Thread: After Not Rushing Drew Lock, the Broncos’ Patience Is Paying Off

Originally Posted by Jaded

Pfft

Lawyers, amirite?

This really is all Bacon and Kings fault. Lawdog too.

Originally Posted by Timmy!

This really is all Bacon and Kings fault. Lawdog too.

Oh there are quite a few other attorneys on this site. MNPats, Cugel, and I believe UA are also attorneys.

I wanna be a lawyer.

Originally Posted by Jaded

I wanna be a lawyer.

You're too good of a human being for that.

Originally Posted by King87

Oh there are quite a few other attorneys on this site. MNPats, Cugel, and I believe UA are also attorneys.

Uh huh. Shift that doubt Mr. Cochran.

Originally Posted by King87

Oh there are quite a few other attorneys on this site. MNPats, Cugel, and I believe UA are also attorneys.

That explains a lot.

Originally Posted by King87

You're too good of a human being for that.

I have not yet begun to defile myself.

I've been quiet on this, but I've finally had enough with the self-flagellation repeated ad nauseam about sitting the kid made him better.

That's bullshit. Kid was ready. The mistake was trading for Joe Flacco and not going all in on the rookie, whoever that may have been. In particular, this one would have been just fine day one. The injury would have put a kink in things, but not $18 million worth of them. Absolutely no need to start Flacco and go through the nonsense of making him "the guy" for six games. The Broncos will have ended up paying him $3 million per start. That's utterly absurd and bad teambuilding.

They could have paid a dude $3 million for the whole season and had a veteran backup.

Originally Posted by Jaded

Which is mitigated by the exact same amount from the rollover from the ‘19 season, had they not altered the deal they’d have the same amount of cap space in ‘20.

My only question is why? They did nothing with the ‘19 cap space.

That's a good question actually. Supposedly they were going to lock up some of their own FAs, but that didn't happen, so there was nothing actually done with the cap savings. They just put it in their own pockets.

Of course, perhaps they would have been buyers at the FA deadline had the record been different, but that was always delusional so your question remains unanswerable.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I've been quiet on this, but I've finally had enough with the self-flagellation repeated ad nauseam about sitting the kid made him better.

That's bullshit. Kid was ready. The mistake was trading for Joe Flacco and not going all in on the rookie, whoever that may have been. In particular, this one would have been just fine day one. The injury would have put a kink in things, but not $18 million worth of them. Absolutely no need to start Flacco and go through the nonsense of making him "the guy" for six games. The Broncos will have ended up paying him $3 million per start. That's utterly absurd and bad teambuilding.

They could have paid a dude $3 million for the whole season and had a veteran backup.

Yes, perfectly sums it up!

And to add insult to injury they were actually trying to keep Brandon Allen as the starter. They were talking about what a savy veteran he was and how impressed Fangio was with him. They said a lot better things about Allen than they ever have about Lock until after the Texans game.

Today Lock sucked, but who cares? We don't expect him to go into Arrowhead in a blizzard and throw up 34 points. He has a chance to bounce back against the woeful Lions and reeling Raiders.

We got lucky that Flacco got hurt.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I've been quiet on this, but I've finally had enough with the self-flagellation repeated ad nauseam about sitting the kid made him better.

That's bullshit. Kid was ready. The mistake was trading for Joe Flacco and not going all in on the rookie, whoever that may have been. In particular, this one would have been just fine day one. The injury would have put a kink in things, but not $18 million worth of them. Absolutely no need to start Flacco and go through the nonsense of making him "the guy" for six games. The Broncos will have ended up paying him $3 million per start. That's utterly absurd and bad teambuilding.

They could have paid a dude $3 million for the whole season and had a veteran backup.

I want to agree, but Cugel agrees. Fed flag man.

Originally Posted by Timmy!

I want to agree, but Cugel agrees. Fed flag man.

I’m not even sure I agree with my own opinion now. I’m so confused.

Originally Posted by Timmy!

I want to agree, but Cugel agrees. Fed flag man.

It's simple. Most people knew that Flacco would suck. Ergo, getting Flacco was a bad move. So in our position we should have done what? Ran out a rookie QB. We were 0-4 with Flacco, what else could have happened with Lock, maybe we actually...win a game in the first quarter of the...season?

It's time to stop having sacred cows and call a spade a spade. We got lucky that Flacco got hurt. we were literally willing to redshirt the best QB we had on the roster, because our GM wanted it that way. It was idiotic.

Originally Posted by King87

It's simple. Most people knew that Flacco would suck. Ergo, getting Flacco was a bad move. So in our position we should have done what? Ran out a rookie QB. We were 0-4 with Flacco, what else could have happened with Lock, maybe we actually...win a game in the first quarter of the...season?

It's time to stop having sacred cows and call a spade a spade. We got lucky that Flacco got hurt. we were literally willing to redshirt the best QB we had on the roster, because our GM wanted it that way. It was idiotic.

That's fair. We also may be lucky our best QB was on IR because he wasn't ready. Lock, himself, has said things that would agree with this.

On the flip side perhaps, as a franchise, the timeline worked out exactly as it did, as it seems pretty damn optimal so far.