plummer cracks under pressure

[riiiiick]

TJ has said many times, as if it's non-debatable, that plummer can't handle big pressure games. yet a graphic from Sunday's game said 27 4th qtr comebacks in last 9 years by plummer is the most in nfl during that time. is that graphic true? how did he possibly get all those if he is such a choker?
would this Sunday's game qualify as "big game" for plummer? isn't every game in the NFL a big game?
plummer has ALWAYS bounced back and i see a great game from him this week under great pressure. what do you think TJ?

[Sassy]

Here we go again...

[BMF Bronco]

at least it's not a Lelie thread

[Dante007]

Not every game is a big game. Last years season opener in Miami was not a big game. Jake is a good qb when the Broncos are playing with the lead. How many come from behind wins do you recall Jake having as the Broncos qb?

[watermock]

Several reasons (Taco is busy breast feeding his well done baby)... so I will take a stab at it.

It's alot easier to come from behind when you ARE from behind. We have given Jake many leads. Second, his attrocious INT totals while in AZ is why he was simply cut loose.

Jake has been a decent stopgap, not alot more. He was the best available after the SOB debacle that cracked him, specifically making the blunder that the Oakland game would be a defining moment. That is was, like drawing a deuce on the river card. You can go "all in" and get lucky sometimes, but usually, you wind up walking away from the table a loser. That consistently happened in AZ. Jake is best playing recklessly...he's also at his worst.

[sirhcyennek81]

Lot of new people. WTF were you guys last year? Also, every QB has bad games, hardly means they choke under pressure or are not any good. QB with 33 wins the last 3 years, and some of you cut him no slack. I suppose he has to block, and catch, too. Or is the success of the QB the only thing that equals a healthy offense? If I recall, the entire offense sucked last week.

:Broncos:

[bronco militia]

Down and out?

The Broncos are 2-14 in games in which they have trailed when entering the fourth quarter the past three seasons, with all but three of those games featuring Jake Plummer at quarterback. Ties entering fourth not included.

Date Opponent Deficit in 4th Result

Sep. 10, 2006 St. Louis 15-7 18-10 loss

Jan. 22, 2006 *Pittsburgh 24-10 34-17 loss

Sep. 18, 2005 San Diego 14-10 20-17 win

Sep. 11, 2005 Miami 13-3 34-10 loss

Jan. 9, 2005 *Indianapolis 35-17 49-24 loss

Dec. 19, 2004 Kansas City 35-10 45-17 loss

Dec. 5, 2004 San Diego 20-7 20-17 loss

Nov. 28, 2004 Oakland 13-10 25-24 loss

Oct. 31, 2004 Atlanta 27-14 41-28 loss

Oct. 25, 2004 Cincinnati 20-10 23-10 loss

Oct. 10, 2004 Carolina 17-13 20-17 win

Sept. 19, 2004 Jacksonville 7-6 7-6 loss

Jan. 4, 2004 *Indianapolis 41-3 41-10 loss

Dec. 28, 2003 **Green Bay 17-3 31-3 loss

Oct. 26, 2003 **Baltimore 9-6 26-6 loss

Oct. 19, 2003 **Minnesota 28-10 28-20 loss* Postseason; ** Plummer Did Not Play

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_4986392,00.html

[Dante007]

Sorry for finding this board this year Sirhcyennek81. I am humbled to be in your 3,157 post presence.

[sirhcyennek81]

Sorry for finding this board this year Sirhcyennek81. I am humbled to be in your 3,157 post presence.



Well, you only had 4 posts. Now you have 5. Your cool.:thumbsup:


8')
:Broncos:

[Mile High Shack]

think we can have one more Plummer thread?

this is freakin' 2002 and change Plummer to SOB and it's the same freakin' arguments

[bronco militia]

think we can have one more Plummer thread?

this is freakin' 2002 and change Plummer to SOB and it's the same freakin' arguments


you had to know this was coming as soon as Tags said "the Denver broncos select QB Jay Cutler"

[bronco militia]

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/drew/012306drew.gif

[Bronco_Beerslug]

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/drew/012306drew.gif

LOL

Well, 2-11 says it all as far as Jake being the comeback king.
It also speaks volumes about the confidence I have in him bringing us back when trailing in a game, any game.

