PSYCHIARTRY 101: Inside Jake's Head, Inside Jay's Head [Archive] - The Orange Mane

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 10:40 PM

Personally, I don't think Cutler is ready. He needs a year to learn NFL defenses, and I've been saying that since draft day. But think about Jake Plummer for a minute ... who is Jake? Has Jake ever had a "young turk" at his back? Has he ever even had another QB challenge him?!

Short answer: No. Not until now.

PRO: Kent Graham was hurt in Week 6 of Jake's rookie year, and from that week until 2003, Jake was the home-grown starter.
COLLEGE: 40+ total starts including a then-record 40 in a row. Plus, he was #3 in Heisman voting.
HIGH SCHOOL: Started all three years ... was first-team All-Idaho twice, and was even an All-American once.

With the dubious exception of Kent Graham during the first 6 weeks of his rookie year, and whomever he beat out as a freshman at Arizona State ... JAKE PLUMMER HAS NEVER FACED COMPETITION for his job. Ever.

We all know he is possessed of a fragile mentality:
1) Allegedly intentionally hit a car on an on-ramp recently and cussed the other guy
2) Flipped off a fan in his home stadium (like we wouldn't see?)
3) Called a newpaper columnist he'd never met and reamed her out
4) Said Denver fans were "not all that great"
5) Claimed he grew the beard "for Pat," but kept it afterward
And he did all that stuff before Jay Cutler showed up. Then yesterday:
1) Threw three picks, nearly half of last year's 16-game total
2) Flipped a falling down crazy backwards throw near his end zone (you forgot about that, didn't you?)

Long story short: Jake Plummer might not have the psychological makeup for a QB battle ... he has a hard enough time acting right when the job is his.

NOW ... let's examine Jay.

Usually teams don't want to play rookie QBs, at least not until the NFL game "slows down" for them. Largely because these rookies can be emotionally traumatized by the expectations and their failures.

But in this case, I'm not sure that's a big problem. If he played now, Cutler sure - would throw PLENTY of interceptions. Like the one he threw against Arizona's third stringers two weeks ago. But think about it: Whatever mistakes (doozies, prolly) he made as an 18/19 year old starter for lowly Vanderbilt four years ago against Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, LSU and Auburn, obviously did nothing to stunt his "emotional growth," as it were. He is one cocky SOB.

I'm still NOT for starting Cutler, but based on Jake's mental fragility and Jay's teflon psyche, I won't cry if it happens.

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/8914/cutsdr0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Taco John's idea ... my artwork 8')

Kaylore

09-11-2006, 10:45 PM

The only thing I care about is turnovers. Four in one game is terrible. I guarantee that Cutler starts that game and we win it because at least Cutler would throw it away and can put the ball downfield with accuracy rather than toss lob passes to Todd Devoe.thwack

ludo21

09-11-2006, 10:45 PM

SureShot

09-11-2006, 10:45 PM

6n06

Kaylore

09-11-2006, 10:47 PM

Jake is our guy unless he proves he can not shoulder the team in the next few weeks.

Look at tonight for example. The Fade's OL WAS AWFUL!!!!

Did Brooks throw 3 picks? NO! He took the sacks (like he had a choice) and didnt force some ill advised throws.

I love that Jake wants to "make a play" but our D is good enough, take a sack.

No Ludo. This was different. This wasn't like the past where ints were glancing off of receivers hands into safety's grasp.

Those ints weren't him throwing under duress, they were Jake playing like crap. And half those sacks were Plummer confused and holding onto the ball too long. He looked lost.

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 10:47 PM

PRO: Kent Graham was hurt in Week 6 of Jake's rookie year, and from that week until 2003, Jake was the home-grown starter.

Which may have adversely affected Jake's development as a young pro quarterback.

Don't start Cutler, dammit.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 10:47 PM

Fess up, guys ... how many forgot about Jake's "behind-the-back flip" near his goalline yesterday?

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 10:48 PM

And half those sacks were Plummer confused and holding onto the ball too long. He looked lost.

My point exactly. Deer in the headlights maybe?

He has never faced competition before.

DBroncos4life

09-11-2006, 10:48 PM

Todd Devoe can suck my balls, we should pick up Charles "broken" Rogers, I think even he could have tipped that ball away from the DB before his shoulder gave out.

ludo21

09-11-2006, 10:50 PM

24champ

09-11-2006, 10:51 PM

You know I was just thinking to myself that this board is missing a Jake vs Jay thread...good job Buff!

SureShot

09-11-2006, 10:56 PM

Which may have adversely affected Jake's development as a young pro quarterback.

Don't start Cutler, dammit.

I don't buy into that theory. I believe young talented QBs fail because they are on crappy teams to begin with.

If Shanny can reel in Flummer and bring him along slowly, I have no doubt he can do it with Cutler.

Have no fear Bronco fans JC saves.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 10:56 PM

ludo21

09-11-2006, 10:59 PM

im not sure what was going thru Jakes head. it sure wasnt football 101.

watermock

09-11-2006, 11:01 PM

Great post. I agree that Rocket Man has been tried by fire at Vandy. He was knocked down but always got back up. One time he just popped a dislocated finger back in while in the huddle. Don't let his boyish good looks and awe shucks demeanor fool ya...he's a different animal completely on the field. He's cocky, but a good cocky.

I want Jake to have his best year ever, but he did look panicky dating back to Pitt. I don't want to start Cutler either. That was the universal consensus. But when you drop turds two games in a row, it gets you thinking. Remember...QB's have come out of the gate full throttle, best example would be Marino. People say that Cutler's throwing motion and release are very similar to Dan's.

We won't pull out the rug...yet. Jay is getting more reps all the time, every week in practice. If Jake puts up three more dogs, if we are 0-4 I say make the change. I agree there is danger but I'm not worried whatsoever about a fragile ego. It's more about, as you said, the game slowing down.

watermock

09-11-2006, 11:02 PM

No Ludo. This was different. This wasn't like the past where ints were glancing off of receivers hands into safety's grasp.

Those ints weren't him throwing under duress, they were Jake playing like crap. And half those sacks were Plummer confused and holding onto the ball too long. He looked lost.

Want to know what Jake looked like? A deer in the headlights rook.

And yes, Shanahan did make a veiled threat that he's not scared to pull out the carpet. See sig below. It's out of context, but it was fun...It started out, (paraphrased) something like "If you have enough (poor) games like that, your not going to last long. I don't think that's even a veiled threat. It's out in the open, something Shanny usually doesn't do. Dayne and Watts were not bad mouthed at all but went out the back door.

24champ

09-11-2006, 11:05 PM

But I added the PSYCHIATRIC angle, Champ!

And I'm serious about that ... had we drafted somebody else, not a QB ... Jake wouldda played much better yesterday, and we'd be 1-0.

I actually believe that.

No offense Buff, but that is about the looniest thing I have heard regarding Jake's poor performance yesterday. He had no reason before the Rams game to be worried about Jay. He needs to be worried about leading this team to victory!

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:07 PM

I don't buy into that theory. I believe young talented QBs fail because they are on crappy teams to begin with.

And you want to put Cutler in if we're losing a bunch of games? Forgive me for suggesting it, but wouldn't losing a bunch of games make us a crappy team?

I'll tell you what. If you want to really test your theory, why don't you wait until we're in the Super Bowl, then bench the veteran and start the rookie? Then he could never be accused of being ruined by starting for a crappy team.

Rascal

09-11-2006, 11:12 PM

Todd Devoe can suck my balls, we should pick up Charles "broken" Rogers, I think even he could have tipped that ball away from the DB before his shoulder gave out.

It never should have been a jump ball to begin with.

watermock

09-11-2006, 11:13 PM

I don't buy into that theory. I believe young talented QBs fail because they are on crappy teams to begin with.

If Shanny can reel in Flummer and bring him along slowly, I have no doubt he can do it with Cutler.

Have no fear Bronco fans JC saves.

Another excellent point. Look at Carr in Houston...Harrington, Couch...all went to crap teams. I'm still amazed we got Jay who IMO, was the best QB in the draft once I read about him.

ludo21

09-11-2006, 11:14 PM

It never should have been a jump ball to begin with.

exactly. wide open!!!!

Safety did a good job of getting back, but come on Jake, that had TD all over it.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 11:14 PM

No offense Buff, but that is about the looniest thing I have heard regarding Jake's poor performance yesterday. He had no reason before the Rams game to be worried about Jay. He needs to be worried about leading this team to victory!

No, I don't think Jake was worried he would be benched yesterday, per se......... I just think his mindset, his confidence at being "cock-of-the-walk" has been shaken by the Cutler pick, and it's showing. He's rattled inside his head - he's not cracking yet, but he is stressed.

Last year he was super-confident, a definite leader, etc.... BVP was no challenge. But yesterday he looked shaky, unsure of himself. The body language .... I know that sounds 'artsy-new age BS", but that's what I think.

We'll see as the weeks go by. He might play well, he might crack under pressure .... but his best days as a Bronco are over.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 11:16 PM

His best days as a Bronco are OVER.

Anybody want to dispute this?

Bob's your Information Minister

09-11-2006, 11:18 PM

How will Plummer fare this week? He's never seen the defense he's about to face. We've got more new wrinkles than Vermeil.

24champ

09-11-2006, 11:20 PM

No, I don't think Jake was worried he would be benched yesterday, per se......... I just think his mindset, his confidence at being "cock-of-the-walk" has been shaken by the Cutler pick, and it's showing. He's rattled inside his head - he's not cracking yet, but he is stressed.

Last year he was super-confident, a definite leader, etc.... BVP was no challenge. But yesterday he looked shaky, unsure of himself. The body language .... I know that sounds 'artsy-new age BS", but that's what I think.

We'll see as the weeks go by. He might play well, he might crack under pressure .... but his best days as a Bronco are over.

thats precisely how I see your point. Plain BS, and that is proof that we beating yesterday's game to death.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 11:21 PM

How will Plummer fare this week? He's never seen the defense he's about to face. We've got more new wrinkles than Vermeil.

True. Your defense is not young. ROFL!

Sorry about Trent, though .... that really svcks.

SureShot

09-11-2006, 11:22 PM

And you want to put Cutler in if we're losing a bunch of games? Forgive me for suggesting it, but wouldn't losing a bunch of games make us a crappy team?

I'll tell you what. If you want to really test your theory, why don't you wait until we're in the Super Bowl, then bench the veteran and start the rookie? Then he could never be accused of being ruined by starting for a crappy team.

