PDA

View Full Version : Uh oh, Terrel Owens in Denver...all thing TO merged


Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

Odysseus
02-04-2006, 12:42 AM
No, it's been documented. I can't recall where I read it, but I'll track it down for you.

The LOWEST percentage? I'd like to see that too. I can think of about a half dozen passes that are worst.

(...1001)

Lidderer
02-04-2006, 01:35 AM
The LOWEST percentage? I'd like to see that too. I can think of about a half dozen passes that are worst.

(...1001)

I hate nothing more than when people mention a stat and don't cite it. And would ya look at what i've done. I've tried at various times over the last few days to cull this nugget that i recall having read, and yet my searching skills are coming up empty.

Obviously this apparently-mythic article was excluding such plays as the hail mary and the spike, being that they are less options and more necessity when deployed.

Out of curiousity: what pass plays do you think complete at a lower percentage?

baja
02-04-2006, 07:29 AM
I hate nothing more than when people mention a stat and don't cite it. And would ya look at what i've done. I've tried at various times over the last few days to cull this nugget that i recall having read, and yet my searching skills are coming up empty.

Obviously this apparently-mythic article was excluding such plays as the hail mary and the spike, being that they are less options and more necessity when deployed.

Out of curiousity: what pass plays do you think complete at a lower percentage?


The left handed side arm toss as the QB is being tackled is one.

DB-Freak
02-04-2006, 07:43 AM
I wouldn't doubt Fade being a one of the lowest complete passes.

It requires a lot of skill from the QB and WR especially if the coverage is tight.

-Slap-
02-04-2006, 10:11 AM
It doesn't matter if the fade is a lower percentage pass. Everything is relative and Jake throws that pass more poorly than most quarterbacks. Any fans of the Great John Elway on this board might recall that proficiency delivering that pass was one of the last tools he added to his repertiore. Eventually became quite adept at dropping the ball in where only his receiver could catch the pass inbounds, though. That complimented his laser beam fastball very nicely in the red zone.

Jake's struggles with that pass are exacerbated by the coaching staffs stubbon insistence on going to that play in key situations. Maybe Jake is better at making this play in practice, but his execution in games has fallen short.

I understand why we keep it in the playbook. The strength of our offensive line is not in rooting people out and driving them off the football, so power dives against certain defenses are suicide. I just think Jake's mobility on the rollout should be utilized more often than the fade, especially on really critical downs.

rbackfactory80
02-04-2006, 10:14 AM
I dont mind the fade, just not on 4-1 like against New England

ND Bronco Fan
02-04-2006, 10:31 AM
The online BetUS.com offers these odds: Tampa Bay 10-to-11 (bet $11 to win $10), Denver 6-to-4 (bet $4 to win $6), Atlanta 4-to-1, Miami 4-to-1, Oakland 7-to-1, Green Bay 8-to-1, Washington 10-to-1, New Orleans 20-to-1, "any other team" even money, "Philadelphia will decide to keep him" 20-to-1, "no team will hire him next season" 5-to-2, and "he will never play in the NFL again" 300-to-1.

Clockwork Orange
02-09-2006, 10:02 PM
No need to start another Owens thread, so I'm bumping this one. The reason being because Al Wilson has now been publicly quoted on the Owens situation.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2325066

Said Broncos Pro Bowl middle linebacker Al Wilson: "When you fall a little short, like we did this season, you always think, 'Well, if we can just get that one more piece of the puzzle, the guy who puts you over the top, it would be worth it.' In the case of [Owens] we'll just have to see."

"All the other stuff aside, he's a dynamic guy, a playmaker, and you can't ignore that," Wilson said.

And of course, Rod Smith:

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_3485660

"One person can't influence a grown man," Smith said Tuesday, his first comments about the issue since Owens met with coach Mike Shanahan on Jan. 30 in Denver.

"You just can't expect one person to have that type of control or influence on a person," the veteran wide receiver said. "That's just the way it is."

"I'm for anything that helps the team, and if that would help the team, I'd be for it," Smith said. "I wouldn't have a problem with it."

"You just don't know how someone is going to react to anything," Smith said. "You'd hope that all the positives that we have would rub off. You'd have to stay positive."

And Champ Bailey:

"I love T.O. ... I'd love to have his talent," said Bailey, preparing to play in his second Pro Bowl as a Bronco. "I'd hope that there wouldn't be any problems."

