I'm going to go ahead and say it: Jake looked like #7 on that half-ending drive. [Archive] - The Orange Mane

View Full Version : I'm going to go ahead and say it: Jake looked like #7 on that half-ending drive.

epicSocialism4tw

12-04-2005, 02:49 PM

Jake made some HUUUUUGE plays on that drive. That looked like #7 reincarnated. That play to Putz where he spun out of the pocket and drilled it low was pure greatness. As was the play to Rod down the sideline where Jake scrambled wide and made the perfect throw. There was another play in there that busted where Jake hit Putz for a 1st down.

Jake has had a brilliant 1st half. One tipped pass/pick that he shouldnt have thrown, but other than that, he has really played well.

Jesterhole

12-04-2005, 02:54 PM

RhymesayersDU

12-04-2005, 02:55 PM

Jester, give some credit to Roaf and Co... They're doing a helluva job on Pryce and Co.

epicSocialism4tw

12-04-2005, 02:55 PM

Jake is playing well. He's thrown 2 bad passes, one that was picked, and one that should of gone back for a TD.

He's not getting great protection either. If our D was as fired up as the Cheaps, we'd be ahead in this game 30-0 right now.

Jake isnt playing well, he's playing great so far. He's having the kind of game that creates a legend. Give Jake his due. Every QB throws picks. Including the Duke. Jake is having an Elway-esque game thus far.

Popps

12-04-2005, 03:44 PM

Jake's playing fine.... looks like our defense is back to their old tricks, though.

Garcia Bronco

12-04-2005, 04:14 PM

I agree ALlama...he made some plays

errand

12-04-2005, 08:11 PM

Jake's playing fine.... looks like our defense is back to their old tricks, though.

Jake tossed two INT's, one that was picked in the end zone (7 points we don't get) and another that was converted into a FG for Chiefs....that's a 10 point swing.

Overall, he made enough plays to win the game, but as Popps pointed out when your QB has to play against two defenses, well, your chances of winning games are greatly reduced.

Larry Johnson looked like Timmy Smith-Natrone Means-Corey Dillon today....and our D reminded me of those good 'ol '80's teams where we'd look good on paper, and then couldn't man up.

Crushaholic

12-04-2005, 08:52 PM

Only thing is...I was hoping for some points before halftime, but our offense sputtered out. For whatever reason, we decided not to try and tack 3 more on the board with 8 seconds remaining in the half...

Popps

12-04-2005, 09:12 PM

Jake tossed two INT's, one that was picked in the end zone (7 points we don't get) and another that was converted into a FG for Chiefs....that's a 10 point swing.

Overall, he made enough plays to win the game, but as Popps pointed out when your QB has to play against two defenses, well, your chances of winning games are greatly reduced.

Larry Johnson looked like Timmy Smith-Natrone Means-Corey Dillon today....and our D reminded me of those good 'ol '80's teams where we'd look good on paper, and then couldn't man up.

Plummer had one of his worst games in a while, and it was still good enough for 27 points... and while he threw 2 INTs, he kept several drives alive on his own. He was NOT just a part of the system, today. The system was made BETTER by his play. He made one particularly dumb throw. (Which WAS tipped.)

It doesn't matter. We'll have the whole off-season to argue about this **** again if the defense is as bad as they appeared today.

Sassy

12-05-2005, 05:01 AM

kappys

12-05-2005, 06:57 AM

Did Shanahan think Jake would throw an INT before the half? Just thinking...

We finally got rid of that albatross on our necks from the 108 yard return for a TD. Thankfully the Bears? had the 109 yard return to snatch the record.

bloodsunday

12-05-2005, 08:02 AM

Plummer had one of his worst games in a while, and it was still good enough for 27 points... and while he threw 2 INTs, he kept several drives alive on his own. He was NOT just a part of the system, today. The system was made BETTER by his play. He made one particularly dumb throw. (Which WAS tipped.)

It doesn't matter. We'll have the whole off-season to argue about this **** again if the defense is as bad as they appeared today.
The problem is that his two picks were a 10 pts (at a minimum 6 pt) swing. The pick he threw in the endzone was HUGE, IMO. It was the difference between playing a road game with the lead and playing catch up. Neither was bad luck either, they were both ill-advised throws and he would admit that. Even if that pass isn't tipped, there is a very small chance it results in a good play for us. There were twice as many Chiefs in the area as Broncos. He should have A) Run B) throw the ball away or C) I think if he throws the ball to Kyle Johnson (who was getting mugged) we may have gotten a PA call. He looked like the Jake of last year yesterday -- the one that keeps both teams in the game. Yeah our defense was bad but the offense left too many points on the table. As is usual in a loss, there are many ways that we could have won.

I am not sure what Shanny was doing either. He got WAY TOO conservative after the Dante Hall fumble at the end of the half. Then he kept going to the spectacularly unimpressive MA and Dayne in the second half. He never ran the toss play to Tatum once. For a team that makes its living running the ball, I found our game plan to be curious.

Our defense is trending the wrong way and that scares me with Peyton (and even Carson Palmer) on the horizon. They have let QB after QB have a career game against them and a lot of it has to do with (surprise) a lack of pressure from the front 4. We are having to blitz too much to generate QB pressure and we are playing tooo far off the ball for that attacking style.

BroncoInferno

12-05-2005, 08:23 AM

Both picks were idiotic. I actually think the second one was dumber because even if he had completed the pass it would have been well short of the first down. Why take a chance like that when the reward will only be a couple of yards of field position ???

Still, Jake didn't have a terrible game. I think he'll rebound nicely. He doesn't seem to have a long memory.