Could we be heading for a QB controversy? [Archive] - The Orange Mane

View Full Version : Could we be heading for a QB controversy?

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 03:29 PM

This thread is NOT about whether Jake Plummer is any good, or whether he's the guy we need at QB. I've already gone on record stating I think he's better than given credit for but the passing game yesterday was non-existent. I did not get to see this game so I can't comment on how much of this was Jake's fault or other things. But here's the question:

We are winning now so it hasn't come up yet, but we are not going to succeed against over the long run with this schedule and this kind of passing attack, so if this team starts losing some games, will we have a QB controversy with people calling for BVP?

Rock Chalk

10-10-2005, 03:30 PM

Only on this message board, courtesy of Taco John.

24champ

10-10-2005, 03:31 PM

Here we go......

Ratboy

10-10-2005, 03:34 PM

Next year we will have one, not now though.

DarkHorse30

10-10-2005, 03:39 PM

Absolutely not. Jake has won games for us...and is learning, in baby steps, how to NOT jeopardize wins turning the ball over with foolish throws. Denver has about twice the firepower on offense over last year, because WRs and TEs are learning "the system". Also, the Bronco playbook added more little dumpoffs this year that have turned into more chain-moving. The problem has been Denver has faced more good defenses to start the season than I can remember.....so any progress has been slooooowwwww.....but steady.

If Denver coaches paid any attention to the fans complaints last year, they didn't show it....awarding Jake his 6M payoff in March. If there was a question as to whether Jake was capable, they would have never paid a dime....especially when trying to reconcile the salcap this year and last.

BVP may be in the works for 2-3 years down the road, but I could never see Denver going for that option unless injury forced them to.

Tredici

10-10-2005, 03:41 PM

BVP is just a bigger Jake.

rbackfactory80

10-10-2005, 03:43 PM

Calling for BVP is not the answer and for those that think it is I would encourage you to lay of the hard stuff.

Ray Finkle

10-10-2005, 03:44 PM

Yeah let's get rid of QB that has not been stellar but played mistake free.....If people are calling for BVP we better be up by 50 or 4-12 with half the starters out for the year....

broncohaven

10-10-2005, 03:49 PM

Jake is finally starting to play the way the Broncos need him to, ie. taking care of the ball and managing a game, and no sooner does he start down the right path than the fruits come out of the woodwork.

What we need from Jake (or any quaterback in there) is not to turn the ball over, and to come through with the occassional scramble. Jake has done that perfectly.

Garcia Bronco

10-10-2005, 03:50 PM

re: Could we be heading for a QB controversy?

Why? Who do you think we're going to draft?

24champ

10-10-2005, 03:51 PM

FADERPROOF

10-10-2005, 03:51 PM

Jason in LA

10-10-2005, 03:54 PM

Not at this point. The passing game wasn't there yesterday. But that's one game against a very good defense. Jake looked very good the past two weeks before they stopped passing in the 2nd half of both games when they had the lead. Against the Chargers he was a part of the comeback.

I don't see any reason to panic about him.

Needa Pass Rush

10-10-2005, 03:54 PM

Shanahan makes a good point in his Monday presser that I brought up yesterday. Brunell threw a very good wet ball yesterday.... Jake did not. You will never know unless you replay the game in dry condition how much the water played a factor. However, we had at least three plays deep that Jake could not deliver the ball. His normal questionable downfield throws were made that much worse by being a crappy wet ball QB.

At least he didn't fumble the hand-offs to the RB's though. ;D

Tredici

10-10-2005, 03:58 PM

How about we think about this once/if we actually start losing these games?

I might suggest the same thought regarding the kicker....

:~ohyah!:

FADERPROOF

10-10-2005, 03:59 PM

I might suggest the same thought regarding the kicker....

:~ohyah!:

Kickers aren't even football players :)

FADERPROOF

10-10-2005, 04:00 PM

And besides, I didnt ask for a kicker controversy, I just asked that we criticize him like we do every other player.

