Thread: 2018 Other Games Discussion

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

This happens to be your standard reply when you don't have a good defense for your position.

LMAO

Its only a standard reply when i dont feel like explaining everything over again. Takes to much time and isnt worth it when its not going to change your mind.

Originally Posted by Northman

Its only a standard reply when i dont feel like explaining everything over again. Takes to much time and isnt worth it when its not going to change your mind.

Fair enough. My thought is (and has been) that Keenum is a sufficient "stand in" for now while the team corrects the other problems facing them, and hopefully he "could be" a long-term answer. The Broncos need to address the OL, find anyone that can cover a TE, and upgrade the CB's.

Cousins wouldn't have made a difference this year because our OL is not very good (despite yesterday's performance) and - as EVERYONE has stated on this very forum - the defense is a shell of itself after Talib and Wade left. So, essentially we're the Vikings. Cousins is having a good year, but they're under preforming when everyone has argued they're only a QB away from a championship. We didn't need to take on that contract, and I think/believe the Vikings made a big mistake. Time will tell though.

Originally Posted by Broncoknight30

Do you ever consider the cost of CK as opposed to the cost of the GREAT COUSINS?

The Vikings defense, while not as good as last year, is not doing as bad as you are insinuating. I do know last nights game the Bears offense did not exactly light the Vikings up. Their offense scored 18 points and had 306 total yards.

The Bears defense though......

Cousins would have bankrupted this team for the next 4 or 5 years and while he is good, he is not that good. He is not a Brees or a Rodgers. Those two QBs have a hard enough time getting to a SB without a defense.

Cousins could never do it.

Do I consider the cost of a player? Yeah, and when you sign multiple bland or average players in that stead I think about it more.

The Vikings defense has been below average most of the season. It's been rebounding the past couple weeks a bit, but it was getting blasted for poor play.

You keep making the same basic points over and over and over again. The salary keeps going up. Cousins is the ones who keeps that team in games. Tell me this - how's the average costed QB thing working out for us? Oh, poorly? Well, how's the drafting a QB thing working out for us? Oh, poorly? Elway for all his accomplishments as a GM really struggles to draft a QB, and the team struggles to develop one.

Just take the context of the team into account, too. Please.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Fair enough. My thought is (and has been) that Keenum is a sufficient "stand in" for now while the team corrects the other problems facing them, and hopefully he "could be" a long-term answer. The Broncos need to address the OL, find anyone that can cover a TE, and upgrade the CB's.

Cousins wouldn't have made a difference this year because our OL is not very good (despite yesterday's performance) and - as EVERYONE has stated on this very forum - the defense is a shell of itself after Talib and Wade left. So, essentially we're the Vikings. Cousins is having a good year, but they're under preforming when everyone has argued they're only a QB away from a championship. We didn't need to take on that contract, and I think/believe the Vikings made a big mistake. Time will tell though.

Perhaps, but i do think that Cousins can cover up some of the weaknesses on this team like Manning did. No, i dont mean to compare them as the same kind of player but Cousins does have the ability to mask some of those short comings where Case cant. Sure, Keenum is cheaper and probably the smart move financially at this time but sooner or later Denver will have to fork out money for a better QB. While im sure the Vikings thought ttheir season might go a bit differently this year there are other factors involved with it.

While Cousins can certainly have poor games he also showed last night why you can never count him out and i think once he and the Vikings get more chemistry and fixed some of their own issues i think they will be fine. Cousins may never get a SB or even win one but then ive seen some great QB's not ever win a SB either but doesnt mean they were not worth the money or praise they got as QB's. I do think had you put Cousins on that Vikings team last year that they at the very least are more competitive against the Eagles than they were with Keenum at the helm. The problem between Case and kirk is that when Case makes mistakes with turnovers his chances of bringing his team back goes down a lot. Considering how good the Bears defense is the fact that they even had a fighting chance in the end is a testament to how good Cousins can be when everything falls into place.

