-MO in the future and work on it.

tumbana
11-11-2009, 09:40 PM
But it was McDaniels who originally openly shopped him...:rolleyes:

:lameconspiracytheory:

McDaniels also never told Cutler that he considered him a part of the future of the team. Cutler and his agent asked McDaniels if he was going to do it again. McDaniels wouldn't answer and that was the last straw. If you think it went "McDaniels tried trading Cutler and when Cutler found out he just never talked to anyone again," then you are surely mistaken. Other things happened.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 09:41 PM
Honestly, even if he did its irrelevant and only proves Jay just couldnt move on. Doesnt change the fact that the ONLY reason he isnt here is because he requested it which goes back to my original post.

But there is no evidence that McDaniels "openly shopped" Jay. If he had, don't
we think there would have been more said about it? After all, that would have
produced a lot of witnesses.

Both McDaniels and Xanders said they took the call, listened to the offer, and
declined. Until I see conclusive evidence to the contrary, this is what I will
accept.

-----

MOtorboat
11-11-2009, 09:41 PM
We don't know all the facts, such as he 'only' returned a phone call, so I am not going to argue anything. I just tend to dislike the homer assumptions as to what happened (ex-player did everything wrong, coach/FO did everything right). It's a pet peave of mine. I should have just let it go without comment. My bad.

Except most of what we do know is that that he wasn't openly shopped until after he requested the trade after acting like a child. The FACT that Cassel was traded to the Chiefs for just a second round pick (oh, yeah, and a Pro Bowl linebacker was included going to the Chiefs) clearly tells us this. It clearly does.

So, by whining and acknowledging the "guessing" you fester the same problem you claim not to be promoting.

Pet peeve or not, acknowledging it and claiming to be so "objective" just fuels this ridiculous fire.

MOtorboat
11-11-2009, 09:41 PM
McDaniels also never told Cutler that he considered him a part of the future of the team. Cutler and his agent asked McDaniels if he was going to do it again. McDaniels wouldn't answer and that was the last straw. If you think it went "McDaniels tried trading Cutler and when Cutler found out he just never talked to anyone again," then you are surely mistaken. Other things happened.

Baiting. Go back to your Bears board.

tumbana
11-11-2009, 09:43 PM
Baiting. Go back to your Bears board.

lol how is that baiting? That is not baiting at all.

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:45 PM
We don't know all the facts, such as he 'only' returned a phone call, so I am not going to argue anything. I just tend to dislike the homer assumptions as to what happened (ex-player did everything wrong, coach/FO did everything right). It's a pet peave of mine. I should have just let it go without comment. My bad.


If the events never happened the way i described them im sure that Cook and company would of come out long by now to deny the way it happened. They have never challenged the events that unfolded so that tells me all i need to know in terms of how it went down. If i didnt want to be traded i would made it known long before the day it actually happened. :lol:

Northman
11-11-2009, 09:48 PM
But there is no evidence that McDaniels "openly shopped" Jay. If he had, don't
we think there would have been more said about it? After all, that would have
produced a lot of witnesses.

Both McDaniels and Xanders said they took the call, listened to the offer, and
declined. Until I see conclusive evidence to the contrary, this is what I will
accept.

-----

I agree with you assessment however it really doesnt matter to me how it went down. The team tried to work it out with Jay being blatantly honest going forward. Jay couldnt get over it and chose to leave. The onus is on him at the end of the day why he isnt here. He got butthurt and couldnt get over it. End of story.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 09:49 PM
McDaniels also never told Cutler that he considered him a part of the future of the team. Cutler and his agent asked McDaniels if he was going to do it again. McDaniels wouldn't answer and that was the last straw. If you think it went "McDaniels tried trading Cutler and when Cutler found out he just never talked to anyone again," then you are surely mistaken. Other things happened.

You don't know any more than anybody else here. Please don't try to look like you do . . .

-----

Tned
11-11-2009, 09:50 PM
North, this stuff has been hashed and rehashed, so I don't feel like going back over the timelines we have discussed so many times. As I said, my bad for posting the earlier reply. I'll just let MO continue to post his 'tiny' snipes at me and not argue something that isn't worth continuing to discuss.

Again, my bad for the earlier reply.

topscribe
11-11-2009, 09:51 PM
I agree with you assessment however it really doesnt matter to me how it went down. The team tried to work it out with Jay being blatantly honest going forward. Jay couldnt get over it and chose to leave. The onus is on him at the end of the day why he isnt here. He got butthurt and couldnt get over it. End of story.

And that's where Jay lost me. I embraced an image of brutal honesty in him, and
then he lied through his teeth about the whole thing.

-----

dogfish
11-11-2009, 11:03 PM
this shit again. . . . really?

TXBRONC
11-11-2009, 11:12 PM
this shit again. . . . really?

Unfortunately. :boxing:

Tned
11-11-2009, 11:13 PM
:behindsofa:

JONtheBRONCO
11-11-2009, 11:15 PM
This is ridiculous. Two losses against two solid franchises and we need to find the next great QB? Orton looked terrible, yeah... But there are so many factors playing into this.. running game, right tackle, (hell, left guard), play calling. Come on GUYS, GALS, we ight.. We'll rebound next week and come back hungry to face a hot Charger team. Keep your heads up, these players can't be all-stars 100% of the time, nor can the coaches. And guess what, these won't be the only L's under the record column, theres gonna be 3-4 more at most.. We'll be where we want to be at the end of the season, the best month to play your greatest football is December, and McDaniels, Orton and the D have my full trust and confidence as they have shown me what our Broncos are capable of this year. We beat some tough teams (NE, DAL, SD), don't forget that because those games weren't flukes.. We have the coach, we have the D, and we have the O... GO BRONCOS!

