PDA

View Full Version : Denver Broncos must prep Peyton Manning's backup


Bronco Rob
07-10-2012, 01:11 AM
NFL Total Access" continues with its "32 teams in 32 days" series. We decided to score some brownie points by writing an accompanying post each night. We'll focus on one goal that each team needs to accomplish before Week 1.

Denver Broncos must plan for worst-case scenario

The Broncos traded away a strong backup in Tim Tebow :stirstir: and currently have a QB depth chart that includes Chicago Bears washout Caleb Hanie, second-round pick Brock Osweiler, and Adam Weber, an undrafted free-agent signing in 2011.Osweiler is being cultivated as Manning's successor's down the line, so don't expect John Fox to rush him into action. That means it will likely fall on Hanie, who proved last season replacing star quarterbacks mid-stream isn't necessarily his thing.

The Colts showed last season what happens when you don't adequately prepare for the loss of your franchise star. Learn from history, Mr. Elway, or be doomed to repeat it.



http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82a70941/article/denver-broncos-must-prep-peyton-mannings-backup?module=HP11_content_stream







http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l69/ricamarykay/160_chicken_little.jpg

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n129/getatmedog/Falling.gif

Doggcow
07-10-2012, 01:44 AM
Seriously. **** off. Show me a team in the NFL that could lose their All-World QB and still compete.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 01:57 AM
Seriously. **** off. Show me a team in the NFL that could lose their All-World QB and still compete.

...the 2008 Patriots? The 1993 49ers? The 2006 Chargers?

ol#7
07-10-2012, 02:23 AM
...the 2008 Patriots? The 1993 49ers? The 2006 Chargers?

The Jeff Hostettler led Giants, the Earl Morral led Dolphins, Doug Williams was Jay Schroeders backup going into the 1987 season, Kurt Warner taking over for the injured Trent Greene and taking AZ to the SB, never mind cases of backups saving a teams season like Frank Reich did for Buffalo against Houston.

TDmvp
07-10-2012, 03:33 AM
Well played with all those examples.

Might I add Bubby Brister in the 1998 season going 4-0 after we started 2-0 and Elway went down ... That season could maybe have been different without a competent back up to fill in for our all world QB for a couple of weeks to let him get back to par. I know we had TD but still a bad run of 4 games could have left us in a funk.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/1998.htm

houghtam
07-10-2012, 06:18 AM
The Jeff Hostettler led Giants, the Earl Morral led Dolphins, Doug Williams was Jay Schroeders backup going into the 1987 season, Kurt Warner taking over for the injured Trent Greene and taking AZ to the SB, never mind cases of backups saving a teams season like Frank Reich did for Buffalo against Houston.

These are all decent examples of backups doing decently when the main QB goes down, but to be fair, the key words to his question were "all-world" and "perform.". So I don't really think Jay Schroeder nor Trent Green fall into the "all-world" category, nor do I think the NYG's 8-8 4th place finish the year after Phil Simms is much of a case of "performing.". Morrall was never really a starte, either.

The point stands, though. My examples were all from teams which made the playoffs the very year after an "all-world" QB missed a year (Brady, Montana, Brees). Suffice it to say that each of these teams were able to do so ONLY with a competent backup who was familiar with the system. Osweiler, Weber and freaking Caleb Hanie scare me much more than Manning's papier mâché neck.

Rabb
07-10-2012, 07:10 AM
What I find amusing is now that we got rid of Tebow and he is in NY he was a strong backup...wasn't he never going to be a QB in the league when he was here?

Jay3
07-10-2012, 07:26 AM
What I find amusing is now that we got rid of Tebow and he is in NY he was a strong backup...wasn't he never going to be a QB in the league when he was here?

I didn't think that, and a lot of people didn't think that. He would have been a good backup, and a "change up."

You can forget trying to have a backup that comes in and plays anything like Peyton Manning. May as well have one that could steal a few wins while Peyton heals, or gives you something off the bench as a wildcat.

But I don't think Tebow would have been better off.

Rabb
07-10-2012, 07:29 AM
I didn't think that, and a lot of people didn't think that. He would have been a good backup, and a "change up."

You can forget trying to have a backup that comes in and plays anything like Peyton Manning. May as well have one that could steal a few wins while Peyton heals, or gives you something off the bench as a wildcat.

