Plummer Hater's STFU

[cdesignmaster]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the F*** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

[SportinOne]

Obviously Plummer wasn't the problem today. But this wasn't a GREAT game for him. He was good. Good game, Jake... hence the thread.

I thought the defense played alright. The defensive game plan was to give up the short yardage and that's what we did. But there comes a time (in the red zone) where you must take some risks and send the house. It didn't work when we tried it but we didn't try it enough.

[Northman]

only 1 turnover today and it cost us 7 points. Who made that turnover again?

[Bronx33]

only 1 turnover today and it cost us 7 points. Who made that turnover again?


The lack of pressure on foreheadboy and exploitation of DW lost this game, not plummer.

[bloodsunday]

Don't get me wrong I am not blaming Plummer for anything. But let's not go to the other extreme. He didn't exactly have a HoF game or anything. He threw for 175 yards. The running game was the story of the game on O. Oh yeah and one other thing -- he did all his damage on the boot today. We all know he can do that. So does every D in the NFL. It just so happens we ran into one today that actually couldn't stop it.

[Broncos4tw]

Wow, Plummer almost threw for 200 yards!!

Please, he played an average to better than average game. Want a great game? Manning threw a great game. Plummer was efficient. And the loss was not his fault, it was our surprisingly bland defensive front-four with no show of a blitz.

But spare the stupidity of "OMG you stoopid plummer haterz omg go to hell!!"

He has SUCKED ALL YEAR. He had ONE GOOD GAME. He finally plays a decent game, and you act like he is on the way to the Pro Bowl. He needs to play like this EVERY game if he expects to keep his starting job. He was solid today, no problems with Plummer. But at least get your head out of your butt to realize why we are on him. Has nothing to do with hate. It has to do with his incredibly crappy play that barely keeps us in games we should be dominating.

[penguintheory]

Plummer homers, please crawl back into your holes immediately. Plummer proved today yet again, he can't be called upon to be a gamebreaker, ever. Whoopee, so he didn't directly cause a loss this week. Is that something we should cheer for? I wonder if all you Plummer homers are enamored with mediocrity in your actual lives as well.

[penguintheory]

P.S. Thanks to Mike Bell for providing the gamebreaking play that could've sealed it for us... maybe one day we'll have a quarterback that can provide that kind of superhuman spark for the passing game as well.

I've got a good hunch he'll wear a number between 5 and 7.

[SprintRightOption]

Plummer homers, please crawl back into your holes immediately. Plummer proved today yet again, he can't be called upon to be a gamebreaker, ever. Whoopee, so he didn't directly cause a loss this week. Is that something we should cheer for? I wonder if all you Plummer homers are enamored with mediocrity in your actual lives as well.

Classic fool post. Our team is a running team. We are not a passing team like the Colts. Nobody's saying Plummer was a god today. He played well enough to win, converting 3rd downs, running for first downs and a TD, and avoiding sacks. No ints, no almost ints.

Plummer's rating today, since you guys are so in love with high ratings: 104.2.

Thank god most Bronco fans aren't like half of the people here.

[bloodsunday]

Classic fool post. Our team is a running team. We are not a passing team like the Colts. Nobody's saying Plummer was a god today. He played well enough to win, converting 3rd downs, running for first downs and a TD, and avoiding sacks. No ints, no almost ints.

Plummer's rating today, since you guys are so in love with high ratings: 104.2.

Thank god most Bronco fans aren't like half of the people here.

You are making the same point you are criticizing. Jake played okay, but it was against a poor D. He didn't do anything special. Typical Jake: when we win he is usually invisible. We don't want Jake to be the story as it is almost always a bad one.

But yes in this case he is pretty much immune from criticism in this loss.

[-Slap-]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

Well, you're certainly less than 100 IQ and shooting you would be a waste of ammo.

[Barry Ramey]

Yeah, it's Plummer fault for this loss. Must be relatives of Coyer who designed such a brilliant game plan.

[TheDave]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

and this is a perfect example of why some push for the 100 post rule.

[Orange_Beard]

Very good first half.

When Mike Bell was out of the game in the second half the O was lame.

[gadlaw]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

Well now I know what STFU stands for. LOL And Plummer did a good job and I was happy to see that.

[SprintRightOption]

You are making the same point you are criticizing. Jake played okay, but it was against a poor D. He didn't do anything special. Typical Jake: when we win he is usually invisible. We don't want Jake to be the story as it is almost always a bad one.

But yes in this case he is pretty much immune from criticism in this loss.

Wrong. It it a fool post because it said: Plummer is not as good as Peyton Manning, therefore no one can say anything good about him.

Once again, the Kill Jake brigade is out in force, this time trying to pin this loss primarily on him. One thread says the loss is due to 2 things: 1-Plummer's fumble after the whistle blew, and 2- an incompletion after avoiding a certain sack on the last drive. It's the insanity some of us are arguing against, guy.