KCL
11-11-2009, 11:16 PM
Unfortunately. :boxing:

See post #35

TXBRONC
11-11-2009, 11:18 PM
See post #35

I read that earlier.

MOtorboat
11-11-2009, 11:20 PM
This is ridiculous. Two losses against two solid franchises and we need to find the next great QB? Orton looked terrible, yeah... But there are so many factors playing into this.. running game, right tackle, (hell, left guard), play calling. Come on GUYS, GALS, we ight.. We'll rebound next week and come back hungry to face a hot Charger team. Keep your heads up, these players can't be all-stars 100% of the time, nor can the coaches. And guess what, these won't be the only L's under the record column, theres gonna be 3-4 more at most.. We'll be where we want to be at the end of the season, the best month to play your greatest football is December, and McDaniels, Orton and the D have my full trust and confidence as they have shown me what our Broncos are capable of this year. We beat some tough teams (NE, DAL, SD), don't forget that because those games weren't flukes.. We have the coach, we have the D, and we have the O... GO BRONCOS!

Peyton Manning has looked terrible against the Ravens, but I don't see him getting replaced. :noidea:

NameUsedBefore
11-12-2009, 03:13 AM
I agree with you assessment however it really doesnt matter to me how it went down. The team tried to work it out with Jay being blatantly honest going forward. Jay couldnt get over it and chose to leave. The onus is on him at the end of the day why he isnt here. He got butthurt and couldnt get over it. End of story.

False. The onus is on the owner and head coach. Brandon Marshall also demanded to be traded and was not. If we wanted Cutler he'd still be on the team; the owner/coach (obviously) felt the trade they got was preferable.

Elevation inc
11-12-2009, 04:29 AM
its interesting that things like a poor run game and crappy defense used to defend that other qb in chicago are now being used to defend orton.....fans of that other qb got ridiculed for those excuses yet its okay to use them for orton now?????

how and when is throwing 3 ints ever acceptable, ever by any qb including manning and brady...especially when the first one was a crappy ass throw for 6 points the other way.....

its inexcuasbale for moreno to fumble 3 times but its okay kyle threw 3 ints and 2 of them were directly responsible for 14 points????

the backwards logic on this site confuses me......


kyles got issues fellas and it dont just lie in excuses with the interior OL or supposed poor run game.....that shit didnt excuse mistakes that other qb made, so it shouldnt be a excuse for orton either....

kyle is what we have???? fine......great, i fully belive he should and will finish the year out and most likely will lead us to the playoffs, but i just do not by right now he can go into cincy, pitt, or balt in december and win a away playoffgame in decemeber......so becasue of that i am more than willing to look at other avenues in the offseason and constructively point out why i dislike his play right now.....


but i do have to say replacing him right now would just be dumb and make the 2 game slide even worse not because simms isnt a solid Qb, but becasue orton led this team to where they are good and bad, and it should be his team to finish the year. despite poor play the last 2 games he has earned the right to try and get this righted......

that being said if the poor play continues over the next 2 games how can you not start to think about chnaging with san-diego huffing at our backside and the possibility we would be the first team in history again to surrender a 3.5 game lead in the division.....


somethings gotta give, somewhere......

Northman
11-12-2009, 07:16 AM
False. The onus is on the owner and head coach. Brandon Marshall also demanded to be traded and was not. If we wanted Cutler he'd still be on the team; the owner/coach (obviously) felt the trade they got was preferable.

Incorrect. The reason Brandon wasnt traded was because he came in too talk to Bowlen and McDaniels when they wanted him too. Sure, he was still disgruntled for a while but he at least didnt ignore the boss when calls were placed. Bowlen saw the writing on the wall with Jay and pulled the trigger. If Jay really wanted to be a Bronco he wouldnt have asked for a trade. Period.

red98
11-12-2009, 08:10 AM
Incorrect. The reason Brandon wasnt traded was because he came in too talk to Bowlen and McDaniels when they wanted him too. Sure, he was still disgruntled for a while but he at least didnt ignore the boss when calls were placed. Bowlen saw the writing on the wall with Jay and pulled the trigger. If Jay really wanted to be a Bronco he wouldnt have asked for a trade. Period.

Jay was under contract. He had zero leverage.

FACT: If the Broncos wanted Jay he'd still be on the team.

Medford Bronco
11-12-2009, 09:18 AM
I doubt it. I think teams have figured him out just like last season.

What about Jay they teams in the NFC have figured out he is a turnover machine. He has more "talent" than Orton but does not have more brains.

Cutler= Jeff George

tumbana
11-12-2009, 10:05 AM
What about Jay they teams in the NFC have figured out he is a turnover machine. He has more "talent" than Orton but does not have more brains.

Cutler= Jeff George

Doesn't have more brains? Cutler is very smart. And how has the NFC figured him out? He threw 3 TDs Sunday and is going to end up throwing for over 4000 yards and 30 TDs. If you mean all they have to do is face the Bears Oline, then yes, I guess they "figured him out." The Browns were mauling him. Cutler is a beast. If anyone got figured out, it's Orton. Just cover the first 10 yards and they are not going to score!

claymore
11-12-2009, 10:15 AM
Doesn't have more brains? Cutler is very smart. And how has the NFC figured him out? He threw 3 TDs Sunday and is going to end up throwing for over 4000 yards and 30 TDs. If you mean all they have to do is face the Bears Oline, then yes, I guess they "figured him out." The Browns were mauling him. Cutler is a beast. If anyone got figured out, it's Orton. Just cover the first 10 yards and they are not going to score!

I told these guys our O-Line was going to look allot worse when Cutler left and I got laughed at. Now we have guards getting benched, we cant run the ball........ etc....

Dirk
11-12-2009, 11:15 AM
I told these guys our O-Line was going to look allot worse when Cutler left and I got laughed at. Now we have guards getting benched, we cant run the ball........ etc....