[Steve Sewell]

TJ has said many times, as if it's non-debatable, that plummer can't handle big pressure games. yet a graphic from Sunday's game said 27 4th qtr comebacks in last 9 years by plummer is the most in nfl during that time. is that graphic true? how did he possibly get all those if he is such a choker?
would this Sunday's game qualify as "big game" for plummer? isn't every game in the NFL a big game?
plummer has ALWAYS bounced back and i see a great game from him this week under great pressure. what do you think TJ?

Riddle me this...how many of those comebacks were made in a Denver uniform?

I can only think of one in particular and that was vs. Cleveland in his first year. Part of that is to do with the fact that we are ahead in a lot of games. He had a lot more opportunities for comebacks in AZ.

[Steve Sewell]

at least it's not a Lelie thread

These threads are becoming just about as tiresome though. I think Jake will be fine, he got it out of his system last week.

[Steve Sewell]

Second, his attrocious INT totals while in AZ is why he was simply cut loose.

That is innaccurate, mock. Plummer was offered a contract extension there and he sought greener pastures elsewhere.

[Crushaholic]

These threads are becoming just about as tiresome though.

The thread starter should have posted this in an already existing Plummer thread...

[Steve Sewell]

The thread starter should have posted this in an already existing Plummer thread...

Not to mention, the thread starter should have adhered to the 100 post rule.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The thread starter should have posted this in an already existing Plummer thread...
This is more fun :yayaya:

[BroncoInferno]

Down and out?

The Broncos are 2-14 in games in which they have trailed when entering the fourth quarter the past three seasons, with all but three of those games featuring Jake Plummer at quarterback. Ties entering fourth not included.

Date Opponent Deficit in 4th Result

Sep. 10, 2006 St. Louis 15-7 18-10 loss

Jan. 22, 2006 *Pittsburgh 24-10 34-17 loss

Sep. 18, 2005 San Diego 14-10 20-17 win

Sep. 11, 2005 Miami 13-3 34-10 loss

Jan. 9, 2005 *Indianapolis 35-17 49-24 loss

Dec. 19, 2004 Kansas City 35-10 45-17 loss

Dec. 5, 2004 San Diego 20-7 20-17 loss

Nov. 28, 2004 Oakland 13-10 25-24 loss

Oct. 31, 2004 Atlanta 27-14 41-28 loss

Oct. 25, 2004 Cincinnati 20-10 23-10 loss

Oct. 10, 2004 Carolina 17-13 20-17 win

Sept. 19, 2004 Jacksonville 7-6 7-6 loss

Jan. 4, 2004 *Indianapolis 41-3 41-10 loss

Dec. 28, 2003 **Green Bay 17-3 31-3 loss

Oct. 26, 2003 **Baltimore 9-6 26-6 loss

Oct. 19, 2003 **Minnesota 28-10 28-20 loss* Postseason; ** Plummer Did Not Play

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_4986392,00.html

The bolded were games where a comeback was simply unrealistic given the circumstances. Even some of the ones I left on were marginal (i.e Atlanta and Cincy). He's really only had nine games in Denver where a comeback wasn't an unrealistic expectation. Twice he succeeded. I don't think seven legit failures in three seasons is a very large sample size, but whatever.

[Arkie]

Does anybody know Elway's 4th qtr comeback percentage?

For example, Plummer's is 18% as a Bronco (2/11). I bet Elway's is similar.

[Taco John]

Have you ever seen Plummer consistent make plays or pass efficiently, with accuracy from the pocket? NO. I'm not talking about making one play from the pocket here and there. I also talking about accuracy. Two years ago he led the league in INT's. Remember that?

When Plummer has to throw from the pocket, he hesitates and double pumps a lot. The offensive line then takes blame for pressure getting to him because he takes forever in the pocket.

[riiiiick]

Riddle me this...how many of those comebacks were made in a Denver uniform?

I can only think of one in particular and that was vs. Cleveland in his first year. Part of that is to do with the fact that we are ahead in a lot of games. He had a lot more opportunities for comebacks in AZ.

the point i wanted to debate is: plummer chokes in big games. does it matter which team or under what circumstances the comebacks occured? it is a question of how one handles pressure and the facts say plummer is as good as anyone else in the league during his career. he has only been hit with this "choke artist" label since coming here and winning 2/3's of his games here. yet, he is now a choker. it just doesn't make sense to me. maybe i will get smarter when i have 101 posts?

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

These threads are becoming just about as tiresome though..

Yep ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[-Slap-]

Riddle me this...how many of those comebacks were made in a Denver uniform?

I can only think of one in particular and that was vs. Cleveland in his first year. Part of that is to do with the fact that we are ahead in a lot of games. He had a lot more opportunities for comebacks in AZ.