But I don't think Tebow would have been better off.

well I am not talking about the fans obviously because it was clear what they wanted, I am talking about the media

Beantown Bronco
07-10-2012, 07:44 AM
The point stands, though. My examples were all from teams which made the playoffs the very year after an "all-world" QB missed a year (Brady, Montana, Brees).

Not exactly. The 2008 Pats didn't make the playoffs under Cassel.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 08:14 AM
Not exactly. The 2008 Pats didn't make the playoffs under Cassel.

You're right...they did go 11-5.

Beantown Bronco
07-10-2012, 08:35 AM
You're right...they did go 11-5.

Especially memorable for me because I was at ground zero for all the crying by the local Pats fans. When I was able to point out that it happened to the Broncos before it happened to them, they quickly shut up about it.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 09:26 AM
Especially memorable for me because I was at ground zero for all the crying by the local Pats fans. When I was able to point out that it happened to the Broncos before it happened to them, they quickly shut up about it.

Yes, I remember remembering what I had forgotten that year, if that makes sense. I thought..."Wait, are they really the first team to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs? LOL" And then I looked it up and went "Oh...oh yeah. No LOL."

chawknz
07-10-2012, 01:18 PM
Plan B? There is no plan B! We're going with PLAN A! :strong:

cmhargrove
07-10-2012, 01:22 PM
Caleb Hanie has Moxie!!!

BroncoMan4ever
07-10-2012, 01:29 PM
...the 2008 Patriots? The 1993 49ers? The 2006 Chargers?

give me a break with the 49ers and Chargers.

Young had starting experience already and was a 1st round pick. Rivers sat on the bench for a few seasons learning behind Brees and was the number 2 overall pick. in their cases both were strong prospects and in Rivers case he was set to take the job.

the Pats were so strong of a team that anyone could have stepped in and gotten the job done. Indy was a mediocre team being elevated by a guy head and shoulders above anyone else at the position

houghtam
07-10-2012, 01:36 PM
give me a break with the 49ers and Chargers.

Young had starting experience already and was a 1st round pick. Rivers sat on the bench for a few seasons learning behind Brees and was the number 2 overall pick. in their cases both were strong prospects and in Rivers case he was set to take the job.

the Pats were so strong of a team that anyone could have stepped in and gotten the job done. Indy was a mediocre team being elevated by a guy head and shoulders above anyone else at the position

Thanks for helping support my point?

If your all-world QB goes down, you're basically screwed, unless you have a solid backup who knows the system.

...for the third time.

enjolras
07-10-2012, 01:41 PM
If there wasn't a Tim Tebow circus, Tebow would be the backup today with Osweiler as the heir-apparent to Manning.

There IS a Tebow circus, however. Having him on the roster costs more than it pays.

errand
07-10-2012, 02:10 PM
didn't the Texans win a playoff game with their 3rd string guy T.J. Yates?

errand
07-10-2012, 02:12 PM
If there wasn't a Tim Tebow circus, Tebow would be the backup today with Osweiler as the heir-apparent to Manning.

There IS a Tebow circus, however. Having him on the roster costs more than it pays.

This....tim would have took the demotion and handled it with class.....his Bieber-esque fans? No way in hell would they have shut their yaps

ZONA
07-10-2012, 05:03 PM
...the 2008 Patriots? The 1993 49ers? The 2006 Chargers?

Don't forget the other Patriots team in which Brady took over for Bledsoe

R-Mac
07-10-2012, 05:32 PM
Kurt Warner: from backup QB to part of The Greatest Show on Turf.

JakeZ01
07-10-2012, 05:43 PM
Seriously. **** off. Show me a team in the NFL that could lose their All-World QB and still compete.

we could...have.

lolcopter
07-10-2012, 05:46 PM
Plan B? There is no plan B! We're going with PLAN A! :strong:

.

Doggcow
07-10-2012, 06:09 PM
Sounds like from what everyone is saying, we need ANOTHER all-world QB (with the Young, Brady, and Warner references) on the bench... I feel like we could sign Brees too and people would be saying "WELL WHAT IF THEY BOTH GO DOWN?!?!?!?!?"