Bronco9798

10-10-2005, 04:08 PM

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:10 PM

Jake is finally starting to play the way the Broncos need him to, ie. taking care of the ball and managing a game, and no sooner does he start down the right path than the fruits come out of the woodwork.
I'm not suggesting we have a QB controversy, let alone that BVP is the answer. I'm asking IF we start losing some of these games and there is no improvement in the passing game...will we have fans asking for BVP?
What we need from Jake (or any quaterback in there) is not to turn the ball over, and to come through with the occassional scramble. Jake has done that perfectly.
Let's not kid ourelves. At some point playing the Eagles, Giants, Pats, SD again...etc...we will need more than a one dimensional offense that doesn't get our receivers involved while avoiding turnovers.

elsid13

10-10-2005, 04:10 PM

We when out the slide last year, did Shanahan stick with Plummer, there is you're answer.

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:12 PM

I just think people on this board are trying to stir up a controversy that isnt there.(sarcastically) We have Lelie needs to be traded thread, David Carr is god threads, and now this stupid thread.......I swear it seems like some people are not happy sitting 4-1 right now because people complained last year that he is throwing too many picks and this year it seems to be he isnt throwing enough touchdowns....
I've already defended Plummer in here and said he's under appreciated. But the Denver fan base in general doesn't trust him. The question is reasonable to ask if we notch a few losses and we're running a one-dimensional offense.

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:13 PM

We when out the slide last year, did Shanahan stick with Plummer, there is you're answer.
I know Shanny will stick with Plummer. The question is will the FANS start calling for BVP?

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:14 PM

::) ::) :puff:
So that's a no?

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:16 PM

24champ

10-10-2005, 04:22 PM

not suggesting we have a QB controversy, let alone that BVP is the answer.

then what are you suggesting by starting this stupid thread???

I'm asking IF we start losing some of these games and there is no improvement in the passing game...will we have fans asking for BVP?

Will you call for BVP? If so name state why BVP is the better option?

Let's not kid ourelves. At some point playing the Eagles, Giants, Pats, SD again...etc...we will need more than a one dimensional offense that doesn't get our receivers involved while avoiding turnovers

who cares? Our defense kicks ass and looks like we can win with a marginal offense. Hell we won without Champ for the second straight week, I dont see anyone talking about that! We are 4-1 and why we are predicting qb controversies in the future baffles me.

elsid13

10-10-2005, 04:22 PM

I know Shanny will stick with Plummer. The question is will the FANS start calling for BVP?

the only opinion that counts is Shanny, and he doesn't care about the fans, just winning. No offense but this is worthless thread.... especial without pictures. ;D Want to talk about this off season ok, but right now all that matters are wins. Plus if Plummer has good game against the Pat over half the board will be over his jock.

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:27 PM

the only opinion that counts is Shanny, and he doesn't care about the fans, just winning. No offense but this is worthless thread.... especial without pictures. ;D Want to talk about this off season ok, but right now all that matters are wins. Plus if Plummer has good game against the Pat over half the board will be over his jock.
QB controversies in other cities among fans sometimes spill over into the locker room as well. They're never healthy for the team regardless of what the coach does IMHO.

BroncoInferno

10-10-2005, 04:29 PM

Any fan who starts calling for BVP with the idea that he will improve the team is absolutely brain dead. I give the Denver fans more credit than that.

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:32 PM

then what are you suggesting by starting this stupid thread???
Nothiing. I'm merely asking if you think the Denver fan base will be pitting BVP vs Plummer if Jake's numbers continue to be down and we lose a few without a passing game.
Will you call for BVP? If so name state why BVP is the better option?
BVP is not the better option IMO. Neither did I indicate I was calling for him. I'm not.
who cares? Our defense kicks ass and looks like we can win with a marginal offense. Hell we won without Champ for the second straight week, I dont see anyone talking about that! We are 4-1 and why we are predicting qb controversies in the future baffles me.
Right now nobody cares. But winning against Washington's offense at home is not the same as beating some of these other offenses we will face. At some point we're going to need a legitimate passing game to win some of these future games because without it I don't think we'll be beating these teams. The question is whether the Denver fan base may start asking for BVP if we lose some of these games without a balanced offense.

Blart

10-10-2005, 04:40 PM

24champ

10-10-2005, 04:44 PM

Nothiing. I'm merely asking if you think the Denver fan base will be pitting BVP vs Plummer if Jake's numbers continue to be down and we lose a few without a passing game.