Shanny won't wait that long, and I don't want him to either.

Veteran QBs through experience are expected to develope the ability to:

1) Read defenses pre-snap
2) Audible to take advantage of defensive alingments
3) Recognize coverages
4) Finding the open man and deliver the ball quickly
5) PROTECTING THE BALL!!!!!!

All which Flummer is lacking.

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:23 PM

No, I don't think Jake was worried he would be benched yesterday, per se......... I just think his mindset, his confidence at being "cock-of-the-walk" has been shaken by the Cutler pick, and it's showing. He's rattled inside his head - he's not cracking yet, but he is stressed.

Last year he was super-confident, a definite leader, etc.... BVP was no challenge. But yesterday he looked shaky, unsure of himself. The body language .... I know that sounds 'artsy-new age BS", but that's what I think.

We'll see as the weeks go by. He might play well, he might crack under pressure .... but his best days as a Bronco are over.

For what it's worth I think you have an intriguing insight into what may be going on inside Jake's head. If you are correct, I suppose that: #1) He doesn't even know it's happening; #2) He doesn't have the skills to cope with it, since he's never had to overcome the problem before.

Then again, you (and I) could be soooooooooo full of ****...

24champ

09-11-2006, 11:24 PM

His best days as a Bronco are OVER.

Anybody want to dispute this?

Yes just look at last years season opener clusterfck and after that Plummer went 229 passes without an INT, and history says Plummer RARELY does crappy two games in a row in the season.

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:25 PM

His best days as a Bronco are OVER.

Anybody want to dispute this?

Nope. I'll go further. His best days as a pro may well be over. Steelers game notwithstanding, I suspect that last year was his career year.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 11:26 PM

Yes just look at last years season opener clusterfck and after that Plummer went 229 passes without an INT, and history says Plummer RARELY does crappy two games in a row in the season.

Touche.

We'll take this up one week from today.

BroncoBuff

09-11-2006, 11:29 PM

For what it's worth I think you have an intriguing insight into what may be going on inside Jake's head. If you are correct, I suppose that: #1) He doesn't even know it's happening; #2) He doesn't have the skills to cope with it, since he's never had to overcome the problem before.

Well said.

Then again, you (and I) could be soooooooooo full of ****...

Funny ... :~ohyah!: This could all be BroncoBuff bullsh!t, true ... I tend to try to psychoanylize people fairly often ... and Champ points out last year's opener left us with no lessons worth remembering (except maybe Gatorade) ....

We'll see ...

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:29 PM

Shanny won't wait that long, and I don't want him to either.

Veteran QBs through experience are expected to develope the ability to:

1) Read defenses pre-snap
2) Audible to take advantage of defensive alingments
3) Recognize coverages
4) Finding the open man and deliver the ball quickly
5) PROTECTING THE BALL!!!!!!

All which Flummer is lacking.

I agree with everything you say except starting Cutler this season. I just don't want to ever look back and wonder why Cutler never blossomed even though he had all the skills.

SureShot

09-11-2006, 11:31 PM

His best days as a Bronco are OVER.

Anybody want to dispute this?

How amazing Cutler must be to have the top 5 winningest,AFCC , pro-bowl alternate Qb quake in his presence.:yayaya:

SoCalBronco

09-11-2006, 11:31 PM

SureShot

09-11-2006, 11:34 PM

I agree with everything you say except starting Cutler this season. I just don't want to ever look back and wonder why Cutler never blossomed even though he had all the skills.

No one ever achieved greatness by playing it safe.

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:34 PM

watermock

09-11-2006, 11:35 PM

This was different than the Pitt game. We lost despite never giving up a TD. Against Pitt, the whole team stunk and we were down 3 TD's before the popcorn was ready.

mosca

09-11-2006, 11:36 PM

Maybe you're really bored or something, Buff, but if you really think that you can psycho-analyze someone you've never met based on: his play on the football field, athletic career history, and bits and pieces of media reports about traffic incidents etc., well... Let's just say, don't quit your day job.

ClevelandBronco

09-11-2006, 11:37 PM

No one ever achieved greatness by playing it safe.

Now that's just a silly statement with no substance.

But it would sound good on a tombstone.

SureShot

09-11-2006, 11:42 PM

His best days as a Bronco are OVER.

Anybody want to dispute this?

So if you take it a little further, wouldn't your theory require Plummer to believe JC is good enough to start?

Taco John

09-11-2006, 11:43 PM

Those ints weren't him throwing under duress, they were Jake playing like crap. And half those sacks were Plummer confused and holding onto the ball too long. He looked lost.

The truth...

BroncoSoja

09-11-2006, 11:44 PM

But think about it: Whatever mistakes (doozies, prolly) he made as an 18/19 year old starter for lowly Vanderbilt four years ago against Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, LSU and Auburn, obviously did nothing to stunt his "emotional growth," as it were. He is one cocky SOB.

This is exactly why the kids needs to start.. Cutler tosses a INT he slaps his hands to together and says ****** and comes right back out on the next series and acts like it never happend. Plummer does it and he starts thinking about how he always does that, how the fans will react, what is he going to say to Mike, why he didnt see that LB sitting on the read, etc..

Is that to say that all that crosses Cutlers mind? No, there is a chance it does. But Cutler has a iron hard mentality and a certain cocky swagger about him. More then likely he will blow it off and move on instead of dwelling on it. Go look at his games at Vandy not much rattled this cocky SOB..He is a stud.

SureShot

09-11-2006, 11:44 PM

Now that's just a silly statement with no substance.

But it would sound good on a tombstone.

True, but its one of my favorite quotes. :wiggle:

Kaylore

09-11-2006, 11:50 PM

If Jake keeps sucking, keep him in there. No matter what. Let Cutler develop the right way...even if the ship sinks in 06, I don't care. If they have to simplify things again and tighten the leash even more...fine. If they have to just live with mistakes every week..fine.

Cutler's proper development > 2006 season.

I do have confidence though that Jake will go back to the solid Jake we have quite often seen the last 3 years, although Bronco Buff may be correct, the pressure from the young buck may be at least partially responsible for this latest performance.

No SoCal! And would you please explain your "we could hurt his development" argument you keep making? You keep claiming that starting Cutler early will set him back like he's some fragile babe in the womb. You don't learn to ride a bike unless you get on. Cutler playing now would be an upgrade over the attack he faced at Vandy. At least here he has an O-line. I can think of two QB's that are top flight QB's (Brady, Palmer) that waited a year and I'm not convinced waiting made them any better. Every other superstar QB started their first year and turned out just fine.

There isn't a single instance of a player who got put in early that was "ruined" by doing so. Even Elway, who was pulled because of bad play, said that him getting the playing time early helped him learn faster than he could have sitting the first year.

BroncoBuff

09-12-2006, 12:00 AM

I can think of two QB's that are top flight QB's (Brady, Palmer) that waited a year and I'm not convinced waiting made them any better. Every other superstar QB started their first year and turned out just fine.

The Benglas were lucky that Kitna played so well while Palmer learned.

That would be fine with me, but I'm not sure Jake's psyche is tough enough.

SoCalBronco

09-12-2006, 12:23 AM

No SoCal! And would you please explain your "we could hurt his development" argument you keep making? You keep claiming that starting Cutler early will set him back like he's some fragile babe in the womb. You don't learn to ride a bike unless you get on. Cutler playing now would be an upgrade over the attack he faced at Vandy. At least here he has an O-line. I can think of two QB's that are top flight QB's (Brady, Palmer) that waited a year and I'm not convinced waiting made them any better. Every other superstar QB started their first year and turned out just fine.

There isn't a single instance of a player who got put in early that was "ruined" by doing so. Even Elway, who was pulled because of bad play, said that him getting the playing time early helped him learn faster than he could have sitting the first year.

I think the situation is certainly distinguishable from that of riding a bike. You can't learn much watching some other kid ride it around. You can learn ALOT by just focusing all your energy on studying football, without having the unnecessary pressure of carrying a team on your back. We want Cutler to be in a position where he goes out there and doesnt have to think at all, just react. There are many physically gifted quarterbacks whose careers have suffered because they were forced into action too early and lost the crucial mental development. It's all about the first couple of years, that is when you really grow as a player. Even with the brightest rookie QBs, the coaches still drastically reduce what they run on offense, so the "experience" that he is getting in that respect is not really that fruitful. In Pittsburgh for example, for the first several weeks of Big Ben's rookie year, the offense was extremely simple, often consisting of very basic route combinations to suit him (Jaws talked about this in an edition of Edge NFL Matchup in 2004). You can't execute the whole playbook (esp. one like ours) in a sufficient manner with a rookie. Even with Big Ben, they had to keep things simple for a good period of time before expanding on it. He did a damn good job with it but it was nonetheless not close to being the entire offense.

I would much rather let him learn by watching, by focusing on just contemplation of the offense, and review and study and reps, thereby becoming more acquainted with the whole complex offense over time, so that when he is ready, he can execute everything, without hesitation. You put him in now and we lose this benefit. I would submit that this would be a better approach that throwing him in there and giving him experience at doing something that is simpler than what will be expected later on, or more limited in scope than what will be expected later on. We have to reshape the offense and constrain it alot and focus on keeping the passing game simple and rep stuff that is simple (or perhaps the better word is limited) so that he can have an acceptable mental load each week that the staff can feel comfortable about. That's not the proper approach. Let him learn full, complicated gameplans from the sideline each week. Every week he will feel more and more comfortable as he soaks more in. There was an article in the DPO today in fact where Jay talked about how this last week's gameplan was tough and how he didnt think he could handle the whole thing. But it is certainly better to expose him to this type of thing every week...the whole real deal and let him learn AT HIS OWN PACE without rushing him in, or adding burden....just learning in peace and slowly getting acquainted with (and repping) the full enchilada. That's the best approach. He is supremely gifted. But he really needs this year on the sideline for his long term benefit.

Let me clarify something though when I refer to the full offense, because obviously we are constrained in some things that we do with Jake. There are some concepts and elements of the offensive system that we don't work as much because they don't suit Jake, but he is still familiar with them, just not great at executing them. The offense is nonetheless complex (even with some of the scaling back for Jake) as you can never be too simple so that you have easy to spot tendencies. You can't afford to have tendencies in the NFL. You always have to add wrinkles. Its not just doing a small number of plays from many formations, although that is one aspect of how we like to appear multiple, you still have to run a large number of plays as well, even if they are merely variations of your base plays. The offense as a whole is very complex and it remains so even with some scaling back for Jake (as Cutler testified to in today's article). Yet, we will eventually be asking him not only to digest and execute (at a high level) the current complex offense, but rather the full array of offense that is even more difficult.