Then we're ****ed. Just like basically any team. Oh well?

houghtam
07-10-2012, 06:24 PM
Sounds like from what everyone is saying, we need ANOTHER all-world QB (with the Young, Brady, and Warner references) on the bench... I feel like we could sign Brees too and people would be saying "WELL WHAT IF THEY BOTH GO DOWN?!?!?!?!?"

Then we're ****ed. Just like basically any team. Oh well?

I can't speak for everyone else, but a lot of the discussion in this thread came as a result of your abrasive and douche-tastic response, and your erroneous insinuation that no NFL team could overcome losing their star QB, when there is, in fact, a pretty solid trail of evidence that with a solid back up who knows the system (fourth time in one thread, new record?), it's not really that big of a deal.

Vegas_Bronco
07-10-2012, 06:31 PM
This all goes back to Jay Cutler somewhere when he wins a superbowl in the next 4 years...sometimes i feel the media is here just to annoy me into reading their spill.

mwill07
07-10-2012, 06:42 PM
I really hate this time of year. Writers have literally no news to report, to they resort to stating the obvious. No **** - the Broncos back-up needs to be ready, and their success hinges on the health of the starting QB. The same could be said for about 20 other teams - the remaining teams don't have a legit starter to begin with, so losing their starter is no biggie.

What happens if Brady goes down? Brees? Rodgers? Is it not equally noteworthy how screwed their teams would be if their starter was injured?

BroncoMan4ever
07-10-2012, 06:46 PM
Thanks for helping support my point?

If your all-world QB goes down, you're basically screwed, unless you have a solid backup who knows the system.

...for the third time.

in the history of the NFL roughly 52 years now. 3 teams have had that ability.

and they can all be given the asterisk treatment.

*when Brees was in SD he wasn't the all world QB he is now. he was seen as a guy who needed to be replaced and then performed once his job was on the line. so he had a number 2 overall pick sitting behind him.*

*in SF, Young wasn't being looked at as the future at the time. he was a veteran backup who performed when given the opportunity(and having that team and coaching staff could make anyone look great) in the case of Cassell he was carried by superior coaching and talent level surrounding him. as evidenced by his play in KC it was not him that made that season work.*

the idea that these teams groomed backups to take over in the off chance their superstar went down is ludicrous. these teams got lucky. and no matter how much you build up a guy, there remains a reason why that guy was a backup in the first place. very rarely teams get lucky though.

BroncoMan4ever
07-10-2012, 07:03 PM
Sounds like from what everyone is saying, we need ANOTHER all-world QB (with the Young, Brady, and Warner references) on the bench... I feel like we could sign Brees too and people would be saying "WELL WHAT IF THEY BOTH GO DOWN?!?!?!?!?"

Then we're ****ed. Just like basically any team. Oh well?

exactly.

in rare cases there is a Warner or Brady waiting in the wings, but typically you have a Caleb Hanie or a Kyle Orton type sitting on the bench. sure every team would love to have that type of guy like Warner as a backup.

but realistically in any decade of football there are usually at best, 5 great QBs playing at the same time and sometimes not even that many; so it just isn't likely or possible to have greatness sitting on the bench waiting for his shot. to prove the point

01-10 - Manning, Brady, Brees, Favre
91-00 - Elway, Marino, Young, Aikman, Montana, Favre, Kelly, Moon(damn the 90s had some great QB's)
81-90 - Elway, Marino, Montana and maybe Fouts, Simms and Theissman
71-80 - Staubach, Tarkenton, Bradshaw(Honorable mention to Griese and the undefeated team)
61-70 - Unitas, Starr, Dawson, Namath?

wanted to put Warner down for the 01-10 decade, but he was inconsistent. he went from backup to superstar for a few seasons, injury then backup and mediocrity for like 5 years and then career resurrection for a few seasons

houghtam
07-10-2012, 07:13 PM
and they can all be given the asterisk treatment...the idea that these teams groomed backups to take over in the off chance their superstar went down is ludicrous. these teams got lucky. and no matter how much you build up a guy, there remains a reason why that guy was a backup in the first place. very rarely teams get lucky though.

Three questions for you:

1) Were. They. Solid. Backups. Who. Knew. The. System?

2) If you're not grooming a backup to take over in the off chance your superstar goes down, then why have a backup?