That has a small part in it. It was moving from the ZBS that has hurt this "undersized" O-line more than anything.

As the old woman used to say....Where's the Beef??

Ravage!!!
11-12-2009, 02:02 PM
That has a small part in it. It was moving from the ZBS that has hurt this "undersized" O-line more than anything.

As the old woman used to say....Where's the Beef??

I agree. BUT.... Indianapolis' OL is pretty average. Its not above average by any means... but Manning's presence and play HELPS that OL. Teams don't blitz as much and they don't crowd the LoS.

I don't think its a coincidence that our OL went from just giving up 11 sacks all season, to now becoming a liability simply from changing schemes. Its not like our OL had a lot of time playing together last year. Ryan was a rookie, and it was Harris' first year starting. So it wasn't like they had a 'lot' of time knowing the system and working together to become some 'well meshed' unit.

Northman
11-12-2009, 03:08 PM
FACT: If Jay wanted to be a Bronco he'd still be on the team.


Fixed it for ya. Jay had plenty of leverage and was determined to get out of town. No way Bowlen and McD were going to allow him to be distraction all year long. Your kidding yourself into thinking that Jay would just show up and be content in TC. :lol:

Slick
11-12-2009, 03:25 PM
Doesn't have more brains? Cutler is very smart. And how has the NFC figured him out? He threw 3 TDs Sunday and is going to end up throwing for over 4000 yards and 30 TDs. If you mean all they have to do is face the Bears Oline, then yes, I guess they "figured him out." The Browns were mauling him. Cutler is a beast. If anyone got figured out, it's Orton. Just cover the first 10 yards and they are not going to score!

I noticed you left interceptions out of your stat line. How convenient.

red98
11-12-2009, 03:50 PM
Fixed it for ya. Jay had plenty of leverage and was determined to get out of town. No way Bowlen and McD were going to allow him to be distraction all year long. Your kidding yourself into thinking that Jay would just show up and be content in TC. :lol:

Whatever you think Bowlen or Jay would do, the fact remains he had 3yrs left on his contract and could only leave if the Broncos let him.:D

JDL
11-12-2009, 05:22 PM
Welcome to the boards!! :welcome:


What people seem to miss is how a QB . . . any QB . . . performs with time and
a semblance of a running game (first six games) and how he performs without it
(last two).

Even if Orton was at the top of his game Monday (which he wasn't by any
stretch), he still would have struggled. Again, any QB would.


P.S. We would be better off with Elway in his prime, too. But we don't have
Elway in his prime, and we don't have Jay. Just saying . . .

-----
I actually thought Orton looked as accurate as he had all year, when given time, but he made bad decisions on a couple of balls and just is a terrible inaccurate QB when he doesn't have a perfect pocket. That is what he is and we can only protect him so much, but he really struggles to find space in the pocket and keep his eyes up field. He literally seems to panic everytime he pulls the ball down, just gets happy feet, jumping around hoping to find a way out. I don't think that is fixable. He has serious limitations as a QB and all the people who didn't think he did just because of early stats, wasn't really paying attention to his entire career. We can DEFINITELY win games with him, but it really would not be unreasonable to question if this is not the same thing as Brian Griese. Griese folded badly under intense pressure from good D's and his inability to get the ball deep really killed our running attack as teams stacked the line. I notice people questioning how Orton doesn't have a running game, but honestly, he is part of the reason we don't have a running game.

But, we finally get to see what this team is made of over the next two weeks. A game they NEED to win this week and in two weeks a game for the division crown. Can they suck it up? or will they fold like Shanahan's Broncos? Regardless of the outcomes though... we clearly knew (and some let themselves believe maybe it wasn't necessary) but we all knew at the beginning of the year the team was not THAT talented... so we will need to keep improving on that front (though again... the damn rookies need to step up at some point and make more of an impact... more than just Ayers right spot right time return TDs.) We need big runs out of Moreno, we need more pressure out of Ayers, we need A. Smith to NOT be invisible on the field (what does it say about Smith that we felt the need to drop Williams and bring in Law?) Quinn is absolutely invisible. Maybe it is time to start Olsen? At some point though, someone from that massive rookie class on a not-so-deep team needs to step up. It is really discouraging they have not because it doesn't matter how good a coach McDaniels is if he is just going to be awful at drafting players. (and mind you I am not asking for a lot here... like ROY type stuff... I just would like to see anyone of them demonstrate an ability to be a future starter... none of them have.)

weazel
11-12-2009, 06:27 PM
Doesn't have more brains? Cutler is very smart. And how has the NFC figured him out? He threw 3 TDs Sunday and is going to end up throwing for over 4000 yards and 30 TDs. If you mean all they have to do is face the Bears Oline, then yes, I guess they "figured him out." The Browns were mauling him. Cutler is a beast. If anyone got figured out, it's Orton. Just cover the first 10 yards and they are not going to score!

he threw those touchdowns in the last 12 minmutes of the game. It was ablowout and the opposition was playing backups in a prevent D. I could have thrown for 3 touchdowns!

Northman
11-12-2009, 09:36 PM
I told these guys our O-Line was going to look allot worse when Cutler left and I got laughed at. Now we have guards getting benched, we cant run the ball........ etc....

Yea, Cutler doesnt seem to be making Chicago's look all that great. Must be something in the water.

Tned
11-12-2009, 09:43 PM
Yea, Cutler doesnt seem to be making Chicago's look all that great. Must be something in the water.

I'm guessing two seperate factors. Our line is a pretty good line, but when it did break down Cutler's mobility saved some sacks. Orton, doesn't have the same mobility. It's a fact, not a Cutler is better than Orton thing. The same way that Cutler wasn't as mobile as Plummer. Based on this trend, the QB that replaces Orton might be near statue-like in his mobility, but it doesn't mean he will be better or worse than Orton.