"Our team will get players like that in here," Bailey said. "But they'll also get them out of here, too, if they don't do what they're supposed to.

"If T.O. came here and did what he was supposed to, it'd be great. If not, he'd be gone. That's the way it works with us."

This has all come out in the last 24 hours. Three of the Broncos top players (including their offensive and defensive captains) have publicly addressed the Owens situation. All of them made mention of the potential downside to bringing in Owens, but none of them sound as though they don't want him here. They all seem to agree that Owens can help this team win and would welcome him if he is acquired.

Just more food for thought.

baja
02-09-2006, 10:35 PM
No need to start another Owens thread, so I'm bumping this one. The reason being because Al Wilson has now been publicly quoted on the Owens situation.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2325066

Said Broncos Pro Bowl middle linebacker Al Wilson: "When you fall a little short, like we did this season, you always think, 'Well, if we can just get that one more piece of the puzzle, the guy who puts you over the top, it would be worth it.' In the case of [Owens] we'll just have to see."

"All the other stuff aside, he's a dynamic guy, a playmaker, and you can't ignore that," Wilson said.

And of course, Rod Smith:

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_3485660

"One person can't influence a grown man," Smith said Tuesday, his first comments about the issue since Owens met with coach Mike Shanahan on Jan. 30 in Denver.

"You just can't expect one person to have that type of control or influence on a person," the veteran wide receiver said. "That's just the way it is."

"I'm for anything that helps the team, and if that would help the team, I'd be for it," Smith said. "I wouldn't have a problem with it."

"You just don't know how someone is going to react to anything," Smith said. "You'd hope that all the positives that we have would rub off. You'd have to stay positive."

And Champ Bailey:

"I love T.O. ... I'd love to have his talent," said Bailey, preparing to play in his second Pro Bowl as a Bronco. "I'd hope that there wouldn't be any problems."

"Our team will get players like that in here," Bailey said. "But they'll also get them out of here, too, if they don't do what they're supposed to.

"If T.O. came here and did what he was supposed to, it'd be great. If not, he'd be gone. That's the way it works with us."

This has all come out in the last 24 hours. Three of the Broncos top players (including their offensive and defensive captains) have publicly addressed the Owens situation. All of them made mention of the potential downside to bringing in Owens, but none of them sound as though they don't want him here. They all seem to agree that Owens can help this team win and would welcome him if he is acquired.

Just more food for thought.


This is the bottom line

<b>"If T.O. came here and did what he was supposed to, it'd be great. If not, he'd be gone. That's the way it works with us."[/B]

End of debate

PS I really like this Champ Baily guy.

-Slap-
02-09-2006, 10:45 PM
This is the bottom line

<b>"If T.O. came here and did what he was supposed to, it'd be great. If not, he'd be gone. That's the way it works with us."[/B]

End of debate.
The downside here being the season will almost certainly go down the tubes if we have to dump him mid year. We have a nice window of opportunity open right now as legitmate Super Bowl contenders. Why risk a whole season on one unstable personality?

Sassy
02-09-2006, 10:47 PM
All of them made mention of the potential downside to bringing in Owens, but none of them sound as though they don't want him here.

I didn't get that same feeling. It sounds like if it happens they'll deal with it and hope for the best.

baja
02-09-2006, 10:53 PM
The downside here being the season will almost certainly go down the tubes if we have to dump him mid year. We have a nice window of opportunity open right now as legitmate Super Bowl contenders. Why risk a whole season on one unstable personality?

personally I'd like to see Watts and David terrell develop but I gotta recant when Wilson, Smith, Bailey and others come out in favor of giving owens a try with a bail out clause in place. Don't ya know they have talked on the phone around the league about this and are willing to risk their SB run on it and God knows how badly they covert that ring.

-Slap-
02-09-2006, 10:58 PM
personally I'd like to see Watts and David terrell develop but I gotta recant when Wilson, Smith, Bailey and others come out in favor of giving owens a try with a bail out clause in place. Don't ya know they have talked on the phone around the league about this and are willing to risk their SB run on it and God knows how badly they covert that ring.
That Ring would mean a hell of a lot more to those guys if the team we have in place pulled together and did the job, rather than turning to some selfish egomaniac.

baja
02-09-2006, 11:00 PM
That Ring would mean a hell of a lot more to those guys if the team we have in place pulled together and did the job, rather than turning to some selfish egomaniac.