Part of the reason he had several opportunities for comebacks in AZ was because he put his team in a lot of holes.

[Merlin]

The bolded were games where a comeback was simply unrealistic given the circumstances. Even some of the ones I left on were marginal (i.e Atlanta and Cincy). He's really only had nine games in Denver where a comeback wasn't an unrealistic expectation. Twice he succeeded. I don't think seven legit failures in three seasons is a very large sample size, but whatever.
Actually, people are missusing the stats worse than that. In those 7 failures how did Plumer do:


Sep. 10, 2006 St. Louis 15-7 18-10 loss --He stunk it up, but got some help

Dec. 5, 2004 San Diego 20-7 20-17 loss

Nov. 28, 2004 Oakland 13-10 25-24 loss --He made the passes, the claw did not help

Oct. 31, 2004 Atlanta 27-14 41-28 loss He started to get the team close and the Claw struck.

Oct. 25, 2004 Cincinnati 20-10 23-10 loss

Oct. 10, 2004 Carolina 17-13 20-17 win

Sept. 19, 2004 Jacksonville 7-6 7-6 loss --Gets team into FG range, RB fumbles

So, in some cases, his teammates made major contributions to scuttle any attempt at a comeback.

[Popps]

he has only been hit with this "choke artist" label since coming here and winning 2/3's of his games here.

Keep in mind, the "choker" label is the product of angry fans, not necessarily unbiased sports analysts. Most of the time, when 3rd parties break down our playoff losses, you'll see something like you see below in my signature.

This just happens to be a forum where it's off-limits to talk about anything contributing to a loss but the quarterback. Unless we win, then you're not allowed to mention the QB.

Plummer is just a limited guy. He CAN perform very well if things are in place around him. Proof is in the pudding. But, if you want to stick him in a hole early on, you're probably not going to like the results. He's not Elway.

Most unbiased viewers are going to look at that Pittsburgh game and see a team that just never showed up, offense, defense, quarterback, coaching, you name it.

Plummer AND our defense won a laundry-list of high pressure games. You don't win 33 games in three years, make the playoffs three times and host an AFCCG without a ton of pressure in those games. It just so happens that we picked a very bad time not to show up, and ran into a great team.

In a year or so, we'll potentially have improvement at the QB spot. Will our defense be any better? Who knows.

[bronco militia]

The bolded were games where a comeback was simply unrealistic given the circumstances. Even some of the ones I left on were marginal (i.e Atlanta and Cincy). He's really only had nine games in Denver where a comeback wasn't an unrealistic expectation. Twice he succeeded. I don't think seven legit failures in three seasons is a very large sample size, but whatever.

of course Jake had nothing to do with those insurmountable 4th quarter leads :clown:

[Popps]

When Plummer has to throw from the pocket, he hesitates and double pumps a lot. The offensive line then takes blame for pressure getting to him because he takes forever in the pocket.

lol!

Go ahead and give me some time codes of when that happened on Sunday.... or better yet, against Pittsburgh. I'd love to see in either game where he took "forever" in the pocket.

[Hulamau]

Several reasons (Taco is busy breast feeding his well done baby)... so I will take a stab at it.

It's alot easier to come from behind when you ARE from behind. We have given Jake many leads. Second, his attrocious INT totals while in AZ is why he was simply cut loose.

Jake has been a decent stopgap, not alot more. He was the best available after the SOB debacle that cracked him, specifically making the blunder that the Oakland game would be a defining moment. That is was, like drawing a deuce on the river card. You can go "all in" and get lucky sometimes, but usually, you wind up walking away from the table a loser. That consistently happened in AZ. Jake is best playing recklessly...he's also at his worst.


That about sums it up Mock. No one is questioning at all the Plummer was by far our best option at the time. But only a few teams have won the QB derby with a true franchise long term solution even once in a century, and it looks like with Cutler we may well have scored twice in two decades ... time will tell.

[Mile High Shack]

lol!

Go ahead and give me some time codes of when that happened on Sunday.... or better yet, against Pittsburgh. I'd love to see in either game where he took "forever" in the pocket.

I'm all over Plummer this week

but for some people to suggest Plummer is holding on to the ball too long and THAT is why he got sacked so much

they are obviously Foster apologists

and by they, I mean TJ

[Circle Orange]

I think the fans are cracking more than Plummer is...at least right now. :o

Maybe we should do a poll on Plummer threads. It's time!