Northman
11-12-2009, 09:50 PM
I'm guessing two seperate factors. Our line is a pretty good line, but when it did break down Cutler's mobility saved some sacks. Orton, doesn't have the same mobility. It's a fact, not a Cutler is better than Orton thing. The same way that Cutler wasn't as mobile as Plummer. Based on this trend, the QB that replaces Orton might be near statue-like in his mobility, but it doesn't mean he will be better or worse than Orton.

Nah, Cutler i believe is far more mobile than Jake was. The only difference was that Shanahan had to use Jake's mobility more than Jay's because of Jay's ability to sit in the pocket and pass. But Clay's post eludes to the idea that our Oline sucks because Orton sits behind it. I dont see it. I see us playing against two great defensive teams and them stopping our run game making us one dimensional. Maybe Hamilton just got complacent with his playing and started slacking off but i dont think Jay made our Oline look better. He just had more mobility as you pointed out than Orton. Of course, again all i heard all offseason is that Jay's mobility would be a blessing in Chi-town if the line collapsed. So far, i dont think he's made his Oline look all that great anyway you slice it. Going by Ravage's hilarious theory that Indy's Oline is average i guess you can say Jay isnt an elite talent as Peyton has no problem making plays.

Tned
11-12-2009, 09:53 PM
Nah, Cutler i believe is far more mobile than Jake was. The only difference was that Shanahan had to use Jake's mobility more than Jay's because of Jay's ability to sit in the pocket and pass. But Clay's post eludes to the idea that our Oline sucks because Orton sits behind it. I dont see it. I see us playing against two great defensive teams and them stopping our run game making us one dimensional. Maybe Hamilton just got complacent with his playing and started slacking off but i dont think Jay made our Oline look better. He just had more mobility as you pointed out than Orton. Of course, again all i heard all offseason is that Jay's mobility would be a blessing in Chi-town if the line collapsed. So far, i dont think he's made his Oline look all that great anyway you slice it. Going by Ravage's hilarious theory that Indy's Oline is average i guess you can say Jay isnt an elite talent as Peyton has no problem making plays.

It might be close, but I do think Jake was more mobile, more likely to escape a sure sack. Truth is it is hard to straight up compare.

That said, I agree with the rest of what you said. I think Jay lowered the sack numbers a bit because of his mobility, but he didn't make the line better or worse. The line still couldn't open the hole for the one yard when we HAD to have it.

HORSEPOWER 56
11-12-2009, 10:02 PM
I agree on your second paragraph, although McDaniels addressed that today,
and both he and Orton addressed it last week. McDaniels said in his presser
that Pittsburgh's safeties were playing 30-35 yards deep a lot. And they both
said Baltimore's safeties were playing deep.

McDaniels also said that they did plan to throw it deep a couple times, but it
"wasn't there."

As I mentioned elsewhere, I would have loved to see them pass it on the first
play of the game. That is when the play action would have worked, because
the first play is usually a running play, and it would have been totally
unexpected. And even if it fell incomplete, it would have delivered the
message that the Broncos WILL do it.

IMHO.

-----

If in fact the Safeties were that deep, wouldn't that have opened up the intermediate stuff a little more? You'd have thought that a guy like Scheffler would've had a field day especially seeing as how their LBs blitz a lot. With the safeties playing that deep, there's a) no excuse for not being able to run the ball, and b) no reason to solely base the offense on a 5-7 yard passing game.

Okay, so maybe the deep, deep ball isn't there, but the 15 yard ins, outs, and slants should be there ALL DAY. Throwing down the field doesn't just mean 50 yd bombs all day. The intermediate passing game (10-20 yds) is EXACTLY what we need to get this offense rolling.

topscribe
11-12-2009, 10:17 PM
If in fact the Safeties were that deep, wouldn't that have opened up the intermediate stuff a little more? You'd have thought that a guy like Scheffler would've had a field day especially seeing as how their LBs blitz a lot. With the safeties playing that deep, there's a) no excuse for not being able to run the ball, and b) no reason to solely base the offense on a 5-7 yard passing game.

Okay, so maybe the deep, deep ball isn't there, but the 15 yard ins, outs, and slants should be there ALL DAY. Throwing down the field doesn't just mean 50 yd bombs all day. The intermediate passing game (10-20 yds) is EXACTLY what we need to get this offense rolling.

In another thread, Ravage made the good point that McDaniels was probably
exaggerating as a figure of speech for effect. It is doubtful that the safeties
were all of 30-35 yards deep, but they were deep. If they were 15-20 yards
deep, for instance, they were still very deep, and that would take away the
10-20 yard passing game, especially as good as they are.

Couple that with the intense, relentless pressure, and all the sudden you don't
have much of a passing game . . . I don't care if you have Peyton Manning
back there.

What would have both softened the pass rush and brought the safeties up
closer to the LOS would have been some semblance of a running game. But
that should not have been expected Monday night because the Broncos are
still finding their wheels in the running game, and they were facing the #1
run defense in the league.

Even the Ravens last week were far better than their #7 ranking since they
had been improving week-by-week and seemed to be peaking.

This next week may be "what the doctor ordered" for the Broncos. The
Redskins have a pretty good defense, too, but not near the offense of the
previous two teams, so they should be easier for the defense to get off the
field and allow the offense to work out some kinks.

At least, I hope that is the way it will happen . . .