[gadlaw]

Plummer homers, please crawl back into your holes immediately. Plummer proved today yet again, he can't be called upon to be a gamebreaker, ever. Whoopee, so he didn't directly cause a loss this week. Is that something we should cheer for? I wonder if all you Plummer homers are enamored with mediocrity in your actual lives as well.

You know, when somebody bolsters their argument or opinion by belittling other people all that really does is speak to your character. It doesn't answer anyone's argument, it doesn't 'illustrate' your point, it certainly doesn't show anyone how smart you are. There really isn't any point here to argue or discuss.

[Sassy]

In the post game...Manning said Denver had a great team and there was a great atmosphere and fans in Denver...

Hmmm...he's probably hoping he doesn't have to come back to Denver soon!

[bloodsunday]

Wrong. It it a fool post because it said: Plummer is not as good as Peyton Manning, therefore no one can say anything good about him.

Once again, the Kill Jake brigade is out in force, this time trying to pin this loss primarily on him. One thread says the loss is due to 2 things: 1-Plummer's fumble after the whistle blew, and 2- an incompletion after avoiding a certain sack on the last drive. It's the insanity some of us are arguing against, guy.

No your post is a fool's post because you are defending nothing. No one on this thread has attempted to "pin it on Jake". But the title of the thread suggests that somehow Plummer has vindicated himself today and proved all the doubters wrong. We are merely pointing out that he had an average game. Nothing special. I guess that goods for Plummer.

I don't expect him to be Payton and I don't think he had much to do with today's game. It was our rushing offense against Payton and he won.

[Popps]

It was our rushing offense against Payton and he won.

I love how our defense is just completely absent from your equation.

I've said it for a while. Being a Bronco d-linemen must be the best job on earth. You can absolutely just not show up for work when you don't feel like it, and someone else gets in trouble.

[bloodsunday]

I love how our defense is just completely absent from your equation.
I am referring to the two elements of the game (one for each team) that worked today. So yeah twist that around. I am on record as admonishing the D for their day. And as you say, they were absent. Happy? Do you just like to argue for no reason?

[No1BroncoFan]

only 1 turnover today and it cost us 7 points. Who made that turnover again?
A great defensive play made that turnover. Blaming Jake for that (and I've held him accopuntable for his piss poor play this year) is like blaming a guy for getting struck by lightening.

Ben

[SprintRightOption]

No your post is a fool's post because you are defending nothing. No one on this thread has attempted to "pin it on Jake". But the title of the thread suggests that somehow Plummer has vindicated himself today and proved all the doubters wrong. We are merely pointing out that he had an average game. Nothing special. I guess that goods for Plummer.

I don't expect him to be Payton and I don't think he had much to do with today's game. It was our rushing offense against Payton and he won.

Not this thread, but there are several threads, including the one by Anubis I referenced, that are pinning it on Jake, as predicted. I responded to a post that angrily attacked anyone saying anything positive about Jake. It's pretty simple.

Jake did have a pretty good game, and I'll defend that. He ran for several critical 1st down, ran for a TD, converted a bunch of 3rd downs passing, threw a TD, didn't throw any picks or near-picks, had a 104 QB rating and helped the offense score 31 points. I think that's not bad. But the other side says "Shut up! Only 176 yards! Plummer did nothing!" It's stupid.

[Arkansas Bronco]

I am no Plummer hater but the amount he has went down from last season isnt funny. I definatly dont blame him for the loss we were just out manned. It is hard to keep one of the best WR down with an average cb with no pass rush. On the other hand I am not backing Plummers play alot either. This was his best game all year and it wasnt that good. He does have a good deal of vetran exp. but J-Cut has the tools to build around and I so wanted him to ride the bench this year and learn but it is hard to take what we have week in week out.

[No1BroncoFan]

Not this thread, but there are several threads, including the one by Anubis I referenced, that are pinning it on Jake, as predicted. I responded to a post that angrily attacked anyone saying anything positive about Jake. It's pretty simple.

Jake did have a pretty good game, and I'll defend that. He ran for several critical 1st down, ran for a TD, converted a bunch of 3rd downs passing, threw a TD, didn't throw any picks or near-picks, had a 104 QB rating and helped the offense score 31 points. I think that's not bad. But the other side says "Shut up! Only 176 yards! Plummer did nothing!" It's stupid.
I said it before the game in jest but now I see it for the truth. Jake will be to blame for everything that happens to the Broncos as long as he wears the uniform. For the sanity of the fans who understand that football games are won and lost by teams, not individual players, I hope Cutler is every bit the QB that Elway was. Anything less will mean hundreds of "Cutler's to blame" threads once the new wears off.

Ben

[Mile High Shack]

I said it before the game in jest but now I see it for the truth. Jake will be to blame for everything that happens to the Broncos as long as he wears the uniform. For the sanity of the fans who understand that football games are won and lost by teams, not individual players, I hope Cutler is every bit the QB that Elway was. Anything less will mean hundreds of "Cutler's to blame" threads once the new wears off.