[Circle Orange]

think we can have one more Plummer thread?

this is freakin' 2002 and change Plummer to SOB and it's the same freakin' arguments

Panic knows no season. :clown:

[Taco John]

I'm all over Plummer this week

but for some people to suggest Plummer is holding on to the ball too long and THAT is why he got sacked so much

they are obviously Foster apologists

and by they, I mean TJ



Next year, George Foster will still be our starting right tackle. ANy guesses where you think Plummer will be?

[Popps]

Next year, George Foster will still be our starting right tackle. ANy guesses where you think Plummer will be?

Taco...

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Why can't ANYONE else on this team be criticized?

You're the ONLY person I see taking up for this guy, and it's only because it happens to be mentioned in the same breath as Plummer.

Most of the people bashing Plummer around here have ALSO called out our crappy protection schemes and crappy right tackle play in passing situations.

You seem to be the only person that insists it HAS to be all Plummer, and NONE... anyone else.

Doesn't it ever get old? Wouldn't you, at some point... like to make a decent contribution to your own board? Or, are "I hate Jake" posts all we're ever going to get out of you?

[Taco John]

Taco...

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Why can't ANYONE else on this team be criticized?



Go for it... You're more than welcome. I'm just providing balance from my perspective for unfair criticism. Roast Foster for the Rams game. He deserves it. But make certain you follow it up with the fact that Plummer double pumps in the pocket and holds the ball too long, and the fact that not a single turnover Plummer committed can be pinned on Foster. What are you left with after that? Go for it. God knows we can't get you to say nary a negative thing about our supposed leader choking when the pressure is on, might as well get what we can out of you blaming everybody else BUT the quarterback.


You're the ONLY person I see taking up for this guy, and it's only because it happens to be mentioned in the same breath as Plummer.


Actually, you're convenientely (purposefully?) ignoring everybody else who spoke up in the "Foster sucks" thread:


Actually (TJ) is right. Watch the plays again. Plummer looked lost and was holding the ball way way too long. Remember that a third of sacks are the QB's ability to get rid of the ball and "know where he wants to go." Manning's line isn't the best in the league but his ability to make quick reads and get rid of the ball fast keeps their sack numbers low.


Damn, what a bunch panicky whiners.

Oh, and Leonard Little is pretty damn good DE. Yes, he got around Foster on a couple of plays, but he is one of the better DEs in the game.

Foster did not play well at all, but it had nothing to do with most of Jakes mistakes. The holding call was actually a good play in my opinion because the player was unimpeded to Jake's backside and he kind of stopped him. Little was strong and Foster looked slow, I think he has a problem in pass protection but he had some good blocks in the run game.



Foster is the worst lineman of the group, but he's not as bad as he's being made out to be...

I just re-watched the game in it's entirety with a specific focus on Foster, having read a few of these posts in various threads.

Sorry, folks, he whiffed on three rushes I saw; two inside & one outside. Then Plummer, being the scheme-genius he is, seemed to step back out of the pocket on several occassions, exposing himself to the pass rush. If he had stepped into the pocket, he might've been fine.

Besides that, Foster was very good, especially in the run game...pancaking somebody on that long Bell run & nailing a LB on the way as well.

I watched & watched and saw none of this incompetence you're talking about...on a regular or consistent basis at any rate.

He drove his assignment outside AND PLUMMER OFTEN STEPPED BACK FROM THE POCKET INTO THE SACK RATHER THAN STEP INTO THE POCKET FOR PROTECTION.

For the life of me I cannot understand why a QB with his experience cannot read a blitz when nine...count 'em...nine men stack the line.



I'd love for you to show me in the game, other than the ONE sack Foster did get beat on, where he was consistently getting beat.

Why don't you make any mention of Hargrove on the other side getting pressure on Lepsis?

There was pressure coming from everywhere, and to blame Foster with **** that actually didn't happen, is just ridiculous.

After watching the game on tape again it seemed like whenever we called for 7 step drops, OL gave plenty of time to Jake but on the running plays/play action passes Jake did not get rid of the ball quickly(May be because no one was open and he was trying to make a play).

Bottom line - GF only made 1 mistake which led to a sack/holding penalty on 1st drive in the 1st half and I think most of mistakes were because Jake held on to the ball too long. If we had punted on these drives when the plays were blocked, I would have liked our chances with the way our defence played[/COLOR]

Yes, our red zone defense was amazing. I'm not denying it.