All of this requires proper study and repetition over time. It is a long process to become fully comfortable. It is better for him to become incrementally more comfortable by focusing ALL of his energies on purely mental absorption and repetition of the whole, than to start him.

anon

09-12-2006, 12:24 AM

I'm certainly not of the start Cutler now camp, but one question that must be pondered is just how much of a "throwing a baby to the wolves" situation starting Cutler would be. If you think about the game against the Rams, our offense in the 2nd half consisted of quick reads, roll outs, and rush plays.

We all believe that Shanahan has tailored (or limited) our playbook in order to suit Plummer's strengths and weaknesses. Why is it such a mental leap to believe that he could simplify our offense to ease the pressure on Cutler? You don't think Cutler can run a rollout with a single receiver to his side, with the options to run or pass or throw away? You don't think Cutler can take a quick drop and throw slants or quick lobs to Walker? You don't think Cutler can hand the ball off to Bell Co.? And really, could it be that much worse than what we saw yesterday? As a matter of fact, starting him as a rookie might even relieve pressure, because everybody, maybe even the media, would give him a pass because he is a rookie.

Anyway, I'm not in the start Cutler camp. I'd like to see Plummer try to redeem himself, but he hasn't given me much to hold on to these last couple of games.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 12:34 AM

But I added the PSYCHIATRIC angle, Champ!

And I'm serious about that ... had we drafted somebody else, not a QB ... Jake wouldda played much better yesterday, and we'd be 1-0.

I actually believe that.

Then you're ignoring history... Jake plays like ass in the opening week of every year of his career.

In 1997, Jake's first start as a pro came in week 9, against the then Tennessee Oilers. His first start... The pressure was on. Jake threw 20 completions in 40 tries, including 4 interceptions, losing to the Tennessee Oilers 41-14. The Oilers jumped out to a 20-0 lead at the half.

In week one 1998, Jake didn't throw any picks, but he did lose two fumbles. He finished 14 for 33 for 166 yards. The Cowboys were on top of the Cardinals 14-0 at halftime. The Cards ended up losing to the Cowboys 38-10.

In 1999, a MIRACLE! Despite the fact that Jake threw 3 interceptions, the Arizona Cardinals beat the Eagles 25-24. He finished the game 25 for 48 for 274 yards. Tell me if this sounds familiar: The Cardinals were down 24-6 at halftime.

In 2000, vs. the New York Giants, Jake threw another 3 interceptions to start the season. He was 28 for 49 for 318 yards on the day. At halftime, the Giants were up 14-0. The Giants ended up winning 21-16, with Jake managing to throw his first touchdown of the day in the fourth quarter.

In 2001, the Denver Broncos were lucky enough to face Jake on Arizona's opening day (oddly enough, the Cards had a week one bye that year). The Broncos went into the locker room 17-10 over the Cardinals. Jake threw only one interception that game, but was largely ineffective, throwing his first touchdown in garbage time in the fourth quarter. He was 16 for 28 for 242 yards. The Broncos won 38-17.

In 2002, Jake started the season with another game marked by an interception. He was 14 for 36 and gained 187 yards on the day, losing to Washington largely thanks to the Arizona defense, as well as the inability for Arizona to get any offense going down the stretch.

In 2003, as a Bronco, Jake started his career with a 3 interception game, relying on the defense to keep the, then hapless Bengals, from converting those turnovers into points. Jake finished the game 12 for 25 and 115 yards. We won that game on the legs of Clinton Portis who gained 120 yards on 24 carries. Ian Gold intercepted a pass for a touchdown. We won 30-10.

In 2004, we faced the Kansas City Chiefs at home, in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions. Quentin Griffin, however, managed to more than make up for Plummer's mistakes running for 156 yards on 23 carries and 3 touchdowns. We won the game 34-24 despite Jake.

In 2005, we faced the Miami Dolphins in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions, as always, at the worst possible moments (when the pressure was on for the offense to respond). We lost the game 34-10, with our only touchdown coming in the fourth quarter when Jake threw a 2 yard pass to Kyle Johnson with 5 minutes left in the game.

I don't have to remind you what happened in 2006... 3 ints, right...

The Cliff Notes Version: In his 9 opening starts over the course of his career, Jake has thrown a grand total of 23 interceptions.

Kaylore

09-12-2006, 12:42 AM

I'm not going to quote your whole post but I disagree SoCal. You did a good job of showing how there are advantages to learning the system for a year or more but here's some counter points.

You still haven't explained examples of QB's that have been hurt by being rushed into the fray.

The gameplans that they are building are for and around a QB that knows the whole offense. This a allows for more complexity and the offense is totally different week to week. If Cutler started, the game plan that they would impliment would be watered down to something that he could handle. While this might limit our production, our defense is good enough that we could make up the slack, and at least we wouldn't be turning it over fifty times.

I also think a simplified plan in real game situations would do more to help him develop than a plan that he doesn't "get" would in practice only. At least him playing would give Cutler real game experience and allow him to prosper in degrees. As he showed an ability to master certain concepts they could increase the load.

Plummer cost us the game. Not only did he not help us win a game, he gave it away. At some point you have an obligation to the rest of the team to be fair to the other 51 guys and play the guy that won't lose it. It's completely wrong to keep playing a guy who's killing your team just because you're affraid to hurt another's development. There are veterans who have taken pay cuts and chosen to play on this team because the ability for this franchise to win games was a deciding factor. Coach owes it to the team to play the best guys regardless. When everyone else is doing there part to win and one guy is ass raping the team over and over, as a coach you have a moral responsibility to pull the moron and put someone else in. If Cutler plays the last game and just hands off the ball to the Bells the whole time we win it. At least we could punt or kick field goals rather than Jake giving them the ball four times!

I disagree on all counts.

I have no patience for Plummer. If he has anything less than a good game this Sunday, I'm going to be at the head of the dump Plummer movement and I'll make Taco look like Plummer's own Waffle Boy.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 12:53 AM

But just to be fair, I'll throw out his Arizona stats:

In four opening starts as a Bronco, Jake has thrown 10 interceptions.

SoCalBronco

09-12-2006, 01:02 AM

If Cutler started, the game plan that they would impliment would be watered down to something that he could handle.

That's the problem though. The experience that I want him to get is not doing stuff that he can handle right now. That's not the type of experience that is optimum. The repetitions that are of the greatest value are of the complex, tough stuff that he talked about in that article today. Even if he struggles at it for awhile and improves on only an incremental basis each week. I'd much rather have him slowly advance at the real deal than something that is going to be crafted for him to handle in a game as a rookie starter which is not representative of the type of stuff that he will later be expected to master. He needs to rep the big time stuff in practice. That's where the real learning comes in.

Plummer cost us the game. Not only did he not help us win a game, he gave it away. At some point you have an obligation to the rest of the team to be fair to the other 51 guys and play the guy that won't lose it. It's completely wrong to keep playing a guy who's killing your team just because you're affraid to hurt another's development. There are veterans who have taken pay cuts and chosen to play on this team because the ability for this franchise to win games was a deciding factor. Coach owes it to the team to play the best guys regardless. When everyone else is doing there part to win and one guy is ass raping the team over and over, as a coach you have a moral responsibility to pull the moron and put someone else in. If Cutler plays the last game and just hands off the ball to the Bells the whole time we win it. At least we could punt or kick field goals rather than Jake giving them the ball four times!

I disagree on all counts.

I have no patience for Plummer. If he has anything less than a good game this Sunday, I'm going to be at the head of the dump Plummer movement and I'll make Taco look like Plummer's own Waffle Boy.

I am also disgusted with Jake's play. I'm not trying to sit here and be a homer for him trying to find whatever reasons I can to keep him in there for the sake of keeping him in there. I was also furious and am tired of these kind of complete ****up performances that seem to occur with him more than most QBs.

On the coach's responsibility to play the best guys, take crappy performers out etc. I think it is the coach's responsibility to do what is in the best interest of the team. Since I feel that Cutler's development (in the method I described) is more important than the 2006 season, I have no trouble with the concept of just keeping Jake in there (perhaps to the short term detriment of the club) even if he is struggling. I understand where you are coming from, though. Shanahan appears to be caught between our two perspectives. He did seem to make a veiled threat out of frustration in his press conference as Mock pointed out in another thread earlier, but by the same token he has also talked about developing Cutler and not rushing him in too early and how he isnt yet ready etc. It's tough when we are in this spot, ideally you want the guy holding fort till the new era to still keep the transition era decent, but when it doesnt happen, it leaves some tough decisions.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 01:07 AM

watermock

09-12-2006, 01:09 AM

Every time the Bells started taking to the Rams, we would pass on second and 5. Apologies to Kubiak. Nothing has changed. Nintendo is from the top.

Jay doesn't have mental weakness IMO, and if we have to use "game management' a.k.a the leash, what difference does it make if Cutler is given a limited playbook. Jay has allready said months ago that the playbook wasn't giving him any problems. I'm not saying start him, just that I don't think he would be shell shocked at all, win or lose.

His progressions may be slow still, but IMO, that's about it.

SoCalBronco

09-12-2006, 01:10 AM

I just can't agree with the idea that Cutler's development would be hurt by getting him game experience. It makes zero sense. Wouldn't it stand to reason that getting him experience *IS* developing him?

Experience at a limited portion of the offense is not the type of experience that is optimum. I'd rather have him practicing the usual regular season offense than playing in something specially designed so that he can handle it in a game.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 01:12 AM

Experience at a limited portion of the offense is not the type of experience that is optimum.

Says who? Every former quarterback I've heard talk about the subject believes in starting the rookie and getting them game experience.

I'd rather have him practicing the usual regular season offense than playing in something specially designed so that he can handle it in a game.

Why? What does it matter so long as we're either winning, or he's showing progress and learning more and more of the playbook each week?

SoCalBronco

09-12-2006, 01:24 AM

Says who? Every former quarterback I've heard talk about the subject believes in starting the rookie and getting them game experience.

Why? What does it matter so long as we're either winning, or he's showing progress and learning more and more of the playbook each week?

I'm not sure which QBs you saw say that TJ, but I still disagree for the reasons stated.