-----

topscribe
11-12-2009, 10:24 PM
Nah, Cutler i believe is far more mobile than Jake was. The only difference was that Shanahan had to use Jake's mobility more than Jay's because of Jay's ability to sit in the pocket and pass. But Clay's post eludes to the idea that our Oline sucks because Orton sits behind it. I dont see it. I see us playing against two great defensive teams and them stopping our run game making us one dimensional. Maybe Hamilton just got complacent with his playing and started slacking off but i dont think Jay made our Oline look better. He just had more mobility as you pointed out than Orton. Of course, again all i heard all offseason is that Jay's mobility would be a blessing in Chi-town if the line collapsed. So far, i dont think he's made his Oline look all that great anyway you slice it. Going by Ravage's hilarious theory that Indy's Oline is average i guess you can say Jay isnt an elite talent as Peyton has no problem making plays.

I've seen Manning struggle under a heavy rush, just as every other QB has.

Anyway, I believe Jay's mobility was part of the line's success. That, and
Wiegmann's Pro-Bowl level of play on one side and Clady on the other helped
to make up for Hamilton's deficiencies. But this year, we have the combination
of a less mobile (but not statuesque, as some would have you believe) Orton
and Wiegmann's losing battle to Father Time, and all the sudden there's an
open door at LG.

I read just today that DCs to other teams believe the best way to rush the
Broncos is right up the middle. To me, it is easy to see why.

-----

Gimpygod
11-13-2009, 05:42 PM
But there is no evidence that McDaniels "openly shopped" Jay. If he had, don't
we think there would have been more said about it? After all, that would have
produced a lot of witnesses.

Both McDaniels and Xanders said they took the call, listened to the offer, and
declined. Until I see conclusive evidence to the contrary, this is what I will
accept.

-----

I pointed out the evidence many times and it Was simply ignored. Fact: people listen to arguments that support their own opinion no matter how flimsy and completely ignore arguments which contradict positions they hope to be true no matter how concrete.

topscribe
11-13-2009, 06:00 PM
I pointed out the evidence many times and it Was simply ignored. Fact: people listen to arguments that support their own opinion no matter how flimsy and completely ignore arguments which contradict positions they hope to be true no matter how concrete.

I fully agree with your statement about people and ignoring evidence.

I apologize, but I don't remember what evidence you presented. Can you link me
to it, or at least summarize for me? As I implied, I try to go by evidence, not by
assumption . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
11-13-2009, 06:02 PM
Its an old argument. But its really pretty silly (imo) that anyone would actually still believe that he just answered the phone. There would be no need for witnesses, there wasn't anyone called to the stand, there wasn't anyone questioned or asked for them to put their noses in Denver's business. But why would there just suddenly be 4 teams that all call on the same day/time about a 24 year old, second year, pro-bowl QB that is was only in the 4th year of his 7 year contract???

*shrugs* I find the "i just picked up the phone" to be absolutely flimsy, and find it pretty funny that people actually buy that. Not that it changes anyhing. I"m surprised some on here aren't willing to change that stance and just say "yeah, he wanted to trade Cutler."

Dilfer made the most sense when he was talking why he felt McDaniels wanted to trade away Cutler. Had nothing to do with Cutler's talent or lack there of. He was explaining that McDaniels was going into a new team with his system, would literally have to teach his asst coaches HOW to coach/teach the system. Having Cassle would give him someone that would literally be able to coach the offense with him. Dilfer was saying 'of course' he wanted that assurance. Considering how many acquisitions that McDaniels has had that were former Patriots (right down to a long snapper)...why is the idea to trade for Cassel such an odd idea? :confused: Seems to fit RIGHT into his MO.

topscribe
11-13-2009, 06:07 PM
Its an old argument. But its really pretty silly (imo) that anyone would actually still believe that he just answered the phone. There would be no need for witnesses, there wasn't anyone called to the stand, there wasn't anyone questioned or asked for them to put their noses in Denver's business. But why would there just suddenly be 4 teams that all call on the same day/time about a 24 year old, second year, pro-bowl QB that is was only in the 4th year of his 7 year contract???

*shrugs* I find the "i just picked up the phone" to be absolutely flimsy, and find it pretty funny that people actually buy that. Not that it changes anyhing. I"m surprised some on here aren't willing to change that stance and just say "yeah, he wanted to trade Cutler."

Dilfer made the most sense when he was talking why he felt McDaniels wanted to trade away Cutler. Had nothing to do with Cutler's talent or lack there of. He was explaining that McDaniels was going into a new team with his system, would literally have to teach his asst coaches HOW to coach/teach the system. Having Cassle would give him someone that would literally be able to coach the offense with him. Dilfer was saying 'of course' he wanted that assurance. Considering how many acquisitions that McDaniels has had that were former Patriots (right down to a long snapper)...why is the idea to trade for Cassel such an odd idea? :confused: Seems to fit RIGHT into his MO.

As I said, I go by evidence. Logic and speculation only go so far. If only that
were used in courts of law, there would be a whole lot more innocent people
in jail or executed and a whole lot more guilty people going free.

Again, as I mentioned, I will accept their explanations until I see conclusive
evidence to the contrary . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
11-13-2009, 06:13 PM
There is no evidence that makes sense that 4 teams would all call at the same time, other, than someone saying 'I picked up the phone." Thats ok if thats what you want to believe, but that has zero evidence to it. Its not like his mentor ever got caught lying. Its not like no one in the NFL has ever lied, before.

I guess it just come down as to what you consider evidence, or what you've been told. I personally believe there is a lot more evidence pointing against the 'I just answered the phone.' *shrugs*

But.... doesn't matter. I don't care anymore. I just find it funny that people actually believe that line.

topscribe
11-13-2009, 07:21 PM
There is no evidence that makes sense that 4 teams would all call at the same time, other, than someone saying 'I picked up the phone." Thats ok if thats what you want to believe, but that has zero evidence to it. Its not like his mentor ever got caught lying. Its not like no one in the NFL has ever lied, before.

I guess it just come down as to what you consider evidence, or what you've been told. I personally believe there is a lot more evidence pointing against the 'I just answered the phone.' *shrugs*

But.... doesn't matter. I don't care anymore. I just find it funny that people actually believe that line.