3) Were you alive when Philip Rivers or Steve Young were drafted?

IHaveALight
07-10-2012, 07:27 PM
Didn't kubes win a playoff game for us one year?

errand
07-10-2012, 10:10 PM
Didn't kubes win a playoff game for us one year?

No...he did however lead us to our only TD and had us on the move again (until Sewell's fumble) in our 10-7 AFCCG loss to Buffalo.

Jay3
07-10-2012, 11:02 PM
Sounds like from what everyone is saying, we need ANOTHER all-world QB (with the Young, Brady, and Warner references) on the bench... I feel like we could sign Brees too and people would be saying "WELL WHAT IF THEY BOTH GO DOWN?!?!?!?!?"

Then we're ****ed. Just like basically any team. Oh well?

Reminds me of all the kerfuffle when Tebow was listed at #2 as a rookie (under the old rules). Tebow drove people so crazy they kept saying "But what if Orton goes down????"

Answer: You could finish out the game with either Tebow or Quinn. "But if Quinn goes in from #3 and gets hurt, then we're screwed that game!!!!"

Lesson: There is such a thing in life as being screwed.

BroncoMan4ever
07-11-2012, 12:38 AM
Three questions for you:

1) Were. They. Solid. Backups. Who. Knew. The. System?

2) If you're not grooming a backup to take over in the off chance your superstar goes down, then why have a backup?

3) Were you alive when Philip Rivers or Steve Young were drafted?

3 Answers for you

1) All backups know the system. that is the job. most backups though, are not capable of executing the system anywhere near the level of the starter, because if they could, they'd be starters instead of backups. the idea of prepping a backup QB is all well and good, but it doesn't matter how much they know if they can't do it. look at Peyton's replacements last year. they knew the offense, they just couldn't execute it. out of the 32 teams right now, there are about 10 teams with a solid situation at QB, meaning they have an experienced NFL starter who is their guy for the foreseeable future. of those 10 their backups and who they are behind on the depth chart; in no particular order

Caleb Hanie - Peyton
Jason Campbell - Cutler
David Carr - Manning
Chris Redman - Ryan
Charlie Whitehurst - Rivers
Shaun Hill - Stafford
Graham Harrell - Rodgers
Kyle Orton - Romo
Brian Hoyer - Brady
Chase Daniel - Brees

of these 10, Orton, Hill, Campbell and Carr have the most starting experience. Of those 4 only Hill has shown an ability to get the job done in recent years. now all these guys know their playbooks. they know the system, and there is maybe 2 guys out of those 10 who could get the job done if their team's starter goes down. knowing the system isn't the only factor, for every bit of dumb luck when a team has a Brady, Warner, or Young riding pine, there are 100 Gus Frerotte's backing up the starter.


2) you can't realistically groom a backup to take over for a starter in the case of injury. with only so many snaps available in practice and preseason, your starter needs as many reps as he can get to build a relationship with the other starters. the backups need to know the playbook and make the most of the few chances they get, and that realistically is not enough to make a difference in how they will perform. if you are splitting the reps enough that a backup has enough to be groomed, means you have 2 QBs and this adage comes into play. If you have 2 QBs, you don't have 1.

3) **** YOU!

ol#7
07-11-2012, 01:15 AM
3 Answers for you

1) All backups know the system. that is the job. most backups though, are not capable of executing the system anywhere near the level of the starter, because if they could, they'd be starters instead of backups. the idea of prepping a backup QB is all well and good, but it doesn't matter how much they know if they can't do it. look at Peyton's replacements last year. they knew the offense, they just couldn't execute it. out of the 32 teams right now, there are about 10 teams with a solid situation at QB, meaning they have an experienced NFL starter who is their guy for the foreseeable future. of those 10 their backups and who they are behind on the depth chart; in no particular order

Caleb Hanie - Peyton
Jason Campbell - Cutler
David Carr - Manning
Chris Redman - Ryan
Charlie Whitehurst - Rivers
Shaun Hill - Stafford
Graham Harrell - Rodgers
Kyle Orton - Romo
Brian Hoyer - Brady
Chase Daniel - Brees

of these 10, Orton, Hill, Campbell and Carr have the most starting experience. Of those 4 only Hill has shown an ability to get the job done in recent years. now all these guys know their playbooks. they know the system, and there is maybe 2 guys out of those 10 who could get the job done if their team's starter goes down. knowing the system isn't the only factor, for every bit of dumb luck when a team has a Brady, Warner, or Young riding pine, there are 100 Gus Frerotte's backing up the starter.