NO

BVP is not the better option IMO. Neither did I indicate I was calling for him. I'm not

Wow, so basically if your not calling for him and you dont think he is the better QB what made you start this thread. Need i remind you that philly isnt calling for Mcnabbs head are they? 136 yards and they lost yet here we are discussing a future qb controversy for crying out loud!!!!

Right now nobody cares. But winning against Washington's offense at home is not the same as beating some of these other offenses we will face. At some point we're going to need a legitimate passing game to win some of these future games because without it I don't think we'll be beating these teams. The question is whether the Denver fan base may start asking for BVP if we lose some of these games without a balanced offense

What happens if plummer throws 400 yards and 3 TDs and no interceptions and we lose, would you be happy then?

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 04:55 PM

Wow, so basically if your not calling for him and you dont think he is the better QB what made you start this thread.
I don't have to hold the opinion that BVP should start in order to ask if a QB controversy could start. My personal view has nothing to do with the question.
Need i remind you that philly isnt calling for Mcnabbs head are they? 136 yards and they lost yet here we are discussing a future qb controversy for crying out loud!!!!
Going to Superbowls tends to make fans happy with their QB's. Poor analogy.
What happens if plummer throws 400 yards and 3 TDs and no interceptions and we lose, would you be happy then?
Why are you assuming I want Plummer out? I went to great lengths on another thread to show why I thought he was better than people think.

Vegas_Bronco

10-10-2005, 05:11 PM

He (Jake) was as happy as anyone that the defense held at the end.

"We'd been standing there a long time," Plummer said. "It would have been hard to get back out there as an offense and get back ready for overtime."

Jake is much better than anything we could have under Shanny's tight budget! Oh, and yes, I do think we will have a QB controversy just like our RB and WR and TE and DL controversies.

Drek

10-10-2005, 05:31 PM

QB Controversy? From BVP? He'll be lucky to EVER start a game, let alone push Jake for a job this year. I don't like Jake at all, but BVP scares me as a backup, let alone as a starter.

rbackfactory80

10-10-2005, 05:33 PM

Maybe he was calling for our #3 Rod Smith.

DrFate

10-10-2005, 05:48 PM

You can't have a controversy with only one viable QB on the roster.

Hercules Rockefeller

10-10-2005, 05:50 PM

If BVP's the answer, I don't want to know the question

elsid13

10-10-2005, 05:53 PM

If BVP's the answer, I don't want to know the question

Can I take drunk back-up QBs for 1000, Alex?

baja

10-10-2005, 05:56 PM

The way I see Plummer this year is with all the "coaching " he is way over thinking his game, he is hesitant and over caseous.

Seems to me they got him scared to make a play

Vegas_Bronco

10-10-2005, 05:58 PM

Can I take drunk back-up QBs for 1000, Alex?

What is it with Denver's QBs and the beer? Griese was pulled over for DUI's and tripped over his damn dog, fell on TD's driveway. Jake hits the bar and was sent to court for feeling up some bargirl in AZ. Van Pelt just looks like a boozer and sure enough found his true nature just a few months ago AT A COLLEGE GAME. Sounds like a problem.

Does Shanny drink like a sailor? Do these boys need intervention? What the hell is this all about? :alky: :alky: :alky: Alec, are you there?

TheDave

10-10-2005, 06:02 PM

errand

10-10-2005, 06:09 PM

And besides, I didnt ask for a kicker controversy, I just asked that we criticize him like we do every other player.

Let me ask you something there FADERPROOF...

What other player has the pressure of practically every time they see the field it means we either score or don't score on the one play he's in for?

DBroncos4life

10-10-2005, 06:43 PM

Shouldn't this thread be about MA and Bell???

Rascal

10-10-2005, 06:47 PM

Only on this message board, courtesy of Taco John.

Yeap.

Jake will be our starter till we draft a stud out of the draft. Get used to it.

Rascal

10-10-2005, 06:48 PM

Let me ask you something there FADERPROOF...

What other player has the pressure of practically every time they see the field it means we either score or don't score on the one play he's in for?

The holder and snapper.