HOWEVER, this thread, and alot of other people, seem to be making this game out to be George Foster's Fault. It wasn't. It was Plummer's fault.

[Northman]

I think my biggest issue with Jake is the lack of taking care of the ball. Both when the pocket collapses and secondly making bad decisions down the field. I would much rather Jake take the sack rather than turn it over multiple times and put even more pressure on a very shaky Defense to begin with. If Jake is scared or unsure about his ability to lead us from behind then he needs to secure the football and let it ride on the defenses shoulders. But at least give the team a chance to punt it away. It still wont make me happy that the offense would be lethargic but at least i wouldnt come down on Jake so much. His bad decision making is what frustrates me the most and i think TJ is pretty much saying the same thing.

[PatsWin2002]

Not one "plumber's crack" joke in this whole thread? How disappointing!

I saw that as a lay up. I guess I'm more demented than most. :)

Carry on with your Plummer bashing......

[Northman]

Not one "plumber's crack" joke in this whole thread? How disappointing!

I saw that as a lay up. I guess I'm more demented than most. :)

Carry on with your Plummer bashing......



Nah, i want to pick on Brady now. Do you mind? :wave:

[PatsWin2002]

Nah, i want to pick on Brady now. Do you mind? :wave:

Have at 'im!

[Jetmeck]

Taco...

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Why can't ANYONE else on this team be criticized?

You're the ONLY person I see taking up for this guy, and it's only because it happens to be mentioned in the same breath as Plummer.

Most of the people bashing Plummer around here have ALSO called out our crappy protection schemes and crappy right tackle play in passing situations.

You seem to be the only person that insists it HAS to be all Plummer, and NONE... anyone else.

Doesn't it ever get old? Wouldn't you, at some point... like to make a decent contribution to your own board? Or, are "I hate Jake" posts all we're ever going to get out of you?

Plummer and Foster both sucked bad in St. Louis..........

[Jetmeck]

Have at 'im!

I am not in any way relieving Plummer of his responsibilty
for our loss. He was the key to the loss.

But just a thought here, Bledsoe threw three ints last week .......how many did Tom Terrific throw ?

[Popps]

I think my biggest issue with Jake is the lack of taking care of the ball. .

Keeping in mind, he almost set an NFL record for throws without an INT last year, and has a 2:1 ratio of TDs/INTs as a Bronco Starter.

That said, I agree with you that he's made some bad decisions. Now, people will flame me, here... but I thought he only made one really bad decision on Sunday, and that was that throw off of his back foot. I have no ****ing idea what that was. Just terrible.

But, the other two were a little less black/white, to me. The Devoe INT looked like a jump ball that he just lost, and the Smith INT was a ball he tried to force, but we also so an excellent defensive play... then a deflection... then an excellent catch. 9 times out of 10, that's just an incomplete pass, even if he shouldn't have thrown it.

I'll say it again, Jake has not been the "comeback kid" for us. To the contrary, he's a good game manager in close games and great when we have a lead. Our strategy in playoff games is just going to HAVE to be to keep games close.

The blueprint is the New England game. The D stood firm, and the O eventually got in gear. (Playoff football.)

We can sit around and wish Plummer was Elway until we're blue in the face, or we can design game plans and personnel to win with him at the helm.

The idea that he can't play in pressure situations is ludicrous. He's won 33 games in 3 years, and that includes 3 playoff runs... featuring games like the win in Indy where we needed to win to get in... a couple of key games this year, etc. There's always pressure when you're in a playoff run.

He's just not shown that he's a big come from behind guy in our system. We managed to keep him out of that kind of trouble for 14 games last year. .. which led to him being a Pro Bowl alternate. Had we done it one more time, we would have likely been in a Superbowl.

Jake isn't John.
+
Jay isn't our starter.
_________________
= Figure out a way to win with the QB who got you to the AFCCG last year.

That's our choice, folks. Pissing and moaning about not liking him or how much we like Cutler or loved Elway won't make a difference this year.

That's why I've been harping on our defensive line for so long... and now with Brown hurt, Jackson cut and Dumervil not even playing, I'm starting to see threads pop up about the problem.

Well, that's because it's a problem.

We HAVE a solution to our QB problem. (In theory.)

We have nothing for the d-line, outside of Lang.

[DeusExManning]

The one thing we know for sure about Plummer is that he is very adept at producing 20+ interception seasons.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1003

[Taco John]

We can sit around and wish Plummer was Elway until we're blue in the face, or we can design game plans and personnel to win with him at the helm.