Originally Posted by Northman

Perhaps, but i do think that Cousins can cover up some of the weaknesses on this team like Manning did. No, i dont mean to compare them as the same kind of player but Cousins does have the ability to mask some of those short comings where Case cant. Sure, Keenum is cheaper and probably the smart move financially at this time but sooner or later Denver will have to fork out money for a better QB. While im sure the Vikings thought ttheir season might go a bit differently this year there are other factors involved with it.

While Cousins can certainly have poor games he also showed last night why you can never count him out and i think once he and the Vikings get more chemistry and fixed some of their own issues i think they will be fine. Cousins may never get a SB or even win one but then ive seen some great QB's not ever win a SB either but doesnt mean they were not worth the money or praise they got as QB's. I do think had you put Cousins on that Vikings team last year that they at the very least are more competitive against the Eagles than they were with Keenum at the helm. The problem between Case and kirk is that when Case makes mistakes with turnovers his chances of bringing his team back goes down a lot. Considering how good the Bears defense is the fact that they even had a fighting chance in the end is a testament to how good Cousins can be when everything falls into place.

We won a SB with what was arguably Manning's worst season. I'm not sure he masked anything wrong with the Broncos that year. In fact, you could argue he was a big part of the problem that year.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

We won a SB with what was arguably Manning's worst season. I'm not sure he masked anything wrong with the Broncos that year. In fact, you could argue he was a big part of the problem that year.

That was certainly an outlier but then we dont make the SB in 2013 without him. But in 2015 without his leadership im not sure how far we get in the playoffs because i dont believe that Brock would have gotten it done when we needed him to. Manning was in shambles that year but he was still able to do enough with his experience to keep the team focused and that goes a long way. And despite how bad he was in 2015 he still lead his teams in his career to 4 SB appearances. Elway may have been 2-3 in SB's but there is no denying how valuable he was getting the teams there. Sometimes not everything comes together at the right time, sometimes you are simply outmatched by the opponent but history has proven to even have a chance you have to have a franchise QB. Teams like we had in 2015 are a rarity, not the norm.

I think we only win a SB with that defense, an all-time great defense. And we only signed a lot of those players because of Manning. Manning also came in and saved that Chargers game, which we needed for homefield advantage.

That's all I got.

Originally Posted by King87

I think we only win a SB with that defense, an all-time great defense. And we only signed a lot of those players because of Manning. Manning also came in and saved that Chargers game, which we needed for homefield advantage.

That's all I got.

And its a valid point.

I need to take a shit.

Originally Posted by King87

Do I consider the cost of a player? Yeah, and when you sign multiple bland or average players in that stead I think about it more.

The Vikings defense has been below average most of the season. It's been rebounding the past couple weeks a bit, but it was getting blasted for poor play.

You keep making the same basic points over and over and over again. The salary keeps going up. Cousins is the ones who keeps that team in games. Tell me this - how's the average costed QB thing working out for us? Oh, poorly? Well, how's the drafting a QB thing working out for us? Oh, poorly? Elway for all his accomplishments as a GM really struggles to draft a QB, and the team struggles to develop one.

Just take the context of the team into account, too. Please.

Getting a proficient QB is as much luck as it is skill. Drafting a QB in the first round guarantees nothing. Getting the 4th or 5th ranked QB in the draft with the 5th pick over what was considered a sure thing in Chubb would have been very foolish imo.

Many of the thriving teams right now are teams that have been fortunate in drafting a QB and having coaches that create an offense that fits their skillset. One of the most important thinge (with my favorite theme) is they are under rookie contracts. Chiefs, Rams, Bears, Eagles etc are teams with relatively cheap productive QBs. They can go out and find those key pieces as a result of those cheap contracts. We will see when those QBs break those teams banks. The Raiders, for example, committed large dollars to Carr, probably too early. As a result they could not afford him and Mack with those for the long term. Look at them now.