I agree with that

baja
02-09-2006, 11:00 PM
I think he will be too expensive anyway

Clockwork Orange
02-09-2006, 11:03 PM
I didn't get that same feeling. It sounds like if it happens they'll deal with it and hope for the best.

I agree with that to a point, but none of them were as blunt as Chambers & Taylor from Miami or even as subtle as Larry Johnson (same article as the Wilson quotes). All of them said that so long as he can help them win, they'll be glad to have him. Naturally they'd rather not have the spector of a potential Owens meltdown hanging over their heads, but they all seem to agree that the Broncos will be a better team with him.

Believe me, I really wish that Rod or Al would have come out and flat said that Owens can go pound sand up his ass.

-Slap-
02-09-2006, 11:11 PM
Believe me, I really wish that Rod or Al would have come out and flat said that Owens can go pound sand up his ass.
They didn't want to graduate from Nurse Shanny's reeducation program like John Lynch.

http://www.coastalrep.com/images/1999/cuckoo_lobotomy.jpg

Clockwork Orange
02-09-2006, 11:15 PM
They didn't want to graduate from Nurse Shanny's reeducation program like John Lynch.

http://www.coastalrep.com/images/1999/cuckoo_lobotomy.jpg

LOL

http://www.aidd.org/droogs/alex-clockwork-orange.jpg

"Terrell Owens is a great teammate. A great person. A leader. He's humble and cares only about winning. We can do this the entire offseason, John. Say it, Terrell Owens is a great teammate......"

-Slap-
02-09-2006, 11:22 PM
http://www.aidd.org/droogs/alex-clockwork-orange.jpg

"Terrell Owens is a great teammate. A great person. A leader. He's humble and cares only about winning. We can do this the entire offseason, John. Say it, Terrell Owens is a great teammate......"
Meanwhile, TO's really that bloke who comes out later and makes him lick his shoe. Oh, yes, my brothers.

Clockwork Orange
02-09-2006, 11:33 PM
Meanwhile, TO's really that bloke who comes out later and makes him lick his shoe. Oh, yes, my brothers.

And just to make sure he stays "cured" they'll have Rod & Al play the roles of Georgie & Dim.

Killericon
02-09-2006, 11:36 PM
Yea, was'nt he like a top 5 pick? He's been hindered by injuries up untill this year, I think this year was more proff that he could be something big, and that he was'nt a bust.

Clockwork Orange
02-09-2006, 11:40 PM
Yea, was'nt he like a top 5 pick? He's been hindered by injuries up untill this year, I think this year was more proff that he could be something big, and that he was'nt a bust.

If you're talking about Owens, no. He was a 3rd round pick (89th overall). The only significant injury of his career that I can remember was the broken leg in '03.

Atlas
02-09-2006, 11:50 PM
Why risk a whole season on one unstable personality?

You risk it because Denver isn't good enough right now. S.D. is going to be better next year, N.E. is N.E. and Pittsburgh dominated Denver. Denver has a window right now but they aren't good enough.

Taco John
02-09-2006, 11:53 PM
It doesn't matter if the fade is a lower percentage pass. Everything is relative and Jake throws that pass more poorly than most quarterbacks. Any fans of the Great John Elway on this board might recall that proficiency delivering that pass was one of the last tools he added to his repertiore. Eventually became quite adept at dropping the ball in where only his receiver could catch the pass inbounds, though. That complimented his laser beam fastball very nicely in the red zone.

Jake's struggles with that pass are exacerbated by the coaching staffs stubbon insistence on going to that play in key situations. Maybe Jake is better at making this play in practice, but his execution in games has fallen short.

I understand why we keep it in the playbook. The strength of our offensive line is not in rooting people out and driving them off the football, so power dives against certain defenses are suicide. I just think Jake's mobility on the rollout should be utilized more often than the fade, especially on really critical downs.



When is the day that we're going to see you and Popps go at it on this subject? Someone send me a PM when that day fimally comes. I want to get to the front row.

MrPeepers
02-09-2006, 11:58 PM
remember how scary the raiders were going to be because of randy moss. i for one don't believe the hype.

Atlas
02-09-2006, 11:59 PM
remember how scary the raiders were going to be because of randy moss. i for one don't believe the hype.

The Faiders suck though.. Denver is a good team... Bad example.