Actually, there's a third option in the works...

[listopencil]

Actually, there's a third option in the works...

...and it involves a kangaroo.



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1272184&postcount=110

[BroncoSoja]

Down and out?

The Broncos are 2-14 in games in which they have trailed when entering the fourth quarter the past three seasons, with all but three of those games featuring Jake Plummer at quarterback. Ties entering fourth not included.

Date Opponent Deficit in 4th Result

Sep. 10, 2006 St. Louis 15-7 18-10 loss

Jan. 22, 2006 *Pittsburgh 24-10 34-17 loss

Sep. 18, 2005 San Diego 14-10 20-17 win

Sep. 11, 2005 Miami 13-3 34-10 loss

Jan. 9, 2005 *Indianapolis 35-17 49-24 loss

Dec. 19, 2004 Kansas City 35-10 45-17 loss

Dec. 5, 2004 San Diego 20-7 20-17 loss

Nov. 28, 2004 Oakland 13-10 25-24 loss

Oct. 31, 2004 Atlanta 27-14 41-28 loss

Oct. 25, 2004 Cincinnati 20-10 23-10 loss

Oct. 10, 2004 Carolina 17-13 20-17 win

Sept. 19, 2004 Jacksonville 7-6 7-6 loss

Jan. 4, 2004 *Indianapolis 41-3 41-10 loss

Dec. 28, 2003 **Green Bay 17-3 31-3 loss

Oct. 26, 2003 **Baltimore 9-6 26-6 loss

Oct. 19, 2003 **Minnesota 28-10 28-20 loss* Postseason; ** Plummer Did Not Play

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_4986392,00.html

And if I remember correctly Champ won us that San Diego game, not Plunker.

[SureShot]

Not one "plumber's crack" joke in this whole thread? How disappointing!

I saw that as a lay up. I guess I'm more demented than most. :)

Carry on with your Plummer bashing......


17339

[Cito Pelon]

Anybody that has ever played any sport has "choked under pressure." Jake does ok considering he's not a Frankenstein made up of the best parts from HOF QB's. Denver was only a few plays away from winning the opener. Jake had some problems, duh-uh. One of them was named Foster, another Walker, another Haslett, another Devoe, two others Bell.

But this is going to go on allllllll herming year, isn't it?

[riiiiick]

Anybody that has ever played any sport has "choked under pressure." Jake does ok considering he's not a Frankenstein made up of the best parts from HOF QB's. Denver was only a few plays away from winning the opener. Jake had some problems, duh-uh. One of them was named Foster, another Walker, another Haslett, another Devoe, two others Bell.

But this is going to go on allllllll herming year, isn't it?

i agree, as poorly as jake and others played, we still were only a couple plays from tying that game. they will be ready for kc on sunday

[BroncoInferno]

But make certain you follow it up with the fact that Plummer double pumps in the pocket and holds the ball too long

Now your just making sh*t up. Plummer barely had time to complete a three step drop Sunday, much less stand in the pocket and pump fake his way into a sack. Plummer sucked, yes, but it does not shine well on you to just make crap up to fit into your argument. I haven't given up on Foster yet, but, face it, he 's been at best average since he became a starter.

[Mediator12]

The bolded were games where a comeback was simply unrealistic given the circumstances. Even some of the ones I left on were marginal (i.e Atlanta and Cincy). He's really only had nine games in Denver where a comeback wasn't an unrealistic expectation. Twice he succeeded. I don't think seven legit failures in three seasons is a very large sample size, but whatever.

The Miami game was a legit game to comeback down ten to start the fourth and Plummer did not take a snap in the 2003 GB game Jarious started and Kannell finished that game.

[Mediator12]

Now your just making sh*t up. Plummer barely had time to complete a three step drop Sunday, much less stand in the pocket and pump fake his way into a sack. Plummer sucked, yes, but it does not shine well on you to just make crap up to fit into your argument. I haven't given up on Foster yet, but, face it, he 's been at best average since he became a starter.

He pump faked to Alexander on the fumble, he pump faked twice on deep passes to Walker, and he pump faked on the ball he threw behind Scheffler that hit him in the head. That is four pump fakes and one fumble and two incomplete passes after the Pump fakes. I suggest you make sure of your premise before accusing somebody of making stuff up.

[BroncoInferno]

He pump faked to Alexander on the fumble, he pump faked twice on deep passes to Walker, and he pump faked on the ball he threw behind Scheffler that hit him in the head. That is four pump fakes and one fumble and two incomplete passes after the Pump fakes. I suggest you make sure of your premise before accusing somebody of making stuff up.