Taco John

10-10-2005, 07:07 PM

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 08:00 PM

Just like during the Griese days, there won't be a QB controversey. There will be unhappiness at the QB position, but since we don't have any viable quarterbacks who can step in and do a better job, there won't be a controversey.
You may be right. On the other hand, fans frequently start calling for the backup irregardless of whether he is viable or not. A couple of other things could enter into this equation. First, nobody expected BVP to even crack this roster, let alone be the #2, so he's already come farther than expected and his rise had nothing to do with fan perception so that probably gives rise for some to think he can keep climbing the ladder. Second, even when Griese was stinking it up, I don't recall this offense being anywhere near this conservative.

When Lelie who led the NFL in yards per catch last year gets 1 for 5 and at nearly 1/3 of the way through the season he's got 11 catches and 113 yards...Darius Watts is on pace to finish the SEASON with 6 catches and 74 yards...you get the point. Something has to change with this passing game. If it doesn't, I have to wonder if people will be calling for BVP. Personally I think Shanny is holding the leash on Jake and that's why we're seeing this. The 4-1 record is nice but we can't do this the entire year and expect to win this division or make the playoffs.

SportinOne

10-10-2005, 08:04 PM

Wait until we trade our two first round picks for that guy from USC.. then start the controversy.

Taco John

10-10-2005, 08:19 PM

You may be right. On the other hand, fans frequently start calling for the backup irregardless of whether he is viable or not. A couple of other things could enter into this equation. First, nobody expected BVP to even crack this roster, let alone be the #2, so he's already come farther than expected and his rise had nothing to do with fan perception so that probably gives rise for some to think he can keep climbing the ladder. Second, even when Griese was stinking it up, I don't recall this offense being anywhere near this conservative.

When Lelie who led the NFL in yards per catch last year gets 1 for 5 and at nearly 1/3 of the way through the season he's got 11 catches and 113 yards...Darius Watts is on pace to finish the SEASON with 6 catches and 74 yards...you get the point. Something has to change with this passing game. If it doesn't, I have to wonder if people will be calling for BVP. Personally I think Shanny is holding the leash on Jake and that's why we're seeing this. The 4-1 record is nice but we can't do this the entire year and expect to win this division or make the playoffs.

Be careful criticizing Plummer. If we lose a game, people will start asking if you're happy that we lost. Just for the fact that you are raising a red flag about him will be held against you. They'll say that you'd rather see the Broncos lose and be right than watch Jake succeed in our offense. Nobody has tried any of that with me yet, but I know it's coming, despite how ridiculous that notion is.

That said, I'm personally of the opinion that Brad didn't have to climb very far up to be the number two guy. I was pretty unimpressed with what I saw in the preseason. I think the only way he sees the field is through an injury scenario, and nobody wants that. At least I dont.

Whatever happens, win or lose, Jake is the guy.

In Shanahan I trust.

ScottXray

10-10-2005, 08:22 PM

QB Controversy? From BVP? He'll be lucky to EVER start a game, let alone push Jake for a job this year. I don't like Jake at all, but BVP scares me as a backup, let alone as a starter.

BVP doesn't scare me as a backup as much as Danny Kanell did. At least he is much like Jake and CAN run. Too bad we lost Mauck.

Jake is playing within the system and not turning the ball over. That's good.
He is also NOT accurate and that is bad. It will inevitably lead to a turnover ,sooner or later, either an outright pick, or off a receivers hands.

As long as he keeps winning there will be no controversy. Lose a few games ,or worse, lose a playoff game because of those and the "fans" will call for his head. Shanny will play him as long as he can, and there isn't a 'better' option.

I think we WILL draft a QB this offseason, because right now were rolling the dice every game, and playing a controlled but limited game. Not necessarily first round , but 2nd or third at least. A quarter of the play book is missing because of Jakes inaccuracy, and the limits he has in check offs etc.. Sooner or later we will come up snake eyes. Shanny knows that as well as anyone. With the draft choices we have this year he will make a move. Just not during the season. :devil:

Ballhawk

10-10-2005, 08:27 PM

Q: Which QB has the 2nd longest winning streak in the NFL?

A: Jake Plummer

24champ

10-10-2005, 09:02 PM

Q: Which QB has the 2nd longest winning streak in the NFL?