I would rather have Owens than Moss. When Owens is on the field he gives 100% all the time. There is no argueing that fact.

Taco John
02-10-2006, 12:01 AM
remember how scary the raiders were going to be because of randy moss. i for one don't believe the hype.



Apples and oranges, IMO... Randy Moss and TO are very different kinds of receivers. Plummer and Collins, two very different kinds of quarterbacks.

WABronco
02-10-2006, 12:05 AM
remember how scary the raiders were going to be because of randy moss. i for one don't believe the hype.

Well, that's because Randy Moss sucks, as does Kerry Collins and Norv Turner...

Generally, just a bunch of sucking goin' on in faiderville...

Clockwork Orange
02-10-2006, 12:06 AM
remember how scary the raiders were going to be because of randy moss. i for one don't believe the hype.

Very different situations. The Broncos were a game away from the Super Bowl. The Fade are almost down to interviewing local high school coaches to fill their vacancy. Very different situations.

WABronco
02-10-2006, 12:06 AM
Apples and oranges, IMO... Randy Moss and TO are very different kinds of receivers. Plummer and Collins, two very different kinds of quarterbacks.

TO actually has a work ethic, believe it or not...

Killericon
02-10-2006, 12:22 AM
Moss was Injured...and he had Collins throwing to him.

I was tlaking about VandenBosch.

The players that play with TO, quarterbacks outstanding, are usually fine with him.

Odysseus
02-10-2006, 03:44 AM
Very different situations. The Broncos were a game away from the Super Bowl. The Fade are almost down to interviewing local high school coaches to fill their vacancy. Very different situations.

I laughed Moss during the off season. I laughed at Moss during the season. I can't wait to laugh at Moss during next season. I think Randy is a great reciever that is on a pretty bad football team. I wonder what is going to happen with Culpepper next season? FF is for losers. How can you predict any of that stuff going to happen during the season?

Most teams are configured using a standard setup which sucks. If you are not picking individual players on defense than it's a crap league. If you are not allowed to have a decent bench while having a commissioner discourage hoarding then it's just a game for losers.

fontaine
02-10-2006, 05:00 AM
Look, when Ray Rhodes was our DC our defense sucked. He dropped 9 into coverage, rushing only two at times. Guess what!? Larry Coyer did the same thing last year.


I disagree. Coyer did a good job changing up his defense according the teams he faced. ie against he Redskins who went to max protect, we had plenty of defenders up front to try and overload their OL.

A similar thing was done against the Pats when we sent wave after wave of blitzers, often send 7 guys after Brady. Ditto against Brees.

There were times when he dropped people back into coverage and it was done when we had a good lead in the 2nd half and the other offense had to pass to catch up. The Offense went would go with 6 lineman and flood the defense with Wideouts in which case most coordinators would drop back people into coverage so this is maybe what you're referring to.

While Ray ray was coach we didn't do well in the sack department. We didn't do very well with Coyer this year or last year either.

Here's the tell tale though. Seattle, with the likes of Fisher, Darby, Bernard, and Winstrom. The only one of those four that likely starts in Denver is Winstrom... so tell me, how is it that that front four is able to get 19 sacks and their DL a total of 30 sacks?

Wistrom, Fisher and Rocky Bernard are excellent pass rushing lineman. Rocky Bernard is an excellent one gap DT who excels at rushing the QB.

I'm not saying its Larry Coyer's scheme b/c I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!

The pass rush did suck, but we also featured two traditional "power" ends who weren't speed rushers. Pryce really disapointed and Brown was just good against the run.

-Slap-
08-21-2006, 09:16 AM
Here you go, kids. The names have not been changed to protect the innocent, but sadly the poll is no longer available for easy incrimination.

I'm on here 57 times saying TO will be a disaster this year. Maybe some of the TO supporters would like to bump their individual posts, too.......:)

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=955117&postcount=11

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=955126&postcount=14

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=955134&postcount=19

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=955146&postcount=27

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=955163&postcount=37

bronco militia
03-04-2009, 09:30 PM
up

LOL

Gcver2ver3
03-04-2009, 09:32 PM
and away we go...

El Guapo
03-04-2009, 09:34 PM
Oi vey.

Killericon
03-04-2009, 09:37 PM
Ugh. Reading my old posts wrought with grammatical(and logical) mistakes is painful.

Taco John
03-04-2009, 09:38 PM
My God! 40 pages of pure Orange Mane glory!