My point that I keep making over and over again is Cousins was going to break a team's bank. We have seen QBs be very productive and not be able to win it without a defense. If Rodgers, Brees, Luck among others could not do it without a defense, Cousins wont. Hell Peyton Manning could not do it either. Even with the most productive offense ever (19th ranked defense that year.)

Btw, as bad as Keenum has been (and he pisses me off), this team has been in virtually every game. The Jets debacle and Ravens debacle being clear exceptions.

This team is bounce here for there from being 6 and 4 or even 7 and 3. Not that that should mean much.

Originally Posted by Broncoknight30

Getting a proficient QB is as much luck as it is skill. Drafting a QB in the first round guarantees nothing. Getting the 4th or 5th ranked QB in the draft with the 5th pick over what was considered a sure thing in Chubb would have been very foolish imo.

Many of the thriving teams right now are teams that have been fortunate in drafting a QB and having coaches that create an offense that fits their skillset. One of the most important thinge (with my favorite theme) is they are under rookie contracts. Chiefs, Rams, Bears, Eagles etc are teams with relatively cheap productive QBs. They can go out and find those key pieces as a result of those cheap contracts. We will see when those QBs break those teams banks. The Raiders, for example, committed large dollars to Carr, probably too early. As a result they could not afford him and Mack with those for the long term. Look at them now.

My point that I keep making over and over again is Cousins was going to break a team's bank. We have seen QBs be very productive and not be able to win it without a defense. If Rodgers, Brees, Luck among others could not do it without a defense, Cousins wont. Hell Peyton Manning could not do it either. Even with the most productive offense ever (19th ranked defense that year.)

Btw, as bad as Keenum has been (and he pisses me off), this team has been in virtually every game. The Jets debacle and Ravens debacle being clear exceptions.

This team is bounce here for there from being 6 and 4 or even 7 and 3. Not that that should mean much.

You have gone from blasting Chubb and saying we should have gone QB to going back. That was AFTER you said that Chubb was the surefire pick. Then you went from saying he was bad to talking about how awesome he was...that approximately all happened in about two threads.

Many of the thriving teams have drafted a QB. Yes. Exactly. Note that this goes in contrast from what you said...which is what I just pointed out.

And my point is that when you sign Cousins you sign him. It's not just for a single season. Think long term - you still have drafts, you still have some cap space.

For the cost of Cousins we would have used the amount of money we spent on CK, Veldheer, nd one or two of the other guys we signed who haven't worked out. When you point to cap space you have to point to it being used well. We all know KC is a good QB. We know we can't draft a QB to save our life. We certainly know we can't develop one right now, either.

And I don't think we're that close. We made it close against the Rams at the end of the game when they were in prevent. We barely beat the Chargers and they committed twenty penalties. TWENTY.

Originally Posted by Broncoknight30

Getting a proficient QB is as much luck as it is skill. Drafting a QB in the first round guarantees nothing. Getting the 4th or 5th ranked QB in the draft with the 5th pick over what was considered a sure thing in Chubb would have been very foolish imo.

Many of the thriving teams right now are teams that have been fortunate in drafting a QB and having coaches that create an offense that fits their skillset. One of the most important thinge (with my favorite theme) is they are under rookie contracts. Chiefs, Rams, Bears, Eagles etc are teams with relatively cheap productive QBs. They can go out and find those key pieces as a result of those cheap contracts. We will see when those QBs break those teams banks. The Raiders, for example, committed large dollars to Carr, probably too early. As a result they could not afford him and Mack with those for the long term. Look at them now.

My point that I keep making over and over again is Cousins was going to break a team's bank. We have seen QBs be very productive and not be able to win it without a defense. If Rodgers, Brees, Luck among others could not do it without a defense, Cousins wont. Hell Peyton Manning could not do it either. Even with the most productive offense ever (19th ranked defense that year.)

Btw, as bad as Keenum has been (and he pisses me off), this team has been in virtually every game. The Jets debacle and Ravens debacle being clear exceptions.