I'm talking about on plays where he was sacked. That was Taco's claim (or it seemed that way at any rate given the context)...that he was sacked because he held onto the ball too long. Plummer is one of the least sacked QBs in the game (even when the protection hasn't been great), so I think it would be hard to substantiate a claim that he hangs onto the ball too long generally speaking.

[BroncoInferno]

The Miami game was a legit game to comeback down ten to start the fourth

I guess I can go along with that. The whole team just sucked that day; I remember not having much hope for a comeback at the time, and it wasn't because of Plummer. But I'll grant you that one.

[Broncos4tw]

Meh, Jake is a servicable QB. But I still don't think he has the ability to win a SB game, or a game against a solid team that keeps it close. Because of this, he is definately not the QB of our future. The sooner we can train his replacement, the better. What is the point of playing a guy that just isn't going to get it done? So we can have another heart-breaker year at the finish, and crappy draft choices next year to-boot?

I like him better than Griese though, Griese really sucked, I was stunned people supported this whiney, pouty loser. When Jake screws up, he tries to make it better. Unfortunately for us, he does this by making really stupid plays. But I still prefer that over Griese's actual mega-choking and pouting by himself afterwards. Jake at least ain't no um... wussy.

But when it comes down to the end of the day, it doesn't matter, we'll probably never win a championship under Jake unless for every single playoff game and the SB, our running game, o-line and defense all play stellar. I have yet to see Jake take the team soley on his shoulders and eke out a win. Elway did this of course, repeatedly. He could single-handidily win games. Jake needs a lot of support. Even with the support, like last week, he can choke big-time.

I'm just leery of the season as a whole. Another heartbreak ending coming our way? Whatever, I'll support Jake as long as he wears our uniforms, only cussing him out when he makes a really stupid play (I was cussing a lot last weekend). But man, it wouldn't break my heart of Cutler was put in for any reason.

[sirhcyennek81]

Meh, Jake is a servicable QB. But I still don't think he has the ability to win a SB game, or a game against a solid team that keeps it close.



Tampa Bay, Carolina, New England (playoffs) San Diego, Baltimore. Close games Denver won, with Plummer as our QB.


:Broncos:

[bronco militia]

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/image.php?u=5649&dateline=1158258571

good lord!....who is she?

[Taco John]

Now your just making sh*t up. Plummer barely had time to complete a three step drop Sunday, much less stand in the pocket and pump fake his way into a sack. Plummer sucked, yes, but it does not shine well on you to just make crap up to fit into your argument. I haven't given up on Foster yet, but, face it, he 's been at best average since he became a starter.


I don't know how to answer this except to say that you should try watching the game before shooting your mouth off. Plummer was pump faking his way to failure all day.

[BroncoInferno]

I don't know how to answer this except to say that you should try watching the game before shooting your mouth off. Plummer was pump faking his way to failure all day.

The context of your statement was re: the debate of the OL allowing too much pressure on Plummer. You complained that he pump faked and therefore contributed to the sacks (in a poorly veiled effort to deflect accountability from Foster), which isn't really true. Yes, he pumped faked on some plays (not a bad thing in of itself--again, depends on the situation), the post you were responding to from Popps was about the pressure Plummer was under and the main culprit for that pressure. If your argument is that he pumped faked and missed an open receiver or something along those lines, that's a different matter from what was being debated. When he pumped faked on a couple of incompletions, I have no idea if that was hesitation on his part or if simply no one was open and he was trying to draw a man off. And I suspect you don't know either. The only way to know that would be access to coaches' film. That's a different matter, but that wasn't the context of your statement.

[Steve Sewell]

the point i wanted to debate is: plummer chokes in big games. does it matter which team or under what circumstances the comebacks occured? it is a question of how one handles pressure and the facts say plummer is as good as anyone else in the league during his career. he has only been hit with this "choke artist" label since coming here and winning 2/3's of his games here. yet, he is now a choker. it just doesn't make sense to me. maybe i will get smarter when i have 101 posts?

Reading comprehension 101: read the last sentence of the post you are referencing here.

[sirhcyennek81]

So...when Elway went 0-3 in his first three superbowls...some people said he choked. Thats the way it goes until you win one.


:Broncos:

[orange 4 life]

Down and out?