I'm trembling...

Dudeskey
03-04-2009, 09:49 PM
who unearthed this old gem?..™

UberBroncoMan
03-04-2009, 09:49 PM
save us

BroncoMan4ever
03-04-2009, 10:35 PM
Jesus Christ for a second when i opened this i thought it was current. i almost **** out my heart, thinking the guy has only been available for a couple hours and we already have him in Denver.

OBF1
03-05-2009, 01:02 AM
I always look at these old threads to see who has ZERO life to go look this crap up

Mogulseeker
03-05-2009, 05:46 AM
I always look at these old threads to see who has ZERO life to go look this crap up

That's harsh... it only takes a second to do it.

brncs_fan
03-05-2009, 05:56 AM
for a second when i opened this i thought it was current. i almost **** out my heart, thinking the guy has only been available for a couple hours and we already have him in Denver.

I also thought the same thing. I thought we were pretty set at WR so why bring in the headache, but I have thought wrong before.

TonyR
03-05-2009, 06:08 AM
Well, we do need a big WR to fill in for Brandon Marshall who will probably miss at least 8 game this season for violating the league's conduct policy. Might as well add another ring to the circus!

bronco militia
03-05-2009, 07:18 AM
I always look at these old threads to see who has ZERO life to go look this crap up

LOL...kiss my ass ;D

El Guapo
03-05-2009, 07:22 AM
Well, we do need a big WR to fill in for Brandon Marshall who will probably miss at least 8 game this season for violating the league's conduct policy. Might as well add another ring to the circus!

No, no, no. If we're going to do it I say we go after the newly disgruntled Torry Holt.

Peoples Champ
03-05-2009, 07:22 AM
The Faiders suck though.. Denver is a good team... Bad example.

I would rather have Owens than Moss. When Owens is on the field he gives 100% all the time. There is no argueing that fact.



No way, this is now the 3rd straight team that TO has torn apart. I would be willing to take the risk if TO had only tore apart 1 team, but not 3 teams. He is a cancer, and will bring down Cutler, Marshall, Sheffler (because he got mad when Romo was friends with his Tight End) and probably the defense.

NYC Bronco
03-05-2009, 07:22 AM
Another likely suitor is the Denver Broncos. New Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels has experience in integrating a "problem" wide receiver into a cohesive offensive unit based on his time with Randy Moss and the New England Patriots. The Broncos may themselves have a problem on their hands with No. 1 wideout Brandon Marshall's off-field drama and the subsequent hearings that are bound to take place with the league, so T.O. could very well be the team's new No. 1 by the season opener.

Peoples Champ
03-05-2009, 07:23 AM
No, no, no. If we're going to do it I say we go after the newly disgruntled Torry Holt.



I would much rather have Torry holt then TO, Holt is not a lockeroom cancer like TO.

Bronco Yoda
03-05-2009, 07:24 AM
We have so many other needs than TO

Popcorn Sutton
03-05-2009, 07:25 AM
No, no, no. If we're going to do it I say we go after the newly disgruntled Torry Holt.

I would like to see this happen. A change of scenery could be exactly what Holt needs and with the uncertainty looming with Marshall it would be a nice insurance policy.

Old Dude
03-05-2009, 08:04 AM
Apart from the inherent suicidal insanity of the idea, where on earth would Denver get the money to pick up TO?

Arkie
03-05-2009, 09:27 AM
Before we give millions to a 36yo problem child WR, have we decided who will play DE in Nolan's defense yet? That might be important.

epicSocialism4tw
03-05-2009, 10:10 AM
Before we give millions to a 36yo problem child WR, have we decided who will play DE in Nolan's defense yet? That might be important.

I have yet to see these guys address the most problematic aspect of this team. Dawkins is excellent, but we need front 7 players who can make an impact.

TonyR
03-05-2009, 10:25 AM
So who might actually be interested? .....

The Broncos make some sense, if Brandon Marshall ends up missing a big chunk of the year as a result of his most recent arrest.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/05/are-cowboys-waiting-for-a-trade-offer/

Old Dude
03-05-2009, 10:30 AM
The only teeny tiny scary little thought that I have about it is that the Broncos were shopping around for a backup WR (but the deal fell through when the Texans matched the Anderson offer.)

But I don't think they are looking for a big money guy.

Northman
03-05-2009, 10:30 AM
One problem child for another. Yep, that will work