A: Jake Plummer

Q: How many games has BVP started in the NFL for a regular season game?

A: ZERO!

Dudeskey

10-10-2005, 09:07 PM

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/sucks7.jpg

baja

10-10-2005, 09:13 PM

Who picked up Mauck?

24champ

10-10-2005, 09:15 PM

Who picked up Mauck?
TITANS

footstepsfrom#27

10-10-2005, 09:26 PM

For all of you who can't seem to understand the fact that I'm not offering an opinion, only asking a question... 1) carefully read the initial post in this thread, and 2) read what I wrote below just a couple of days ago:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=786714&highlight=marino#post786714

I've posted some of this information on the extremeskins board with predictably bizarre response, but if you want to view it: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/...ighlight=marino

The thread seems to have been removed from their board or salted away where you can't find it so I had to do a search but in a nutshell here's the gist of this:

Plummer is obviously running a more conservative offense so far this year than last, but part of that has to do with the nature of the teams we've played so far. Kansas City and San Diego both have explosive offensives and a game plan built on the run and controlling the time of possession was the smart thing to do. Miami is an aberation, I think anyone who is objective can see the obvious problems caused by the combination of our defense getting worn down in the heat and loosing MA plus the top 3 corners, so throw that out as something that's not generally indicative of how they want to manage a game. Jacksonville supposedly had the tough defense and so I think Shanny wanted to keep it close and make sure we didn't give them anything they didn't earn.

The constant accusation against Plummer is that he's still a turnover machine who makes bad decisions but I ask you all this question; If we didn't have Jake's Arizona career as a backdrop for a predisposed opinion about him before he got to Denver, would we still see him as more prone to bad decisions and stupid mistakes or turnovers than othr QB's?

I submit we would not. The reason we would not is because Jake Plummer has essentially had not one, but two careers; during the one in Denver he has been a markedly less mistake prone quarterback than he was in Arizona. On the surface of it that seems like a hard statement to justify, especially when we all remember the famous left handed pass, and a few other glaring mistakes as well as the 20 INT's he threw last year. I acknowledge this but I think it's obvious, and entirely reasonable to expect old habbits die hard. However, I remind you all that every QB in the league makes some obvious mistakes at times, and once again, I'm asking the question, "Would you think Plummer is MORE mistake prone and tends to turn the ball over more than other quarterbacks if you didn't have his Arizona career to look at also?

It's been pointed out on here that about a half dozen of his INT's last year came after they hit Bronco receivers in the hands, including all 4 in the San Diego game. That obviously inflated his INT numbers in '04, but forget that for a moment. How does Jake stack up in terms of his intereceptions in Denver vs his time in Arizona? Here is the comparison:

Arizona: 2,754 pass attempts/114 INT's= 1 INT per 24.1 attempts
Denver: 952 pass attempts/30 INT's= 1 INT per 31.7 attempts

That's a huge difference. How does Jake's percentage of interceptions to attempts IN DENVER compare to other NFL quarterbacks over the course of their careers? Check it out:

Jake Plummer(Denver): 952 pass attempts/30 INT's= 1 INT per 31.7 attempts
Dan Marino: 8,358 attempts/252 INT's= 1 INT per 33.1 attempts
John Elway: 7,250 attempts/226 INT's= 1 INT per 32.07 attempts
Peyton Manning: 3,994 attempts/122 INT's= 1 INT per 32.7 attempts
Brett Favre: 7,162 attempts/234 INT's= 1 INT per 30.7 attempts
Troy Aikman: 4,715 attempts/141 INT's= 1 INT per 33.4 attempts

As you can see, the difference between Plummer's percentage of INT's to attempts is very comparable during his time in Denver with these other 5 HOF caliber quarterbacks. I am not suggesting Plummer is a HOF quarterback, only that during his Denver career (which is all I really care about) his tendency to throw interceptions is not something that deserves the constant criticism he's gotten since those numbers are very much in line with what some of the greats have also done.