What is it I want to believe, Ravage? I said I haven't see any evidence. Was I
not clear with that statement? Let me say it again: I haven't seen any
evidence.

Therefore, I feel I have no choice but to accept what they said.

Geez . . .

-----

Tned
11-13-2009, 07:44 PM
But there is no evidence that McDaniels "openly shopped" Jay. If he had, don't
we think there would have been more said about it? After all, that would have
produced a lot of witnesses.

Both McDaniels and Xanders said they took the call, listened to the offer, and
declined. Until I see conclusive evidence to the contrary, this is what I will
accept.

-----

It would be great if everyone either agree to move on past it or actually rely on what little evidence that has been published, which is not that McDaniels and Xanders picked up the phone and said no.

I have never seen anything where Xanders and McDaniels said they listend to an offer and declined it. I have seen things where they said they were "late" to the party and didn't get a deal done. Here's one excerpt where McDaniels says that "after the deal for cassel didn't happen" other teams called and they weren't interested in getting draft picks for Jay. Those two statements (Cassel deal didn't happen, not interested in draft picks) makes it pretty clear that they were interested in Cassel for Cutler.


McDaniels admitted that the team got involved in trade discussions for Cassel, who instead was dealt to the Kansas City Chiefs. However, he said any perception Cutler felt that the team could still trade him was misleading.

"That's what we have communicated ever since the deal with Cassel didn't happen," McDaniels said. "Other teams have called but we're not interested in getting draft picks for Jay. I never made a statement [Saturday] that 'you can be traded at any time.' They asked a question and I told them it was the time of year when people inquire about your team. Your job, as a head coach and general manager, is to listen and not bypass any opportunity to help your team improve. I think most people [in the NFL] feel the same way. You make smart, educated decisions that are best for your football team."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

Here is another from Peter King, who concidentally the Denver media was pissed at (along with McDaniels) in the early part of the season, because they said McDaniels was far more likely to sit down with national media like King than the local media.


McDaniels is just as adamant that he never even considered trading Cutler until Detroit and Tampa Bay approached him at the NFL combine in late February and asked about acquiring the quarterback. Then on Feb. 26, McDaniels says, one of the teams proposed a three-way trade in which the Broncos would give up Cutler for high draft choices they would then trade for Cassel. The next day McDaniels began exploring a trade for Cassel, but "we were late to the dance," he said; New England already had a deal with Kansas City. As evidence that the Broncos were not close to making the trade, McDaniels says he didn't discuss such a deal with owner Pat Bowlen, as he would have been obligated to do, and Bowlen concurs.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153631/index.htm

topscribe
11-13-2009, 08:17 PM
It would be great if everyone either agree to move on past it or actually rely on what little evidence that has been published, which is not that McDaniels and Xanders picked up the phone and said no.

I have never seen anything where Xanders and McDaniels said they listend to an offer and declined it. I have seen things where they said they were "late" to the party and didn't get a deal done. Here's one excerpt where McDaniels says that "after the deal for cassel didn't happen" other teams called and they weren't interested in getting draft picks for Jay. Those two statements (Cassel deal didn't happen, not interested in draft picks) makes it pretty clear that they were interested in Cassel for Cutler.



Here is another from Peter King, who concidentally the Denver media was pissed at (along with McDaniels) in the early part of the season, because they said McDaniels was far more likely to sit down with national media like King than the local media.

Thank you for that. I never did research it very deeply. What I said was that
I had not seen any evidence: therefore, I was inviting any evidence of such.

That would not include someone saying, "It's silly anyone would believe that,"
which is what I had an issue with. I never said I believed anything, just what
I had to accept pending further developments . . .

-----

Denver Native (Carol)
11-13-2009, 08:53 PM
http://www.fantasysp.com/player/nfl/Jay_Cutler/251260

Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Posted: 258 days 5 hrs 39 mins ago. | Source kffl.com
Player: Jay Cutler rss icon
Jay Cutler

Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports the Tampa Bay Buccaneers jumped in trying to get QB Matt Cassel from the New England Patriots. They then reached out to the Denver Broncos, looking to see if they could acquire QB Jay Cutler from the Broncos for Cassel if they were able to work a trade.

Tned
11-13-2009, 08:55 PM
Thank you for that. I never did research it very deeply. What I said was that
I had not seen any evidence: therefore, I was inviting any evidence of such.

That would not include someone saying, "It's silly anyone would believe that,"
which is what I had an issue with. I never said I believed anything, just what
I had to accept pending further developments . . .

-----

I didn't follow the back and forth between you guys. This isn't just a reply to you, but everyone that keep maintaining a stance that in fact is not supported by the facts.

While on the one hand I am ready to move past this discussion, on the other the "he did nothing more than take a call and say no" statements are becoming more and more prevelant lately, rather than less so.

As I have said many times, we really have no idea what went on, because neither side has said much. However, McDaniels has made it very clear it wasn't simply "we took a phone call and said no".

McDaniels freely admitted that after he was offered high draft picks for Cutler, that HE BEGAN EXPLORING A TRADE FOR CASSEL. He didn't get a call about Cutler and said no, but instead was approached about trading Cutler at the combine, then took a phone call regarding a draft picks for Cutler, then HE EXPLORED a trade for cassel, but says he was late to the party and NE and KC already had deal done for KC.

Why people keep maintaining that McDaniels took a phone call and said no, despite McDaniels freely admitting he pursued a trade for Cassel, I have no clue.