Re: Point 2, it certainly would be nice to see the week to week progress and ofcourse the corresponding expansion of the offense, but if that were the case, he would still be getting practice reps and then game reps in the type of offense which is not representative of what he will later be asked to master (ofcourse in the situation you offer, as he learns more and more, and gets better at it, the game reps become somewhat more representative of what he will eventually be asked to master). Still, I prefer the opposite situation because he is gaining reps and experience at the whole thing from the start. There is no period of wasted reps on the specially designed/limited stuff. Rather, everything is geared to repping/absorbing the full offense. Same goes for game experience. It is definitely helpful in general, but even that experience is of (at least in the beginning and probably for a good while) the specially designed/limited offense variety.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 01:28 AM

I'm not sure which QBs you saw say that TJ, but I still disagree for the reasons stated.

The ones that come immediately to mind are Jaws, Simms, and Esiason.

Re: Point 2, it certainly would be nice to see the week to week progress and ofcourse the corresponding expansion of the offense, but if that were the case, he would still be getting practice reps and then game reps in the type of offense which is not representative of what he will later be asked to master (ofcourse in the situation you offer, as he learns more and more, and gets better at it, the game reps become somewhat more representative of what he will eventually be asked to master). Still, I prefer the opposite situation because he is gaining reps and experience at the whole thing from the start. There is no period of wasted reps on the specially designed/limited stuff. Rather, everything is geared to repping/absorbing the full offense. Same goes for game experience. It is definitely helpful in general, but even that experience is of (at least in the beginning and probably for a good while) the specially designed/limited offense variety.

I just don't see the problem. Regardless of when he starts, he's going to be given the offense to him a piece at a time... Unless we plan on keeping Jake around for 3 more years and carry two expensive quarterbacks... That's not going to happen. I'll be suprised if Jake lasts the season, especially with New England coming up.

Kaylore

09-12-2006, 01:30 AM

Says who? Every former quarterback I've heard talk about the subject believes in starting the rookie and getting them game experience.

Why? What does it matter so long as we're either winning, or he's showing progress and learning more and more of the playbook each week?

Exactly. And not just QB's a lot of coaches too. Jimmy Johnson, Ditka, a lot of coaches pointed out if you're paying them the money go get your value out of it. I know a lot of QB's that have said that practice was ok but they didn't really start progressing until they got into games.

I also thinJay's got a better shot at developing by learning simplified offensive plays, maiking quick easy reads and progressing in levels than he does by having to just learn the whole offense at once and one day just pop in. I'd rather get him in and get the reps.

Let's say we start Cutler and he makes a bunch of stupid decissions and costs us a game. Well at least he has the excuse of being a rookie and there is a better chance of him learning from those mistakes than Plummer who just doesn't have the mechanics to throw accurately or make tight throws and likes to just stare down Rod Smith all day.

Shanahan has always played to win now. He doesn't believe in rebuilding. So this "preserve the future by sacrificing the present" stuff doesn't fly. If Cutler can give us a better chance, or at least not act like a retard on the field by giving the game away, then start Cutler. I trust Shanahan. We traded up to get this kid. He obviously saw a need to improve. Eight turnovers in two games is hard evidence to sidestep.

Kaylore

09-12-2006, 01:34 AM

I'm not sure which QBs you saw say that TJ, but I still disagree for the reasons stated.

Re: Point 2, it certainly would be nice to see the week to week progress and ofcourse the corresponding expansion of the offense, but if that were the case, he would still be getting practice reps and then game reps in the type of offense which is not representative of what he will later be asked to master (ofcourse in the situation you offer, as he learns more and more, and gets better at it, the game reps become somewhat more representative of what he will eventually be asked to master). Still, I prefer the opposite situation because he is gaining reps and experience at the whole thing from the start. There is no period of wasted reps on the specially designed/limited stuff. Rather, everything is geared to repping/absorbing the full offense. Same goes for game experience. It is definitely helpful in general, but even that experience is of (at least in the beginning and probably for a good while) the specially designed/limited offense variety.

That's bunk. Look at Rivers. He's been "learning" the complicated offense of Marty Ball for three years and they're still giving him baby spoons. Game experience trumps practice every day of the week. You still haven't explained an example of how Cutler being put in would hinder his development. You've only said that him learning the whole thing first is preferable. For me it's about winning games and Plumer is losing them for us.

Full Throttle

09-12-2006, 02:15 AM

Then you're ignoring history... Jake plays like ass in the opening week of every year of his career.

In 1997, Jake's first start as a pro came in week 9, against the then Tennessee Oilers. His first start... The pressure was on. Jake threw 20 completions in 40 tries, including 4 interceptions, losing to the Tennessee Oilers 41-14. The Oilers jumped out to a 20-0 lead at the half.

In week one 1998, Jake didn't throw any picks, but he did lose two fumbles. He finished 14 for 33 for 166 yards. The Cowboys were on top of the Cardinals 14-0 at halftime. The Cards ended up losing to the Cowboys 38-10.

In 1999, a MIRACLE! Despite the fact that Jake threw 3 interceptions, the Arizona Cardinals beat the Eagles 25-24. He finished the game 25 for 48 for 274 yards. Tell me if this sounds familiar: The Cardinals were down 24-6 at halftime.

In 2000, vs. the New York Giants, Jake threw another 3 interceptions to start the season. He was 28 for 49 for 318 yards on the day. At halftime, the Giants were up 14-0. The Giants ended up winning 21-16, with Jake managing to throw his first touchdown of the day in the fourth quarter.

In 2001, the Denver Broncos were lucky enough to face Jake on Arizona's opening day (oddly enough, the Cards had a week one bye that year). The Broncos went into the locker room 17-10 over the Cardinals. Jake threw only one interception that game, but was largely ineffective, throwing his first touchdown in garbage time in the fourth quarter. He was 16 for 28 for 242 yards. The Broncos won 38-17.

In 2002, Jake started the season with another game marked by an interception. He was 14 for 36 and gained 187 yards on the day, losing to Washington largely thanks to the Arizona defense, as well as the inability for Arizona to get any offense going down the stretch.

In 2003, as a Bronco, Jake started his career with a 3 interception game, relying on the defense to keep the, then hapless Bengals, from converting those turnovers into points. Jake finished the game 12 for 25 and 115 yards. We won that game on the legs of Clinton Portis who gained 120 yards on 24 carries. Ian Gold intercepted a pass for a touchdown. We won 30-10.

In 2004, we faced the Kansas City Chiefs at home, in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions. Quentin Griffin, however, managed to more than make up for Plummer's mistakes running for 156 yards on 23 carries and 3 touchdowns. We won the game 34-24 despite Jake.

In 2005, we faced the Miami Dolphins in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions, as always, at the worst possible moments (when the pressure was on for the offense to respond). We lost the game 34-10, with our only touchdown coming in the fourth quarter when Jake threw a 2 yard pass to Kyle Johnson with 5 minutes left in the game.

I don't have to remind you what happened in 2006... 3 ints, right...

The Cliff Notes Version: In his 9 opening starts over the course of his career, Jake has thrown a grand total of 23 interceptions.

Screw Bob, you are the true Information minister. LOL

BroncoBuff

09-12-2006, 03:06 AM

But just to be fair, I'll throw out his Arizona stats:

In four opening starts as a Bronco, Jake has thrown 10 interceptions.

I did not know that ...

Well-baked avatar?

He looks great! With his finger on his chin, contemplating whether this string of opening-game Plummer doldrums followed by significant improvement in week 2 means the Broncos will cover the spread against the Chefs. 8')

Whatever he decides - take his advice, TJ!

BroncoBuff

09-12-2006, 03:08 AM

Then you're ignoring history... Jake plays like ass in the opening week of every year of his career.

In 1997, Jake's first start as a pro came in week 9, against the then Tennessee Oilers. His first start... The pressure was on. Jake threw 20 completions in 40 tries, including 4 interceptions, losing to the Tennessee Oilers 41-14. The Oilers jumped out to a 20-0 lead at the half.

In week one 1998, Jake didn't throw any picks, but he did lose two fumbles. He finished 14 for 33 for 166 yards. The Cowboys were on top of the Cardinals 14-0 at halftime. The Cards ended up losing to the Cowboys 38-10.

In 1999, a MIRACLE! Despite the fact that Jake threw 3 interceptions, the Arizona Cardinals beat the Eagles 25-24. He finished the game 25 for 48 for 274 yards. Tell me if this sounds familiar: The Cardinals were down 24-6 at halftime.

In 2000, vs. the New York Giants, Jake threw another 3 interceptions to start the season. He was 28 for 49 for 318 yards on the day. At halftime, the Giants were up 14-0. The Giants ended up winning 21-16, with Jake managing to throw his first touchdown of the day in the fourth quarter.

In 2001, the Denver Broncos were lucky enough to face Jake on Arizona's opening day (oddly enough, the Cards had a week one bye that year). The Broncos went into the locker room 17-10 over the Cardinals. Jake threw only one interception that game, but was largely ineffective, throwing his first touchdown in garbage time in the fourth quarter. He was 16 for 28 for 242 yards. The Broncos won 38-17.

In 2002, Jake started the season with another game marked by an interception. He was 14 for 36 and gained 187 yards on the day, losing to Washington largely thanks to the Arizona defense, as well as the inability for Arizona to get any offense going down the stretch.

In 2003, as a Bronco, Jake started his career with a 3 interception game, relying on the defense to keep the, then hapless Bengals, from converting those turnovers into points. Jake finished the game 12 for 25 and 115 yards. We won that game on the legs of Clinton Portis who gained 120 yards on 24 carries. Ian Gold intercepted a pass for a touchdown. We won 30-10.

In 2004, we faced the Kansas City Chiefs at home, in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions. Quentin Griffin, however, managed to more than make up for Plummer's mistakes running for 156 yards on 23 carries and 3 touchdowns. We won the game 34-24 despite Jake.

In 2005, we faced the Miami Dolphins in a game that saw Jake throw 2 interceptions, as always, at the worst possible moments (when the pressure was on for the offense to respond). We lost the game 34-10, with our only touchdown coming in the fourth quarter when Jake threw a 2 yard pass to Kyle Johnson with 5 minutes left in the game.

I don't have to remind you what happened in 2006... 3 ints, right...

The Cliff Notes Version: In his 9 opening starts over the course of his career, Jake has thrown a grand total of 23 interceptions.

My compliments to your research staff, TJ. That's some fine work, and actually quite encouraging. Maybe this whole thread is nuts! Maybe Mosca is right - we CAN'T psychoanalyze somebody based upon a traffic incident, a chick columnist and a first round draft pick. Uhh

OrangeShadow

09-12-2006, 03:34 AM

anytime your first postgame comments are about cutler looking over your shoulder you arent thinking right.