The Broncos are 2-14 in games in which they have trailed when entering the fourth quarter the past three seasons, with all but three of those games featuring Jake Plummer at quarterback. Ties entering fourth not included.

Date Opponent Deficit in 4th Result

Sep. 10, 2006 St. Louis 15-7 18-10 loss

Jan. 22, 2006 *Pittsburgh 24-10 34-17 loss

Sep. 18, 2005 San Diego 14-10 20-17 win

Sep. 11, 2005 Miami 13-3 34-10 loss

Jan. 9, 2005 *Indianapolis 35-17 49-24 loss

Dec. 19, 2004 Kansas City 35-10 45-17 loss

Dec. 5, 2004 San Diego 20-7 20-17 loss

Nov. 28, 2004 Oakland 13-10 25-24 loss

Oct. 31, 2004 Atlanta 27-14 41-28 loss

Oct. 25, 2004 Cincinnati 20-10 23-10 loss

Oct. 10, 2004 Carolina 17-13 20-17 win

Sept. 19, 2004 Jacksonville 7-6 7-6 loss

Jan. 4, 2004 *Indianapolis 41-3 41-10 loss

Dec. 28, 2003 **Green Bay 17-3 31-3 loss

Oct. 26, 2003 **Baltimore 9-6 26-6 loss

Oct. 19, 2003 **Minnesota 28-10 28-20 loss* Postseason; ** Plummer Did Not Play

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_4986392,00.html

ah for fvcks sake.

wanna add up the point totals for the OTHER team in those losses?

notice that in the games where our defense played well in the 4th, we either won or almost won?
notice the glaring games against oakland, san diego (we had a chance to comeback even AFTER the int. but watts dropped another one), atlanta, jacksonville, etc.?
games where plummer was very good or great, but a drop, missed fg, or fumble cost us a win.

now look at games like miami, indy, atlanta, or oakland where our defense self destructed in the 4th.

plummer is a gamer. there's just no way around it. he always has been.
he'll shake off a bad play and come back as if nothing happened.
he's played well enough to have won roughly half the games in which we trailed, but some others around him didnt.
of all those games, only LAST WEEK can you put mostly on him.
you could add san diego to that list, but we had a chance there even after the int., and if it werent for plummer we wouldnt have been in the position to tie or take the lead anyway.

this is getting so frustrating.
i know its the ADD generation, but this is ridiculous.
its the only thing discussed on sports radio this week. fvckin guy averages 11 wins the last three years, takes us to the playoffs all three years, gets a probowl nod, has a 2:1 td to turnover ratio, leads the ENTIRE nfl in lowest int. percentage (full time starters) last season.......and you brilliant football minds want to get rid of him after a bad opening game.
or at the very least talk about when he SHOULD get benched.
God this season just isnt any fun.
here's to hoping it changes.

[riiiiick]

Reading comprehension 101: read the last sentence of the post you are referencing here.

it seems this particular subject has not been exhusted yet as i see 770 views and 62 posts on this thread i should never have started. and another new post from baja with almost 500 views and 89 posts.

[Mediator12]

ah for fvcks sake.

wanna add up the point totals for the OTHER team in those losses?

notice that in the games where our defense played well in the 4th, we either won or almost won?
notice the glaring games against oakland, san diego (we had a chance to comeback even AFTER the int. but watts dropped another one), atlanta, jacksonville, etc.?
games where plummer was very good or great, but a drop, missed fg, or fumble cost us a win.

now look at games like miami, indy, atlanta, or oakland where our defense self destructed in the 4th.

plummer is a gamer. there's just no way around it. he always has been.
he'll shake off a bad play and come back as if nothing happened.
he's played well enough to have won roughly half the games in which we trailed, but some others around him didnt.
of all those games, only LAST WEEK can you put mostly on him.
you could add san diego to that list, but we had a chance there even after the int., and if it werent for plummer we wouldnt have been in the position to tie or take the lead anyway.

this is getting so frustrating.
i know its the ADD generation, but this is ridiculous.
its the only thing discussed on sports radio this week. fvckin guy averages 11 wins the last three years, takes us to the playoffs all three years, gets a probowl nod, has a 2:1 td to turnover ratio, leads the ENTIRE nfl in lowest int. percentage (full time starters) last season.......and you brilliant football minds want to get rid of him after a bad opening game.
or at the very least talk about when he SHOULD get benched.
God this season just isnt any fun.
here's to hoping it changes.

You think that self destruction had anything to do with the TO's Jake and the offense had after stopping the other team and giving the offense another chance?