Tned
11-13-2009, 08:56 PM
http://www.fantasysp.com/player/nfl/Jay_Cutler/251260

Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Posted: 258 days 5 hrs 39 mins ago. | Source kffl.com
Player: Jay Cutler rss icon
Jay Cutler

Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports the Tampa Bay Buccaneers jumped in trying to get QB Matt Cassel from the New England Patriots. They then reached out to the Denver Broncos, looking to see if they could acquire QB Jay Cutler from the Broncos for Cassel if they were able to work a trade.

In the coache OWN words:


The next day McDaniels began exploring a trade for Cassel, but "we were late to the dance," he said

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 08:56 PM
If you honestly believe that the Patriots traded Cassel and Vrabel to the Chiefs for a ONE second round pick, and that they turned down the supposed two-first-rounders from Tampa, Cutler to Tampa, Cassel to the Broncos, you are kidding yourself.

But, hey, if that's what you want to believe. If you actually think Bill Belichick is that dumb, be my guest.

Because, if that WERE the case, because CLEARLY (as it did ACTUALLY happen) Jay Cutler was worth two first round picks AND a quarterback.

But you believe what you want to believe. I know coaches lie all the time, and I'm pretty sure McDaniels was playing coy with the media in those two "tell-all" interviews.

Of course, we should just "agree to move on past it." And I'm just "speculating" that Belichick is really that dumb.

claymore
11-13-2009, 08:58 PM
http://pictureisunrelated.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/wtf-pics-fetish-is-poor.jpg

slim
11-13-2009, 08:58 PM
Thanks, now I am going to have nightmares.

claymore
11-13-2009, 08:59 PM
http://s2.buzzfeed.com/static/imagebuzz/web02/2009/3/27/7/horse-fetish-24664-1238153814-47.jpg

slim
11-13-2009, 09:01 PM
Now that is a Bronco we can ALL get behind :baghead:

claymore
11-13-2009, 09:01 PM
Now that is a Bronco we can ALL get behind :baghead:

Nuts going to go Nuts.

slim
11-13-2009, 09:02 PM
Nuts going to go Nuts.

I bet he loses his job over this.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:03 PM
I bet he loses his job over this.

No worries. It's the weekend.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:03 PM
If you honestly believe that the Patriots traded Cassel and Vrabel to the Chiefs for a ONE second round pick, and that they turned down the supposed two-first-rounders from Tampa, Cutler to Tampa, Cassel to the Broncos, you are kidding yourself.

But, hey, if that's what you want to believe. If you actually think Bill Belichick is that dumb, be my guest.

Because, if that WERE the case, because CLEARLY (as it did ACTUALLY happen) Jay Cutler was worth two first round picks AND a quarterback.

But you believe what you want to believe. I know coaches lie all the time, and I'm pretty sure McDaniels was playing coy with the media in those two "tell-all" interviews.

Of course, we should just "agree to move on past it." And I'm just "speculating" that Belichick is really that dumb.

This is the same logic you have used repeatedly. It has never been stated that they turned down two first rounders from Denver for one 2nd round pick from KC. Simply that the Broncos would get high draft choices for cutler and then turn around and trade for Cassel, but in McDaniels OWN WORDS, the Broncos were late to the dance.

So, your stance is that Josh McDaniels is a liar? That he didn't approach NE to trade for Cassel, but was "late to the dance"?

Can you please explain why McDaniels would lie about this? State he tried to trade for Cassel, when in fact he didn't.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:06 PM
This is the same logic you have used repeatedly. It has never been stated that they turned down two first rounders from Denver for one 2nd round pick from KC. Simply that the Broncos would get high draft choices for cutler and then turn around and trade for Cassel, but in McDaniels OWN WORDS, the Broncos were late to the dance.

So, your stance is that Josh McDaniels is a liar? That he didn't approach NE to trade for Cassel, but was "late to the dance"?

Can you please explain why McDaniels would lie about this? State he tried to trade for Cassel, when in fact he didn't.

Let's just move on.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:08 PM
Let's just move on.

You're the one that jumped in with some insults, while I was contributing to the thread. By all means, let's move on.

slim
11-13-2009, 09:08 PM
Lol...

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:11 PM
You're the one that jumped in with some insults, while I was contributing to the thread. By all means, let's move on.

Going to make it personal again, huh?

Which insults? I said, and I quote: If you actually think Bill Belichick is that dumb, be my guest.

Just failing to see how that was insulting. But, if you really are insulted by that, well, then...

TXBRONC
11-13-2009, 09:31 PM
Maybe we should try to get back on topic. :behindsofa:

Disclaimer: I know I'm not perfect either.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:34 PM
Maybe we should try to get back on topic. :behindsofa:

Disclaimer: I know I'm not perfect either.

Good idea.

Back on the recent topic, McDaniels has freely admitted he explored a trade for Cassel, so I guess we can finally dispense with the "he took a call and said no" nonsense.

More important, Orton is our QB and hopefully he has a good game in Washington.

Northman
11-13-2009, 09:38 PM
Good idea.

Back on the recent topic, McDaniels has freely admitted he explored a trade for Cassel, so I guess we can finally dispense with the "he took a call and said no" nonsense.

More important, Orton is our QB and hopefully he has a good game in Washington.


So, he got a call regarding a possible trade with Cassel and explored it. Big deal.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:40 PM
As far as Orton improving, he will improve. Those were two of the best defenses in the league and he will grossly improve from those two performances. He's shown ALREADY that he can, but that has been completely forgotten. His performance against a top tier team in New England is utter proof of this. So the complete overreaction that has appeared over this last game is astounding to me.

TXBRONC
11-13-2009, 09:40 PM
Good idea.

Back on the recent topic, McDaniels has freely admitted he explored a trade for Cassel, so I guess we can finally dispense with the "he took a call and said no" nonsense.

More important, Orton is our QB and hopefully he has a good game in Washington.

I hope he does too, I would like to see him get back into kind groove he was in before the bi-week.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:42 PM
So, he got a call regarding a possible trade with Cassel and explored it. Big deal.