Orange_Beard

09-12-2006, 05:33 AM

You missed the left handed pass.
He is now 1 for 2 with a pick left handed.

Drek

09-12-2006, 06:14 AM

Its Plummer's job at least up to the bye. He typically turns it around after the first bad week though, so I don't see us actually making the change. If it comes to that though, we can use the bye to have two full weeks of getting Jay up to speed.

55CrushEm

09-12-2006, 06:27 AM

I don't buy into that theory. I believe young talented QBs fail because they are on crappy teams to begin with.

Agreed.....that's what I said yesterday. People here just assume that Cutler can't suceed because other rookie QB's in the past like Alex Smith, or Joey Harrington, or Losman, etc.....have failed.

The big difference, is that THEY played on SH*TTY teams !! WE are a SB contender.....

55CrushEm

09-12-2006, 06:30 AM

I just can't agree with the idea that Cutler's development would be hurt by getting him game experience. It makes zero sense. Wouldn't it stand to reason that getting him experience *IS* developing him?

Yes, agreed again. Wasn't it Cutler's POISE we were all praising in preseason....that he never once looked like a "deer in the headlights".

Or how about him bouncing back from his INT, to go on an 80-yard TD drive. Jake throws an INT, and, well......throws 2 more.

Not to mention, he was always losing at Vandy.....yet, his psyche doesn't seem bruised at all.....quite the opposite. He's EXTREMELY confident.

Dedhed

09-12-2006, 06:37 AM

How will Plummer fare this week? He's never seen the defense he's about to face. We've got more new wrinkles than Vermeil.
It's the offense in KC that has the monopoly on new wrinkles.

Taco John

09-12-2006, 10:14 AM

I did not know that ...

Well-baked avatar?

He looks great! With his finger on his chin, contemplating whether this string of opening-game Plummer doldrums followed by significant improvement in week 2 means the Broncos will cover the spread against the Chefs. 8')

Whatever he decides - take his advice, TJ!

Heh... Thanks!

ludo21

09-12-2006, 10:25 AM

That's bunk. Look at Rivers. He's been "learning" the complicated offense of Marty Ball for three years and they're still giving him baby spoons. Game experience trumps practice every day of the week. You still haven't explained an example of how Cutler being put in would hinder his development. You've only said that him learning the whole thing first is preferable. For me it's about winning games and Plumer is losing them for us.

QUOTED FOR TRUTH! ^5

ClevelandBronco

09-12-2006, 10:32 AM

QUOTED FOR TRUTH! ^5

Quoted for not being able to understand the difference between truth and opinion.

It's all opinion on this matter. Jay ain't playing yet because, in Shanny's opinion, it's not his time. I just hope that his opinion holds steady until 2007, even if that means we'll be flipping a coin with the Raiders to decide who gets first pick next spring.

ludo21

09-12-2006, 10:34 AM

Quoted for not being able to understand the difference between truth and opinion.

It's all opinion on this matter. Jay ain't playing yet because, in Shanny's opinion, it's not his time. I just hope that his opinion holds steady until 2007, even if that means we'll be flipping a coin with the Raiders to decide who gets first pick next spring.

I too WANT Jake to be the guy, i want him to prove me worng.

But that right their is the stupidest thing ive heard all Season.

ClevelandBronco

09-12-2006, 11:02 AM

I too WANT Jake to be the guy, i want him to prove me worng.

But that right their is the stupidest thing ive heard all Season.

It's not about Jake anymore. Jake's future is history.

Now it's all about the kid.

No1BroncoFan

09-12-2006, 11:10 AM

Before the salary cap era, teams often drafted good to great QBs and kept them in the backup roll for a year or two, maybe three. Since the salary cap has put such restrictions on teams, they now draft QBs and throw them straight into the fire. Which method is better? We're in the same situation San Diego was in (albeit with better talent backing up our starter). We have the luxury of being able to afford our current starter and keep the kid back until he's ready. Remeber, both Shanny and Cutler have said that Cutler isn't ready. So, what's the rush to do exactly the opposite of what Shanahan and Cutler both think is the right thing for Cutlers development? I just don't understand it. If it reaches the point where Jay Cutler is the better option, readoy or not, than Jake Plummer is, Shanahan will pull the trigger. Until then, no amount of pissing, moaning, b*tching and complaining will do any good at all.

Most likely, Jake will rebound from his typical opening day brain-fart and right the ship. We'll go somewhere between 10-6 and 14-2 (I'm thinking 12-4). We'll make the playoffs and if the defense and offensive line comes to play, we'll go deep, maybe even the Superbowl. If the worst happens (as all the Jake bashers assume it will) and we tank the season, Cutler still may not get the nod until next year. Why throw him out there in a futile effort if he (as Shanny and Cutler have both said) isn't ready?

Ben

ludo21

09-12-2006, 11:11 AM

so why would u want the first pick over competing this season?

No1BroncoFan

09-12-2006, 11:16 AM

You missed the left handed pass.
He is now 1 for 2 with a pick left handed.
Actually, he's two for three with a TD and a pick.

Ben

ClevelandBronco

09-12-2006, 11:28 AM

so why would u want the first pick over competing this season?

Paraphrased from the movie, "Colors:"

"An old bull and a young bull are standing on a hill looking down at a herd of cows. The young bull says to the old bull, 'Let's run down there and nail one of those cows.' The old bull replies, 'Nah. Let's just walk down there and nail them all.'"

I'm not willing to gamble the multiple successful seasons I anticipate if Jay is developed correctly for success this season.

ludo21

09-12-2006, 11:34 AM

I still dont get what ur getting at.... Ha!

If Jake continues to struggle, then put Jay in and try and salvage somewhat of a season.

mosca

09-12-2006, 12:44 PM

My compliments to your research staff, TJ. That's some fine work, and actually quite encouraging. Maybe this whole thread is nuts! Maybe Mosca is right - we CAN'T psychoanalyze somebody based upon a traffic incident, a chick columnist and a first round draft pick. Uhh
Right. I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. The things you have to base your psychoanalysis of him on are such common occurrences - as if most everyday guys have never : gotten into a traffic incident, flipped someone the bird, grew a beard, reamed someone out over the phone, or had a first round QB drafted to push him...er... never mind the last one. But do you get what I'm saying here?

Go ahead and psychoanalyze him... never said you CAN'T. Just that you're wasting your time. Me, I'd rather pay attention to his play on the gridiron.

BroncoBuff

09-12-2006, 01:14 PM

Right. I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. The things you have to base your psychoanalysis of him on are such common occurrences - as if most everyday guys have never : gotten into a traffic incident, flipped someone the bird, grew a beard, reamed someone out over the phone, or had a first round QB drafted to push him...er... never mind the last one. But do you get what I'm saying here?

Go ahead and psychoanalyze him... never said you CAN'T. Just that you're wasting your time. Me, I'd rather pay attention to his play on the gridiron.

I enjoy psychoanalyzing things, actually, and its fun to talk about (it is a "message board" after all ;D) I thought my point about Jake never having any competition - overlaid on his strange behavior - overlaid on Cutler - might mean something. It still might.

But TJ's stats on Plummer's opening days was far more incisive.

freak6

09-12-2006, 02:09 PM

Jay Cutler vs Jake Plummer

Arm Strength ---- CUTLER - Duh

Accuracy ---- CUTLER - Duh

Ability to execute offense ---- EQUAL - Yeah Jake has more experiance, but since he can't execute a deep pass to save his beard, I downgrade him there, and with his terrible reads even more.

Decision making/reading the defense ---- Equal - Normally I would say Jake but after last week, fkn A.

Playmaking ---- Cutler - he's not afraid to run the ball either, and he also has the cannon to thread the needle when he needs to, that pass to Devoe after his pick 6 shows his ability to shake off a mistake and come right back, Jake just builds on his mistakes with more.

Leadership ---- Plummer - but not for long I hope.

How hard is it for Jake Plummer anyway. His deep passes ALL HAVE to come off playaction, because his rag arm has got to have the Safety cheat way up for him to hit a reciever one on one, who also must have about a 5 yard gap thanks to the playaction for Jake to actually complete the pass. He even blew that to Devoe this week. If it isn't play action, his passes are on quick slants enabling him about 10 seconds to get a pre-snap read on the defense. Or they are on quick hitches, or the 3 step drop jump balls he threw to Rod and Javon.

No more excuses for Plummer. His nickname this week should be Make Or Break Jake.

DeusExManning

09-12-2006, 02:17 PM

I really think you hit the nail on the head Broncobuff. Clearly something has happened to Jake. He looked like he was lost.

freak6

09-12-2006, 02:20 PM

He looked scared, hesitant, and unfocused to me.

Orange_Beard

09-12-2006, 02:46 PM

Actually, he's two for three with a TD and a pick.

Ben

When was the third pass?

Hercules Rockefeller

09-12-2006, 02:48 PM

When was the third pass?

He had a left-handed shovel pass to Q in the same game as the pick, don't remember if it went for a TD though. If Ben's talking about another pass, then he's 3 for 4 with a TD.

cmhargrove

09-12-2006, 03:46 PM

Did anyone watch the Chargers / Raiders last night? Someone tell me if you don't think Cutler already looks more poised than Rivers? I believe their D won the game because the QB wasn't alllowed to make mistakes.

Another question - If we had not even thrown a ball in St. Louis, what do you think the score would have been? I think we could have won.

I think Jake will redeem himself, and we are still headed for the playoffs, but I have no doubt that Cutler is the better QB. This is the first time in a long time we have speed at receiver, but they are all waiting for the ball when it does finally come.
Did you see Sheffler when he donked the pass off his facemask? It was like "I thought you were supposed to throw that in front of me?"
I think hitting receivers on a dead run is something that Jake will never do to a high degree, but Cutler has already shown.
That is also the reason why we never got much out of Lelie. Many of the deep passes he caught, he had to stop and wait for the ball to get there - lots of lost TD's.
The ability of Cutler to throw with accuracy and velocity will always distinguish him. Teams like Pittsburgh will still kill us if we can't burn them with accurate passes when they blitz. Jake just can't do it.
Until next year.......

Jetmeck

09-12-2006, 06:24 PM

How will Plummer fare this week? He's never seen the defense he's about to face. We've got more new wrinkles than Vermeil.

Shut up, your full of **** as usual.

Jetmeck

09-12-2006, 06:27 PM

Cutler pushing Jake might explain last Sunday if your the excuse type of person. Jake is jake and looked exactly the same against Pittsburgh last year and we didn't know who Cutler was. What about all the other times he has played like crap, although this last game tops them all ?