This team is bounce here for there from being 6 and 4 or even 7 and 3. Not that that should mean much.

Mack wasn’t traded for lack of cap space.

Originally Posted by King87

You have gone from blasting Chubb and saying we should have gone QB to going back. That was AFTER you said that Chubb was the surefire pick. Then you went from saying he was bad to talking about how awesome he was...that approximately all happened in about two threads.

Many of the thriving teams have drafted a QB. Yes. Exactly. Note that this goes in contrast from what you said...which is what I just pointed out.

And my point is that when you sign Cousins you sign him. It's not just for a single season. Think long term - you still have drafts, you still have some cap space.

For the cost of Cousins we would have used the amount of money we spent on CK, Veldheer, nd one or two of the other guys we signed who haven't worked out. When you point to cap space you have to point to it being used well. We all know KC is a good QB. We know we can't draft a QB to save our life. We certainly know we can't develop one right now, either.

And I don't think we're that close. We made it close against the Rams at the end of the game when they were in prevent. We barely beat the Chargers and they committed twenty penalties. TWENTY.

I said after the Broncos gave up over 400 yards on the ground that Chubb may not be a 3-4 olb and I had some concern after the first two weeks.

I have been pretty consistent in saying having a a dynamic defense is MORE IMPORTANT than having an over priced QB. Even if that QB was as productive as Rodgers or Brees or Manning. History shows that.

Cousins with his large contract would have been a detriment. He may he solid, but he is NOT an Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. Since those two QBs along with Manning or even Brady have shown they struggled to win it without a defense, how is Cousins going to?

Which, his contract would have made it a lot harder to keep guys like Von, and if I had the choice between those two, I would take Von every time.

Not to mention all of the other areas a team needs if they want to get a championship.

Originally Posted by Broncoknight30

I said after the Broncos gave up over 400 yards on the ground that Chubb may not be a 3-4 olb and I had some concern after the first two weeks.

I have been pretty consistent in saying having a a dynamic defense is MORE IMPORTANT than having an over priced QB. Even if that QB was as productive as Rodgers or Brees or Manning. History shows that.

Cousins with his large contract would have been a detriment. He may he solid, but he is NOT an Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. Since those two QBs along with Manning or even Brady have shown they struggled to win it without a defense, how is Cousins going to?

Which, his contract would have made it a lot harder to keep guys like Von, and if I had the choice between those two, I would take Von every time.

Not to mention all of the other areas a team needs if they want to get a championship.

You really dug into the guy, and it was more than just questioning his prowess as a 3-4 OLB.

You have been consistent...then you walked it back after bemoaning the extent that offense is favored (and maybe rightfully so) only to switch.

Look, no one will fault you for developing an opinion. I actually like it because it shows some nuance.

KC would make the team competitive for many years and we would continue drafting players. He would also help with FA recruitment because players go where they either get paid or win.

To talk of championships without a franchise QB is a waste of time. That's the disconnect.

Originally Posted by Broncoknight30

I said after the Broncos gave up over 400 yards on the ground that Chubb may not be a 3-4 olb and I had some concern after the first two weeks.

I have been pretty consistent in saying having a a dynamic defense is MORE IMPORTANT than having an over priced QB. Even if that QB was as productive as Rodgers or Brees or Manning. History shows that.

Cousins with his large contract would have been a detriment. He may he solid, but he is NOT an Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. Since those two QBs along with Manning or even Brady have shown they struggled to win it without a defense, how is Cousins going to?

Which, his contract would have made it a lot harder to keep guys like Von, and if I had the choice between those two, I would take Von every time.

Not to mention all of the other areas a team needs if they want to get a championship.

History shows several things, not just this singular picture of defenses win.

History shows long-term success, playing in the playoffs nearly every year for 12-15 years starts at the quarterback position. It also shows us that defenses can have one-off Super Bowl wins, like the Ravens, Broncos, Seahawks. A great defense cannot sustainably win for a team over a period of time. A quarterback does that.