Throw in the fact that Jake has a 70% win percentage in Denver and 26 4th quarter comebacks for ties or wins, which puts him on track to approach Elway and Marino by the end of his career in that department and it's obvious that this guy is the most under appreciated/over criticized QB in the NFL right now. People want to continue to judge Plummer on his what he did in Arizona, while forgetting to look at the fact he's made serious strides towards getting better and eliiminating his mistakes in Denver. I've been on record in this forum for suggesting Jake may not be the answer we need to win a Superbowl, and that we should draft a young QB, but while I still think that's a smart idea, I'm also willing to give credit where credit is due, and Plummer has not been the turnover machine and field general failure in his Bronco career with decisions that people think he's been. Jake suffers by comparison to a lot of other QB's...he doesn't have Marino or Aikman's ability to thread the needle with pinpoint passes...doesn't have Elway's jaw dropping athletic ability or rocket launcher arm...doesn't scramble quite as good as Steve Young...doesn't have the pretty boy look that lets Marino do TV commercials...etc...but Jake is a leader and a great competitor...basically he's a lunch pail blue collar guy whose just a winner if he's given the right situation and set of circumstances in which to play.

He might have that now.

Now tell me why you think I'm calling for BVP to unseat Plummer.

Crushaholic

10-10-2005, 10:34 PM

Meck77

10-10-2005, 10:43 PM

The guy next to me wanted to stir up some **** and yell for BVP. I turned and told him that wasn't funny. Plummer has been managing the game very well since that Miami game. He knows when to throw it away and when to take a sack so as to avoid a turnover. We are 4-1. There's no reason to change QBs at this time...

Kinda sounds like the old bag that was on your right next to me that I tangled with....lol

Jake readily admitted he has room for improvement on a clip I saw. I've been critical of him like alot of you. Bottom line is we are winning. You can't have a QB controversy when we keep winning. Jake also said he understands and accepts the fact that the Broncos fans will not accept poor performances. Infact I think he even said he welcomes the challenge and the pressure. His head is screwed on right I'll give him that.

Go Broncos!

Crushaholic

10-10-2005, 10:55 PM

Kinda sounds like the old bag that was on your right next to me that I tangled with....lol

No...he was sitting to my left with the orange bullhorn.

Odysseus

10-10-2005, 11:04 PM

At the chargers game there was a big group chanting "BRAD LEE, BRAD LEE, BRAD LEE!"

Combine that with everyone boo'ing at half-time, and I was happy I didn't have season tickets.

Did Invesco turn everyone into a-holes or what?

Yes it did. Broncos fans used to loyal and now they are pretty much sellouts. Oh look at the sparkly? Oooooh! AaaaaH! It's pathetic.

Personally I think bringing in another QB to challenge BVP is fine with me. If we are going to challenge Jake at every opportunity why don't we challenge BVP as well or is the young prince above competition?

Rock Chalk

10-10-2005, 11:10 PM

What is it with Denver's QBs and the beer? Griese was pulled over for DUI's and tripped over his damn dog, fell on TD's driveway. Jake hits the bar and was sent to court for feeling up some bargirl in AZ. Van Pelt just looks like a boozer and sure enough found his true nature just a few months ago AT A COLLEGE GAME. Sounds like a problem.

Does Shanny drink like a sailor? Do these boys need intervention? What the hell is this all about? :alky: :alky: :alky: Alec, are you there?
Im here but Im not sure what you are insinuating, but I got a sneaky suspicion its bad, or at the least, mean spirited. ijiwaru ne!

watermock

10-10-2005, 11:17 PM

I think BVP is an almost perfect backup if he makes more strides next year. It's good to have a tough runner that is used to winning. I wouldn't be adverse to bringing in another project QB, but the time has to come when that special QB is out there. With two #1's, it would be a good time, but I don't see one.

Denver has to bleed off at least one more year of Jakes cap tho or we will be screwed yet again with the cap. I don't know what he's got left on it, but I think letting him go would cost a bundle to say the least, I'm guessing 10 million is left on his bonus after those extensions and roster bonus. Whether Taco likes it or not, we are probably stuck with Jake for at least two more years.

RhymesayersDU

10-10-2005, 11:22 PM

I'll admit, I've chanted for Shanny to put BVP in too...