Kaylore

09-12-2006, 07:49 PM

Here's the problem; Every other QB that was on a team that drafted a top flight QB to replace them usually upped their game in response. Kitna and Brees come to mind. I mean the added preasure and knowledge that someone else is going to take your job ensure you focus and take things a bit more seriously.

So what does Plummer do? He goes out and has probably his worst game of his career here single-handedly losing the game. Thanks Jake. Way to step up to the plate.

If that's what we can expect from Jake this year, then we might as well put the rookie in because worst case scenario is the result's the same but at least he'll learn. How long have we been asking to Jake to learn?

Steve Sewell

09-12-2006, 08:02 PM

Shanahan could tell Cutler he is the starter this Sunday, and Jay would just yawn, say "thanks coach" and fall asleep...and still destroy the Chiefs.

freak6

09-12-2006, 08:04 PM

lol S.S.

Steve Sewell

09-12-2006, 08:05 PM

I guess it's all a moot point though, because if we lose to a Trent Green-less Chiefs team at home this weekend, you can bet your ass that Cutler will be suiting up as the starter in Week 3.

Steve Sewell

09-12-2006, 08:09 PM

lol S.S.

Seriously man, there is something about this kid. Nothing seems to get to him at all...he always has the same, calm demeanor and looks like he is actually bored with what he's doing, and then he turns around and does everything at an extremely high level.

I tell you what, if for some reason Cutler had to come in to spell Jake for the remainder of the season, I would have no qualms whatsoever about predicting that we'd still make the playoffs. I think he's that good.

freak6

09-12-2006, 08:16 PM

I agree. His face is kind of chubby or whatever, and his eyes slant down, giving him this perpetual sleepy look. His interviews are pretty bland. He has a dorky Lloyd from "dumb and dumber" haircut. And then he goes on the field and lights it up. Quarterback Savant?

I think we could make the playoffs with him starting every game too, not as a wildcard though, but I think we could win the division with him starting every game.

I just noticed your avatar, very nice. That was such a fun game to watch, and still is on ESPN Classic.

BroncoBuff

09-12-2006, 09:14 PM

I guess it's all a moot point though, because if we lose to a Trent Green-less Chiefs team at home this weekend, you can bet your ass that Cutler will be suiting up as the starter in Week 3.

The way you put that ... I'm not sure if I want it to happen or not. I think not, but I wanna see the kid play more. Let's hope for a 4-touchdown lead as the 4th quarter starts.

maven

09-12-2006, 09:32 PM

If anyone has ever seen the Dwayne Wade dommercial where he gets knock down over & over, and gets right back up.

This was Jay Cutler at Vandy. Cutler has it. He's Ebay.

On Sunday I saw a qb looking over his shoulder.

maven

09-12-2006, 09:33 PM

Let's hope for a 4-touchdown lead as the 4th quarter starts.

Last I checked we're not playing the Raiders...

Taco John

09-12-2006, 10:34 PM

Teams like Pittsburgh will still kill us if we can't burn them with accurate passes when they blitz. Jake just can't do it.
Until next year.......

Teams like Pittsburgh... Or the Rams... take your pick.

Rock Chalk

09-15-2006, 06:39 AM

You missed the left handed pass.
He is now 1 for 2 with a pick left handed.

2 for 3 with a pick.

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 07:36 AM

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 11:58 AM

Psychology 101, thank you.

This thread is priceless. As a trained Psychotherapist, this pop psychology has been most entertaining. Thank you all for a great laugh.

Oh, and BTW, it is impossible to make any assessment without conducting a face to face interview. Reading into peoples actions alone is a form of Bias from a mental standpoint. From a performance standpoint, players can easily be graded from film.

The word was "PSYCHIATRY," not psychology Uhh ... as a trained therapist, I'm surprised you thought this thread or my word choice evinced any effort at a clinical diagnosis of any kind ... c'mon, Med - just having fun ;D .. can't we talk about the pressure Jake is under without having our credentials scrutinized? (btw, despite the fact it was just fun, I'm a BA Psych, CU-Denver 1985, y tu?)

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 12:17 PM

From a mental standpoint, actions are only a small peice of the process.
Med, you're preaching to the choir ...

I ask people all the time - lately these Seahawks fans: Why do you think two of the exact same physical specimins - same height, weight, strength, eyesight, can turn out to have as wildly varied careers as Dan Marino and Todd Marinovich ... as John Elway and Jeff George?
Sports psychology is THE cutting edge psych. imo. Guys like Elway and many like him truly hate - not dislike, but HATE - losing. 'Hate' to the point of an identifiable pathology, often with phobic features. Examples:

Dan Reeves and Mike Ditka. Reeves broke two fingers and dislocated one playing "bloody knuckles" with Ditka in Philadelphia the night before a game in the 70s. He said he knew a finger was broken, but he kept going because he didn't want to lose. Uhh
Elway trashed a $15,000 Italian pool table because he lost to Bubby Brister on it. He was so angered by Marino's gaudy numbers early on, that he acted out and lost some friends in the QB fraternity - rifts that survive today. Just ask Ken O'Brien and Steve DeBerg. Remember he flipped off Shanahan on the Raider sidelines right there on the field?
An LPGA golfer I know, Kristi Albers, once 5-putted the 18th green at a major in 1993. The last 3 putts were from less than 30 inches ... her prize money was $38,000 less because of them. Each of her missed putts of under 30 inches cost her $12,667.

Sports psych is so fascinating .... how do you transfer the competitive mentality (or, phobia of losing) of a John Elway or Marino or Montana - even for just 3 hours at a time - into a perfect physical specimin like Marinovich or a golden-armed geek like George? How does somebody like Kristi harness whatever psych is required to drain a kindergarten putt to save 40 grand and gain invaluable exemptions for her career?

baja

09-15-2006, 12:20 PM

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 12:29 PM

http://www.moviemail-online.co.uk/images/small/sound-of-music.jpg

How do you solve a problem like marinovich? ...

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/4059/nunwf1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

How do you hold a moonbeam in your hand?

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 12:38 PM

The word was "PSYCHIATRY," not psychology Uhh ... as a trained therapist, I'm surprised you thought this thread or my word choice evinced any effort at a clinical diagnosis of any kind ... c'mon, Med - just having fun ;D .. can't we talk about the pressure Jake is under without having our credentials scrutinized? (btw, despite the fact it was just fun, I'm a BA Psych, CU-Denver 1985, y tu?)

I'm a BA in History and Political Science Indiana University '94. BA Psych IU 2000. MA in Counseling Psychology and Current Ph.D candidate. Right now I am fulfilling my license requirements in Indiana and am studying Sports Psychology under an internship with a Ph.D. here in INDY.

The term "Sports Psychologist" has been misused for so long by kinesiologists, that it has lost a lot of relevant meaning in the Professional Sports ranks in this country. Thankfully, the APA put out guidelines for the profession three years ago, and the Term Psychologist requires a Ph.D or PsyD designation along with an internship with a qualified Sports Psychologist. Hence, all the extra degrees and study.

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 12:45 PM

Awesome ... :notworthy

I wasn't trying to be technical, I just think it's interesting that Jake hasn't had competition to be the starting QB since the inimitable Kent Graham in Week 6 of his rookie year .... and he was a 4-year starter in college.

Now there's Cutler. And Jay just seems to have this Joe Montana-like icy "what-ever" indifference to those around him. That's gotta rattle a guy like Jake ... Jay just has this natural cockiness that seems to .... er, I guess I'm doing it again, right? Uhh

With all your education ... can you answer me this: WHY IS EVERYBODY AROUND HERE SO MUCH YOUNGER THAN ME?!

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 12:49 PM

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 12:53 PM

At least you didn't say "the generation BELOW me" :~ohyah!:

Billy Clyde Puckett

09-15-2006, 01:01 PM

With all your education ... can you answer me this: WHY IS EVERYBODY AROUND HERE SO MUCH YOUNGER THAN ME?!

PPPPPFFFFFFFTTT - Youngster :)

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 01:07 PM

PPPPPFFFFFFFTTT - Youngster :)

Case in point ;D

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 01:10 PM

Hence, all the extra degrees and study.

You are definitely not kidding there ... I started an MA program briefly, but there are such HUGE barriers to becoming a clinical psychologist of any kind, that I just dropped it. Enormous and seemingly endless certification, interning, accrediting and study requirements.

On the other end of the spectrum, I finished law school in just under two years, passed the bar exam 7 weeks after I graduated, and was licensed to practice law in L.A. just 2 years and 5 months after my first day in law school.

What's up with that?

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 01:18 PM

My thesis title: "Scent Sense and Body Language: The Raging Undercurrents of Non-Verbal Human Communication."

Never finished.

What kind of clientele do you work with Med? What does the spectre of Payaton Manning hanging over that city do to your psyche? ;D

I'm 45, dudes ... and I feel my own mortality now. Not to mention the cold, clammy hand of death tugging on my shoulder every waking moment of my life! ;D

Billy Clyde Puckett

09-15-2006, 01:19 PM

Case in point ;D

Yea and I have a bad case of CRS disease (Can't Remember Sh*t) to prove it.

Sassy

09-15-2006, 01:20 PM

Shhh....you're making me feel old..and I have a HUGE party to go to for the next 5 days ;D

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 01:20 PM

You are definitely not kidding there ... I started an MA program briefly, but there are such HUGE barriers to becoming a clinical psychologist of any kind, that I just dropped it. Enormous and seemingly endless certification, interning, accrediting and study requirements.

On the other end of the spectrum, I finished law school in just under two years, passed the bar exam 7 weeks after I graduated, and was licensed to practice law in L.A. just 2 years and 5 months after my first day in law school.

What's up with that?

SIGH!

I have to do two years under supervision and a probationary license. Then, I can practice Counseling without supervision and on my own. However, I can not practice Sports Psychology without supervision until I get my Ph.D. Plus, you have to be liscensed in every state you practice and the exams are harder than the Law equivalent's :thumbs:

Mediator12

09-15-2006, 01:21 PM

Yea and I have a bad case of CRS disease (Can't Remember Sh*t) to prove it.

I was referring to the EXCELLENT older posters :welcome:

baja

09-15-2006, 01:22 PM

My thesis title: "Scent Sense and Body Language: The Raging Undercurrents of Non-Verbal Human Communication."

Never finished.