I never said it was a big deal. I was responding to yet another claim that he "took a call and said no".

McDaniels said he got a call about trading Cutler (not Cassel) and that HE then explored trading for Cassel.

He is the head coach, that is not only his right, but his obligation (to do what he thinks is best for the team). I'm just sick of people stating facts that are in conflict to what McDaniels himself has freely stated.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:47 PM
I am mostly concerned with Orton and whether he will improve from these past two weeks. I think he will. Many other people do not.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:49 PM
I am mostly concerned with Orton and whether he will improve from these past two weeks. I think he will. Many other people do not.

If the offensive line gives him a little more time, I think he will be fine. It's hard for a QB to step up and make the throw, when the pressure is coming from the interior of the line.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:51 PM
If the offensive line gives him a little more time, I think he will be fine. It's hard for a QB to step up and make the throw, when the pressure is coming from the interior of the line.

All the talk is about Hamilton. I worry about Wiegmann, he's not a spring chicken, either. The other thing I worry about is who is making the blocking adjustments up front, that's not all on the quarterback.

Hopefully, Hochstein gets it more than Hamilton, but I'm just not sure he will.

TXBRONC
11-13-2009, 09:54 PM
All the talk is about Hamilton. I worry about Wiegmann, he's not a spring chicken, either. The other thing I worry about is who is making the blocking adjustments up front, that's not all on the quarterback.

Hopefully, Hochstein gets it more than Hamilton, but I'm just not sure he will.

The center on most offensive lines is the guy that makes line calls.

Tned
11-13-2009, 09:55 PM
All the talk is about Hamilton. I worry about Wiegmann, he's not a spring chicken, either. The other thing I worry about is who is making the blocking adjustments up front, that's not all on the quarterback.

Hopefully, Hochstein gets it more than Hamilton, but I'm just not sure he will.

It would appear that having Hamilton and Wiegman next to each other was making matters worse. Whether or not Hochstein will be an upgrade, I really don't know. As bad as Hamilton was being beat in the first half of the Baltimore game, I was wondering if we were going to see Hochstein in the second half, which obviously we didn't.

I'll admit to not being an expert when it comes to blocking assignments and stuff, but what I do know is that Orton is constantly stopping the play, pointing at a potential blitzer, but from there, I don't know who's responsibility it is to pick up the rushing defenders.

MOtorboat
11-13-2009, 09:59 PM
The center on most offensive lines is the guy that makes line calls.

Yes, I would assume that it is Wiegmann, and that's what worries me against 3-4 defenses.

Thankfully...don't have to face one this week.

GEM
11-14-2009, 12:22 AM
Cleaned up the thread. Knock off the personal stuff.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-14-2009, 12:27 AM
Who cares about the trade that happened anymore and what we did or didn't do in regards to Cassel. We got rid of the QB with diabetes who couldn't hit the Pacific Ocean with the moon and are 6-2 with a loser under center who just shaved his beard. Things ain't that bad. Tim Hiller is starting for the Denver broncos next yhear.

Northman
11-14-2009, 09:53 AM
Who cares about the trade that happened anymore and what we did or didn't do in regards to Cassel. We got rid of the QB with diabetes who couldn't hit the Pacific Ocean with the moon and are 6-2 with a loser under center who just shaved his beard. Things ain't that bad. Tim Hiller is starting for the Denver broncos next yhear.

Who's Tim Hiller?

Ravage!!!
11-14-2009, 11:21 AM
Who's Tim Hiller?

QB, western michigan

Ravage!!!
11-14-2009, 11:32 AM
I personally would like to see if we can get that kid from Stanford. Not only has he shown that he will be a good QB at a young age..... he's from stanford (Elway, Lynch, McCaffrey) yay :cheer: :smile:

Northman
11-14-2009, 12:01 PM
I personally would like to see if we can get that kid from Stanford. Not only has he shown that he will be a good QB at a young age..... he's from stanford (Elway, Lynch, McCaffrey) yay :cheer: :smile:


I havent really sat down to evaluate (as if my opinion matters anyway lol) the upcoming class of players especially QB's. Once the season is over and the bowl games have been played ill spend some time looking over who i would like to see Denver pick up if at all.

Ravage!!!
11-14-2009, 12:44 PM
I havent really sat down to evaluate (as if my opinion matters anyway lol) the upcoming class of players especially QB's. Once the season is over and the bowl games have been played ill spend some time looking over who i would like to see Denver pick up if at all.

yeah. neither have I really. I'm not much of a college 'watcher' anyway....

I've seen the kid at stanford play once and then have heard several on ESPN radio talk about him. But don't really know much. I know he's too young to be coming out this draft anyway.

I also don't expect our team to use a high pick on a QB this year. I think we have too many holes to fill. Thats why I say the stanford kid. He's a couple years down the road before he even comes out.

Medford Bronco
11-14-2009, 12:45 PM
As far as Orton improving, he will improve. Those were two of the best defenses in the league and he will grossly improve from those two performances. He's shown ALREADY that he can, but that has been completely forgotten. His performance against a top tier team in New England is utter proof of this. So the complete overreaction that has appeared over this last game is astounding to me.

I just hope Denver runs the ball better. That is the key to them winning in almost all games.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-14-2009, 01:07 PM
Tim Hiller is awesome. I think he's thrown for like 2,600 yards - 18 touchdown and around 8 picks this year. He isn't that mobile though at all, and actually has negative rushing yards on the year. He has a great pocket presence though and steps up and makes all the right throws. He's a very cerebral quarterback, much like Orton is. The difference is, Hiller truly does have a strong arm.

He already has his undergraduate degree and is going for his MBA. He's a 4.0 student. Not related to football, but I like that because he's a dedicated and driven individual.