2) you can't realistically groom a backup to take over for a starter in the case of injury. with only so many snaps available in practice and preseason, your starter needs as many reps as he can get to build a relationship with the other starters. the backups need to know the playbook and make the most of the few chances they get, and that realistically is not enough to make a difference in how they will perform. if you are splitting the reps enough that a backup has enough to be groomed, means you have 2 QBs and this adage comes into play. If you have 2 QBs, you don't have 1.

3) **** YOU!

It's about having a COMPETENT backup waiting in the wings. Sometimes those guys show enough they become valuable (see Matt Flynn), Hell, Seattle already hit that jackpot with Matt Hasselbeck once before.

Hostettler won a SB when Simms went out for the year and then became a competent starter in the league, two of the guys on this list, Warner and Brady, no one had ever heard of when they took over for injured guys and became better than the players they replaced.

Someone else made the case that Brister kept that team on track, whereas we missed the playoffs in the year we had to count on the Tommy Maddox/Shawn Moore Combo.

Kubiak was a great backup, and would win when counted on.

To say that you are screwed when your All-World-QB goes down is not true as evidenced by our own experience, as long as there is a COMPETENT backup on the squad. Maybe Osweiler is htat guy, but I am pretty sure Hanie has proven he is not.

Doggcow
07-11-2012, 01:26 AM
I can't speak for everyone else, but a lot of the discussion in this thread came as a result of your abrasive and douche-tastic response, and your erroneous insinuation that no NFL team could overcome losing their star QB, when there is, in fact, a pretty solid trail of evidence that with a solid back up who knows the system (fourth time in one thread, new record?), it's not really that big of a deal.

Before you go all douche-tastic, I said show me a team in the nfl, pretty sure all of those douche-tastic responses were of teams that are from the past.

Show me the team that could be a strong competitor this year with their backup QB?

Doggcow
07-11-2012, 01:29 AM
It's about having a COMPETENT backup waiting in the wings. Sometimes those guys show enough they become valuable (see Matt Flynn), Hell, Seattle already hit that jackpot with Matt Hasselbeck once before.

Hostettler won a SB when Simms went out for the year and then became a competent starter in the league, two of the guys on this list, Warner and Brady, no one had ever heard of when they took over for injured guys and became better than the players they replaced.

Someone else made the case that Brister kept that team on track, whereas we missed the playoffs in the year we had to count on the Tommy Maddox/Shawn Moore Combo.

Kubiak was a great backup, and would win when counted on.

To say that you are screwed when your All-World-QB goes down is not true as evidenced by our own experience, as long as there is a COMPETENT backup on the squad. Maybe Osweiler is htat guy, but I am pretty sure Hanie has proven he is not.

But the other thing, if teams, or the league, knew how good Steve Young or Tom Brady were... They wouldn't have been backups. We could for all intents and purposes say we're set to have Osweiler be the next Tom Brady, given they both have little to no evidence to prove otherwise. You can't know until it happens, and you also can't go around drafting first round QB's all the time either. Something has to give.

Maybe Philip Rivers' backup is a superstar, maybe he's one of the greatest to ever play the game. But who the fk even is their backup? Don't they need help there based on that?

I also think I'm not the only one on the board who is thinking Superbowl or Bust. I seriously doubt NE/NO/GB/NY/SD/DET or anyone else could win the SB without their QB. Thus, they're ****ed, too.

Agamemnon
07-11-2012, 05:10 AM
If Manning goes down we're screwed. Period. The guys backing him up are a bad joke.

DENVERDUI55
07-11-2012, 05:56 AM
It's about having a COMPETENT backup waiting in the wings. Sometimes those guys show enough they become valuable (see Matt Flynn), Hell, Seattle already hit that jackpot with Matt Hasselbeck once before.

Hostettler won a SB when Simms went out for the year and then became a competent starter in the league, two of the guys on this list, Warner and Brady, no one had ever heard of when they took over for injured guys and became better than the players they replaced.