What kind of clientele do you work with Med? What does the spectre of Payaton Manning hanging over that city do to your psyche? ;D

I'm 45, dudes ... and I feel my own mortality now. <b> Not to mention the cold, clammy hand of death tugging on my shoulder every waking moment of my life! </b> ;D

That's just the weather dude remember you live in Seattle! ;D

Florida_Bronco

09-15-2006, 01:44 PM

So...what's the mental break down on Bob?

riiiiick

09-15-2006, 01:44 PM

not technical but a more "heart", "spirit" slant. this team was confident, full of heart, could taste that SB since they were only ONE game away, even a few fortunate breaks away (champ's tip possible TD, end zone pic, etc). they were ready. then draft day, and their leader, whom they ALL had confidence in, gets gutted by the coaches. can jake rebound, can this team still follow him into battle? or is this cutlers team now?

Bob's your Information Minister

09-15-2006, 02:34 PM

So...what's the mental break down on Bob?

I don't know, but I threw a horrible interception on Madden last night. My decision making isn't up to par. Good thing I can hand the ball to Larry Johnson. I'm a product of the system.

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 02:39 PM

So...what's the mental break down on Bob?

You're joking - but I do have one for Watermock. After -Slap- posted his great "worst posters," or "Bottom 10 Posters" thread, complete with analyses of each of them, I got to thinking about mock mostly.

Mock has a "repressed anger"/"Don Quixote"/"mother" complex of some sort imo, whereby he repeatedly and intentionally provokes others to attack him with intense criticism, even insults. He knows he is doing this, and in fact he INTENTIONALLY PROVOKES these attacks. As Slap put it, he "Craves abuse and demands ritual beatdowns on a daily basis." But I don't think he does it for the beat-down per se, I think he does it because he craves the experience of his response to the beat-downs.

When he is criticized/insulted/"mocked", he reacts, as WE see it - like a caged animal - lashing out at all who dare question him - STFU! and on and on until he loses steam and peters out on that point in an alcohol-induced cloud, at which time he starts the whole process over again. This pattern repeats over and over and over and over and over and over again.

My guess is that mock had an experience/experiences in his childhood where he was attacked/insulted by persons in his peer group one or more times in a public setting (prolly school). For whatever reasons, mock wasn't able to, or did not respond in a healthy outward manner that nurtured self-confidence and a positive self image as he grew. I think he was quasi-traumatized by this experienc(es), and is "stuck" in that moment - stuck on this lack of response, which stunted the growth of his self-image.

Sooo ...

... he artificially re-creates and acts out this same scenario today, again and again and again, with his peer group in a public setting (OM), so that he can respond in a manner that he "should have/wishes he had/needed to" - back then. We hear crazed, caged-animal "STFU!" ... but he feels, however artificially, that he is reacting to that bully. He is (finally!) "swooping down" like Don Quixote, smiting the bully with a self-confident "STFU!"

The "mother" part I'm less clear on, but I think it reflects that he probably was comforted after this trauma by his parents (as is so often the case, his parents probably didn't know what actually happened, but they were there for him). Alcohol is now the mother/parent, which soothes him after these inneffectual latter-day "STFU!"s fail to yield what he needs.

No matter how many times he artificially re-creates that situation, and no matter how many time he swoops in with the A+ perfect "STFU!" ... it will never give him what he needed at that time - during that stage of his development.

I'm actually quite serious here, this is not a joke. And if you read this mock, I'm not trying to minimize you - I'm no better a person than you, I have plenty of demons of my own - maybe more than you.

BTW - if you haven't seen Slap's thread, it's an absolute must-read: http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?&p=1199002#post1199002

TDforTD

09-15-2006, 02:54 PM

Broncos fans aren't that great. A lot of these threads show why. Anyone blaming Plummer for the loss is in this category.

ScottXray

09-15-2006, 03:06 PM

LOL LOL LOL

I just read the "loser" thread for the first time...
about died Hilarious! when I got down to #2.

As far as feeling old.....Maybe it is the NWest Climate...I don't think so.
I am trying to finish my Summer of Disasters as far as my body goes.

I got poison oak the first week of July....in my own back yard! It ended up spreading to cover 85% of my skin about 10 days after exposure...and I spent 3 days in the hospital receiving IV steiroids to stop its spread before it finally came under control. Another 3 weeks of prednisone use and then 3 more before it was finally cleared up all the way. About the first of September

For Labor day I had friends and family over for BBQ and Beer (really Margaritas with triple sec and Grand Marnier). So I went and did some yard clean up on Sunday the 3rd, because of the kids that would be coming ...I carefully avoided the area the poison oak is at. However, I got a SMALL scratch on my left cheek from some thorns I cleaned up near a path.

I'm now on the last day of a two week vacation that I have spent with my Left eye swollen closed because I got an antibiotic resistant infection. Hell I couldn't even golf cause I have no depth perception. Ever try to hit something without being able to judge it's distance. The multiple antibiotic cocktail I am now on is finally reducing the swelling...I can actually see out of the eye now. My sixth doctor appt this week is tomorrow.

I was really looking forward to the Broncos killing the lambs last week......

They better RIP the Chiefs Sunday....... I have to go back to work Monday.

:flower: :egbgb: :wave:

ZachKC

09-15-2006, 03:07 PM

Brutal thread. Very funny.

Hulamau

09-15-2006, 05:03 PM

I just now saw this thread had I seen it before I would not have started the other thread.

Good point Buff about jay in the wings making Plummer look over his shoulder. I too think it had something to do with his crappy game.

Like your new sig Baja, about it being better to go 8 and 8 with Cutler, IF and only IF, we seem destined for a one and done fate in the playoffs at best with Jake this year. Thats what I'm most afraid of, JAke wins enough to insure us another very low set of draft choices in each round next April, and yet we still get bounced in the first round of the playoffs when Jake can't overcome the compelling issue of the forward pass in crunch time.

I'm all for Jake rebounding and doing really well and winning it all this year ... just like I'm all for sunny skies 365 days a year as well, but I only hope the odds of both dont turn out to be about the same.

IF indeed Jake cant get the final step done, at some point later in the season we could be far better off giving the kid the reins and letting him get over his first year foibles so that next year we can get down to the serious business of going all the way.

Pehaps if Cutler comes in around game 8 he may well take us just as far as Jake would have, but even if he struggles as most rookies do and we wind up 8 and 8 or worse, at least as consolation we can add two high first round picks to the quiver considering Washington's top 10 pick they are going to have to donate to the cause :-).

We could then really reload the Dline and grab a solid safety and RB in April as well as bring in a solid and motivated FA replacement for Foster to protect the right side of tthe line with Jay Cee next year.

To be sure, I'm not hoping that is how it plays out, nor am I suggesting we give-up on this season by any means, but if the better teams we play this year have learned from our great year last year and are effective in coralling Jake significantly throughout the first half of the year and forcing him in a pattern of more mistakes, it would be ashame to waste the second half of the season on an obviously lame-duck QB tenure by continuing with the status quo when we could get a HUGE head start in the maturation of the new gun for 2007 and the long term future.

However, that said I'm perfectly happy to let Shanny make those decisions and it shouldnt be driven by fan demands or outrage over a bad game, but should only come from a solid football decision for what is best for the team both now and long term.

For now though, its all Jake all the way and he is sure to rebound this week and Kill KC as I suspect he will, and I'm behind him 100% each week, one game at a time that he can get it done .. for as long as he can pull it off. The good news is, it will all become crystal clear which it will be in a matter of weeks and we wont have to wait another year to find out if Jake finally can rise to the occasion.

Bob's your Information Minister

09-15-2006, 05:28 PM

I am still waiting for BroncoBuff's psych-eval of moi.

Taco John

09-15-2006, 06:31 PM

I am still waiting for BroncoBuff's psych-eval of moi.

You want to hear mine? You're a younger brother in a small family with the only other sibling being a sister that you don't particularly relate to and deep down you despise her due to the unequal treatment your parents gave to you and her. You've longed your whole life for an older brother who would protect you, show you the ropes, and even put you in your place when you need to be put in your place. Thanks to the Internet, you've found this camraderie that your soul seeks in a virtual way, and you're happy to take the abuse that you get wherever you go because in a funny way, it fills a need that you have in your life...

ZachKC

09-15-2006, 06:49 PM

Oh man, where is stevieray when we need him. Haha.

Bob's your Information Minister

09-15-2006, 07:00 PM

You want to hear mine? You're a younger brother in a small family with the only other sibling being a sister that you don't particularly relate to and deep down you despise her due to the unequal treatment your parents gave to you and her. You've longed your whole life for an older brother who would protect you, show you the ropes, and even put you in your place when you need to be put in your place. Thanks to the Internet, you've found this camraderie that your soul seeks in a virtual way, and you're happy to take the abuse that you get wherever you go because in a funny way, it fills a need that you have in your life...

"Richard Grieco...you see right through me!"

Needa Pass Rush

09-15-2006, 07:03 PM

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/drew/archives/drew0913toon.gif

usedupbraids

09-15-2006, 07:16 PM

when Elway was and his 10th year Gary kubiak came everyone in denver wanted him to start but Shannhan kept Elway in.
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/4493/garykubiakkc2.jpg

usedupbraids

09-15-2006, 07:25 PM

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/4997/1643909379oq1.jpgthis time shanahan has a better QB with feel of the game.Jake took us to the Afc chip i wouldnt take him out give shanahan 2 years than yall see cutler

-Slap-

09-15-2006, 09:26 PM

when Elway was and his 10th year Gary kubiak came everyone in denver wanted him to start but Shannhan kept Elway in.
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/4493/garykubiakkc2.jpg

Taco, we need to boot BLove as team historian and elevate this brash savant to his position.

Cito Pelon

09-15-2006, 10:12 PM

You're joking - but I do have one for Watermock. After -Slap- posted his great "worst posters," or "Bottom 10 Posters" thread, complete with analyses of each of them, I got to thinking about mock mostly.

Mock has a "repressed anger"/"Don Quixote"/"mother" complex of some sort imo, whereby he repeatedly and intentionally provokes others to attack him with intense criticism, even insults. He knows he is doing this, and in fact he INTENTIONALLY PROVOKES these attacks. As Slap put it, he "Craves abuse and demands ritual beatdowns on a daily basis." But I don't think he does it for the beat-down per se, I think he does it because he craves the experience of his response to the beat-downs.

When he is criticized/insulted/"mocked", he reacts, as WE see it - like a caged animal - lashing out at all who dare question him - STFU! and on and on until he loses steam and peters out on that point in an alcohol-induced cloud, at which time he starts the whole process over again. This pattern repeats over and over and over and over and over and over again.