...During the 4th quarter of the KC game with the game out of reach. ;)

watermock

10-10-2005, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by Meck77
Kinda sounds like the old bag that was on your right next to me that I tangled with....lol [/quote

No...he was sitting to my left with the orange bullhorn.[/quote]

sounds like my 5th cousin SnakeMan...I think I remember seeing him with an orange bullhorn...did he have a BroncoBilly helmet on with a snake on top?

watermock

10-10-2005, 11:35 PM

One thing that WAS stupid was not pulling McNabb with 4 mins left in a hopeless loss with his hernia injury..he gets a bye...why not rest the guy as long as you can Reid...absolutly idiotic...the game was rediculously lost....

Taco John

10-10-2005, 11:36 PM

Denver has to bleed off at least one more year of Jakes cap tho or we will be screwed yet again with the cap.

Not really. I'm not saying it's going to happen. I'm just saying that Denver could conceivably cut Jake after June 2nd and spread out his hit over two years. He's anything but tenured.

watermock

10-10-2005, 11:42 PM

True, but wouldn't it make more sense to bring in a REALLY good prospect and let him learn for at least a year? I haven't looked alot, but Leinhart just doesn't quite to seem the type of QB that fits our system, unless the line is fixed first....

It's a long time to the draft, but I haven't seen that many great prospects...more your LT's Taco. Again, I haven't really looked. I wouldn't mind someone that can at least move tho. Not a Vick, but someone reasonably mobile...our line isn't going to look like Gibbs for a long time, if ever...it's just not the philosophy, altho I have called for max protect many times, it's like asking Kubiak to jump into salt water as a brook trout. He's not going to jump there. We are running a little two TE, but we usually wind up motioning them split from what I listened to on the radio feed, which was horribly on and off.

Taco John

10-10-2005, 11:50 PM

True, but wouldn't it make more sense to bring in a REALLY good prospect and let him learn for at least a year?

I agree, and I think this is ultimately what's going to happen. I was just pointing out that possibilities exist if worse comes to worse. Shanahan and Sundquist left themselves with options with regards to Plummer's contract.

anthonypacino

10-11-2005, 12:00 AM

This is Denver, that stadium is filled with 73000 homers, they have either attended CSU or started following them (since the decline of the Buffs) BVP is a hometown kid, just like Jake was at Arizona. This town has always had strange love affaris with their backups, Anyone remember Jeff Lewis? people were calling him the "heir apparent" to Elway, Brister was the same way tons of people liked him and were pissed when Shanny ditched him. Nobody liked Gus that much IMO he was one of the best back ups we have had. Trust me you do not want BVP now, he is a poor man's Mike Vick, I am experincing that first had with the Buckeyes and Troy Smith, unpredictable, exciting fun to watch until...

wabbit

10-11-2005, 12:46 AM

I really believe that Mike had a 'controversy' of sorts in mind when he named Van Pelt as the back-up & dispatched Mauck & Kannell.

First, he knows Kannell can be called back with a phone call if disaster strikes. Second, Van Pelt is so raw that no-one with any football clarity would suggest he needs to replace Plummer with...for all sense & purposes...a rookie.

Strategy.

I'm guessing here, but I sense that he wants time to work with Plummer under this more restrictive, balanced offense & he doesn't want the distraction of a public clamoring for the back-up every time (Washington) things get sticky.

He wants Bell, Lelie, Putzier & the defense to step up & fill the need...and so far, the defense has responded. I suspect Bell, Lelie & Putzier will follow.

Popps

10-11-2005, 01:39 AM

John Elway:

17 TD 19 INT
18 TD 18 INT
15 TD 14 INT
13 TD 12 INT
10 TD 17 INT
___________
73 TD 80 INT

Just for some reference. That's a 5 year snapshot starting from year 6 of John's career... you know, those years when if John was going to be a champion, he would have been one by now. Clearly, if a guy is 8 years into his career, he shouldn't be throwing that many INTs, right? That's what I'm told around here, anyway.

A five year span of a hall of fame QB's career where he threw more INTs than TDs.
We watched a guy break his yardage and tie his TD records last year... while throwing 7 more TDs than INTs, and people around this place talk about it like it was the worst season by a QB in NFL history.

Jake is 23-8 as a starer and has accounted for 52 TDs against 30 INTs in less than three seasons in Denver.

To say our fans lack perspective is an understatement.