Someone else made the case that Brister kept that team on track, whereas we missed the playoffs in the year we had to count on the Tommy Maddox/Shawn Moore Combo.

Kubiak was a great backup, and would win when counted on.

To say that you are screwed when your All-World-QB goes down is not true as evidenced by our own experience, as long as there is a COMPETENT backup on the squad. Maybe Osweiler is htat guy, but I am pretty sure Hanie has proven he is not.There are very few backups that have come in to win it all. The idea is have a competant guy that can win you some games til your stud comes back. Any team that loses their franchise QB is done these days. Sure a backup may win a playoff game but no team will be a threat to win it all without their starter.

barryr
07-11-2012, 09:20 AM
The Broncos had to trade Tebow when they told him he was the starter going into TC and they were going to do all they could to make sure that wouldn't be the case. Whether you agree with that move or not, bottom line is you don't lie to a player and expect him to shrug it off and trust you in the future. It doesn't work that way and they knew that, so he had to go and I'm sure Tebow welcomed that.

Tebow did not create this "circus" or whatever people want to label it. He helped the team win games and even a playoff game, yet some were not happy that Tebow likes to say a little prayer after games and is against abortion. That is the only reason why people did not like Tebow, their denials about that are weak. The reason is Tebow was a great teammate from what has been reported and never a problem on or off the field with his attitude or behavior, but oh, "I hate him anyway". Whatever.

houghtam
07-11-2012, 10:42 AM
But the other thing, if teams, or the league, knew how good Steve Young or Tom Brady were... They wouldn't have been backups. We could for all intents and purposes say we're set to have Osweiler be the next Tom Brady, given they both have little to no evidence to prove otherwise. You can't know until it happens, and you also can't go around drafting first round QB's all the time either. Something has to give.

Maybe Philip Rivers' backup is a superstar, maybe he's one of the greatest to ever play the game. But who the fk even is their backup? Don't they need help there based on that?

I also think I'm not the only one on the board who is thinking Superbowl or Bust. I seriously doubt NE/NO/GB/NY/SD/DET or anyone else could win the SB without their QB. Thus, they're ****ed, too.

Not true at all. This isn't Madden. The CPU controlled teams don't automatically try to upgrade their position just because someone is rated higher or has higher potential, because there are no CPU controlled teams. Each of those teams has its current starting quarterback, each of those starting quarterbacks have contracts which would affect cap space if they're replaced. Each of those good backups has a team that knows he's good and won't let him out, unless it's for the right price.

The NFL does not happen in a vacuum. There are a lot of instances where teams have solid backups (not even at the quarterback position, mind you) who teams are salivating after because they know the current team isn't going to start him, and he's going to become a free agent soon. Your assumption that backups are backups because they're not better than anyone else in the league who's a starter is completely false.

Also, my reference to you being douche-tastic wasn't to your question about NFL teams, it was to your saying "**** off."

houghtam
07-11-2012, 10:46 AM
There are very few backups that have come in to win it all. The idea is have a competant guy that can win you some games til your stud comes back. Any team that loses their franchise QB is done these days. Sure a backup may win a playoff game but no team will be a threat to win it all without their starter.

This thread isn't about winning it all, though, it's about "competing", as doggcow put it. I would say that a team with a backup QB that won a playoff game fits the definition of "competing" in this instance.

Josh007
07-11-2012, 11:30 AM
So few teams have the a Game Day Tested back up little own a past MVP/Super Bowl caliber guy...That being said Osweiler could be the real deal learning from Peyton (what a gift)!

ward63
07-11-2012, 12:12 PM
From reading Bill Parcells' book and from last years team, the coaching staff has to be able to work to the strength's of the QB they have in order to be successful. Parcells ran a different offense once Simms went down and we ran a different offense once Orton was shown the door. The Giants accommodated to Hostetler and we did with Tebow. Both instances created success with what they had and that's all you can hope for with a back up quarterback. If the back up was as good as the starter, then he'd be getting paid the same and vying for the actual spot. Good teams only have one clear starter (sometimes controversy w/a rookie) and work if something bad was to happen to that starter. Would we want to trade our QB situation with the Dolphins and have 3 QB's who are pretty equal and average at best? I know I wouldn't