My guess is that mock had an experience/experiences in his childhood where he was attacked/insulted by persons in his peer group one or more times in a public setting (prolly school). For whatever reasons, mock wasn't able to, or did not respond in a healthy outward manner that nurtured self-confidence and a positive self image as he grew. I think he was quasi-traumatized by this experienc(es), and is "stuck" in that moment - stuck on this lack of response, which stunted the growth of his self-image.

Sooo ...

... he artificially re-creates and acts out this same scenario today, again and again and again, with his peer group in a public setting (OM), so that he can respond in a manner that he "should have/wishes he had/needed to" - back then. We hear crazed, caged-animal "STFU!" ... but he feels, however artificially, that he is reacting to that bully. He is (finally!) "swooping down" like Don Quixote, smiting the bully with a self-confident "STFU!"

The "mother" part I'm less clear on, but I think it reflects that he probably was comforted after this trauma by his parents (as is so often the case, his parents probably didn't know what actually happened, but they were there for him). Alcohol is now the mother/parent, which soothes him after these inneffectual latter-day "STFU!"s fail to yield what he needs.

No matter how many times he artificially re-creates that situation, and no matter how many time he swoops in with the A+ perfect "STFU!" ... it will never give him what he needed at that time - during that stage of his development.

I'm actually quite serious here, this is not a joke. And if you read this mock, I'm not trying to minimize you - I'm no better a person than you, I have plenty of demons of my own - maybe more than you.

BTW - if you haven't seen Slap's thread, it's an absolute must-read: http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?&p=1199002#post1199002

Have you ever considered why you chose the moniker "BroncoBuff"? Is it possible you really wanted to be known as "Beelzebub'sBabe"? Uh-huh, you have demon fantasies.

Taco John

09-15-2006, 10:40 PM

Taco, we need to boot BLove as team historian and elevate this brash savant to his position.

He's on the fast track, isn't he?

BroncoBuff

09-15-2006, 11:56 PM

He's on the fast track, isn't he?

Funny .... I hardly understands what he writes.

When I first read the part about fans wanting Kubiak, I thought it was BS ... I did not remember that. But literally 20 minutes later, Peter King was talking to Costas about Jake Plummer on HBO, and I swear to you he said the exact same thing about Elway/Kubiak 10 years ago (in relation to Plummer/Cutler now). First 2 times I have EVER heard that.

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 12:22 AM

I am still waiting for BroncoBuff's psych-eval of moi.

I'm not sure I can top TJ with the siblings thing, that was a hum-dinger. But here goes:

I have a better opinion about your motives than mock's, but I'm not clear on your history. You were banned from Chefs Planet I know .... but do you come here mostly as a mere replacement for that board? If so, you can be more easily excused for tolerating abuse.

But if you return and return (and return) for other reasons, things get fuzzy. At first look, I'm tempted to call you brave - coming into this board touting "Tamba Hali" and how he's gonna "school Foster this week." :~ohyah!: That's some pretty crazy stuff, dude. Or popping in with a new thread the instant you sign Kyle Turley, as if that roid-starved underweight carcass of a former competent NFL lineman is finally the "missing piece" to your SB puzzle.

But when people make decent arguments about why you're wrong, you don't go nuts or get wacky like mock ... and you don't seem to hold grudges or go into any crazy attack modes, either. You strike me mostly as just a fan. A fan with a teflon exterior. TJ's right - you are a "youngest child" personality type, with a fairly even (if boring) temperament ... and that photo of you in the Arrowhead lot is not a flattering image. You stick your nose into Bronco topics and tweak people pretty good sometimes ... injecting Chefs propoganda in the least approproate places at the least appropriate times. Truth be told, I think often you get attacked merely for stating "inconvenient truths" Broncos fans don't want to dwell on. I'm not saying you have any great insight ... it doesn't take a rocket scientist to pick at the weakest link.

I guess I just think you're a fan with a "fetish" for hanging around where you're not wanted. Like a grown man who pays $500 for some 21 year-old girl in leather to spank him.

Happy?

Bronx33

09-16-2006, 12:26 AM

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 12:29 AM

AND?

and what? I'm agreeing the kid's history was accurate - right on point, even though I doubted it at first.

Pretty rare to have a Peter King pop up to confirm your take 20 minutes later.

Taco John

09-16-2006, 12:33 AM

Funny .... I hardly understands what he writes.

When I first read the part about fans wanting Kubiak, I thought it was BS ... I did not remember that. But literally 20 minutes later, Peter King was talking to Costas about Jake Plummer on HBO, and I swear to you he said the exact same thing about Elway/Kubiak 10 years ago (in relation to Plummer/Cutler now). First 2 times I have EVER heard that.

For my part, I was kidding... and I'm pretty sure Slap was as well... I don't remember Elway ever being in danger of losing his job to Kubiak. That would be the first time I can remember that an 8th rounder would have displaced a consensus number one QB.

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 12:49 AM

I don't remember Elway ever being in danger of losing his job to Kubiak.

Me neither - I thought the kid was out to lunch.

But 20 minutes later, Peter King said the exact same thing. Watch this week's NFL show for a long interview with Jake re: Pat Tillman and the Army's friendly-fire report.

Florida_Bronco

09-16-2006, 07:22 AM

So what's my psych evaluation?

usedupbraids

09-16-2006, 07:23 AM

Me neither - I thought the kid was out to lunch.

But 20 minutes later, Peter King said the exact same thing. Watch this week's NFL show for a long interview with Jake re: Pat Tillman and the Army's friendly-fire report.

Kubiak was drafted by the Denver Broncos in the eighth round of the 1983 NFL draft was a backup quarterback behind John Elway for nine seasons.

He returned to his alma mater Texas A&M to coach running backs for two years and joined the San Francisco 49ers as their quarterbacks coach in 1994. In 1995, he joined Mike Shanahan's staff at Denver as the offensive coordinator, and helped the team win two Super Bowls in 1997 and '98.
!Booya! :twokisses :thanku:
So young but know so much? :charge:

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 12:53 PM

Kubiak was drafted by the Denver Broncos in the eighth round of the 1983 NFL draft was a backup quarterback behind John Elway for nine seasons.

Hmmm .... your story checks out.

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 01:06 PM

So what's my psych evaluation?

I'll give it a shot, my friend ...

You appear to harbor a deep-seated hostility - with psychotic features and homicidal ideations - against groups of men that intentionally wear matching crayola-crayon red and yellow "outfits." Your hostility to these groups comes close to violent pathology, especially when these groups refer to the crayon-yellow color in their outfits as "gold," so as to avoid the cowardly and urine-stained implications of the word "yellow."

You also evidence strong, alomst virulent contempt for a very large city located in middle America whose only claim to "culture" is that a cut of beef is named after them. A large city whose local TV news product is so backward, that reporters there consider a new job in Wichita Falls, Texas to be an "excellent career move."

You'll be fine, though.

GonzoLays

09-16-2006, 01:46 PM

Somebody give me my psych evaluation....:)

ClevelandBronco

09-16-2006, 01:51 PM

Somebody give me my psych evaluation....:)

Don't even think about it. It could initiate the end of the Internet as we know it.

watermock

09-16-2006, 01:57 PM

I'm still evaluating BroncoBuff. I believe he may be a shape shifter out of the Gamma Quarant.

mosca

09-16-2006, 02:27 PM

Kubiak was drafted by the Denver Broncos in the eighth round of the 1983 NFL draft was a backup quarterback behind John Elway for nine seasons.

He returned to his alma mater Texas A&M to coach running backs for two years and joined the San Francisco 49ers as their quarterbacks coach in 1994. In 1995, he joined Mike Shanahan's staff at Denver as the offensive coordinator, and helped the team win two Super Bowls in 1997 and '98.
!Booya! :twokisses :thanku:
So young but know so much? :charge:
It's obvious that whoever made the initial post was confusing Tommy Maddox with Kubiak.

ORANGEJARHEAD

09-16-2006, 04:16 PM

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 09:40 PM

It's obvious that whoever made the initial post was confusing Tommy Maddox with Kubiak.

That's what I thought!

But then Peter King said THE EXACT SAME THING on "This Week in the NFL" on HBO ... check it out, I think they replay it early Sundays before the games start. I'm telling you - these were the first two times I had EVER heard that story - and they both came in the same one hour period. Kinda strange ... could they BOTH have been thinking Mattox?

Florida_Bronco

09-16-2006, 09:45 PM

I'll give it a shot, my friend ...

You appear to harbor a deep-seated hostility - with psychotic features and homicidal ideations - against groups of men that intentionally wear matching crayola-crayon red and yellow "outfits." Your hostility to these groups comes close to violent pathology, especially when these groups refer to the crayon-yellow color in their outfits as "gold," so as to avoid the cowardly and urine-stained implications of the word "yellow."

Hit the nail on the head, doc!

You also evidence strong, alomst virulent contempt for a very large city located in middle America whose only claim to "culture" is that a cut of beef is named after them. A large city whose local TV news product is so backward, that reporters there consider a new job in Wichita Falls, Texas to be an "excellent career move."

You'll be fine, though.

Ass! Hilarious!

BroncoBuff

09-16-2006, 10:02 PM

Plummer is shaping up to be another Steve DeBerg, train the uber talented Rookie. If I remember right didn't Jesus (Elway) start right out of the gate in '83? Threw him to the wolves & he did fine, from what I've seen of Cutler, he ought to do o.k. too.

John started the season ... but after a truly dismal game vs. the Raiders in week 2 or 3 in Mile High (when Reeves had us wear white jerseys at home, the ass), they pulled the plug and put DeBerg in.

If you had any earthly idea of how badly Elway treated DeBerg after that ... nobody has to believe I know this stuff, but I do. First person. John was a royal dick - especially to DeBerg. He hated (literally hated) Marino's early statistical success and bitterly blamed Reeves for his lack of stats ... and in the offseason/winter of 85, he caused a huge drama with Ken O'Brien and his significant other in Cancun. Believe it or don't, but he was "dis-invited" from the QB fraternity social events after that ...

These guys we watch - these pro athletes - some of them have truly troubled minds. They are quasi freaks of nature. The drive to win is psycho-pathological in many of them. Maybe not for, say ... Darius Watts or Ron Dayne. But for many, this "desire to win"/"phobia of losing" that is such a positive trait in pro sports .... is actually a personality defect in the real world:

http://orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1273138&postcount=103