Ben

I think the hate for QBs ends, for better or worse, with Cutler

The people who pine for an Elwayeque QB (when in reality those come once in a blue moon) will get their wish and if Cutler doesn't work out, then I don't want to hear it...nope...not at all. Done with the QB hate if Cutler doesn't work out

we need to start drafting real dlineman before we start hating on our offense again

[theAPAOps5]

Very true games are won and lost as a team. But sometimes that team has a player who does their darnedest to take a team on his back and lose. Unfortunately Jake sometimes has that ability. He also has the ability to overcome and make something happen. I am not a Plummer fan but I commend him today. He ducked out of sack that would have killed that last FG for Denver and forced a very long 4th down. He also snaked around for a huge first down when it looked like they had it snuffed. That TD to Walker was really nice, he put it exactly where he needed to. He also missed a few and hung some ball up there and got his TE hit. He is no way responsible today and if he strings a few more of these games together Denver will be in good shape. The emergence of a prolific run also helps as if forces team to cheat which opens up the boot for Jake and that is when he is awesome.

[Wes Mantooth]

Plummer homers, please crawl back into your holes immediately. Plummer proved today yet again, he can't be called upon to be a gamebreaker, ever. Whoopee, so he didn't directly cause a loss this week. Is that something we should cheer for? I wonder if all you Plummer homers are enamored with mediocrity in your actual lives as well.

Were you even watching the game today? The guy had a very good game. Gee, did that offense put up 31? That should win you any game in the NFL.

[mosca]

P.S. Thanks to Mike Bell for providing the gamebreaking play that could've sealed it for us... maybe one day we'll have a quarterback that can provide that kind of superhuman spark for the passing game as well.

I've got a good hunch he'll wear a number between 5 and 7.
Hmm... so if the QB isn't a "superhuman" (i.e. Elway) they're not worth the time of day. Yup, forget about throwing and running for first downs, throwing a TD pass, running for a TD... Nope, not good enough, no thanks! They gotta be superhuman. Man, for Cutler's sake, I hope that he lives up to the hype... #7's shoes are gonna be hard to fill.

[Ballhawk]

Jake made three plays maybe 5 in the game. Kircus catch was a great call and jake made a nice throw, He did a nice job looking off the S and hitting Rod, TD to Walker, run for a first (very nice scamper), and pass to Schef. I am not blaming him for the loss, but I would like to see more plays come from the QB position.

[penguintheory]

Classic fool post. Our team is a running team. We are not a passing team like the Colts. Nobody's saying Plummer was a god today. He played well enough to win, converting 3rd downs, running for first downs and a TD, and avoiding sacks. No ints, no almost ints.

Plummer's rating today, since you guys are so in love with high ratings: 104.2.

Thank god most Bronco fans aren't like half of the people here.

According to many we haven't been a truly effective running team since TD. I for one disagree. That being said, I think most agree that around here the goal is always to win the Super Bowl (Shanahan's words). We have (had?) a Super Bowl caliber defense, or at the very least quite a good one, but the offense has yet to match that performance.

"Well enough".... this is a phrase Plummer fans are in love with. Well enough? Come on now, we've got to get a quarterback in there who can WIN GAMES not just not lose them for us. I'm not asking for him to be run out of town, hanged, shot between the eyes, or even benched in favor of Cutler against a team like the Colts where the QB has a ton of responsibility...... but please, will we quit acting like he's been earning his paycheck lately?

[theAPAOps5]

He earned his paycheck today. He fumbled, after being called in the grasp and missed a throw to Javon other than that he was good. He still is in the rears for other games this year but I think he was good today.

[penguintheory]

I responded to a post that angrily attacked anyone saying anything positive about Jake. It's pretty simple.

Here is the nicest thing you'll hear from a non-Plummer apologist: It's not good when the most positive thing you can say about Jake, objectively, is that he didn't screw up the game, but he did what any well-paid, Pro Bowl, starting quarterback playing for a Super Bowl contender should do. And today that wasn't enough for us to get a win against a very tough team.

So I really wouldn't say I'm "hating" on Jake... but there just isn't any way to angle this such that he's the hero or has vindicated his poor performance thus far in 2006. Yes, today he escaped criticism because he didn't turn the ball over, garnered a great QB rating, and generally played very well. But remember, for the previous five weeks, he's been the goat.... and many of us think deservedly so. How can you chastise a fan for expecting great play from their starting quarterback?

[penguintheory]

He earned his paycheck today.

I can agree with this statement, most definitely.

[Blueflame]

Here is the nicest thing you'll hear from a non-Plummer apologist: It's not good when the most positive thing you can say about Jake, objectively, is that he didn't screw up the game, but he did what any well-paid, Pro Bowl, starting quarterback playing for a Super Bowl contender should do. And today that wasn't enough for us to get a win against a very tough team.

So I really wouldn't say I'm "hating" on Jake... but there just isn't any way to angle this such that he's the hero or has vindicated his poor performance thus far in 2006. Yes, today he escaped criticism because he didn't turn the ball over, garnered a great QB rating, and generally played very well. But remember, for the previous five weeks, he's been the goat.... and many of us think deservedly so. How can you chastise a fan for expecting great play from their starting quarterback?

Does any objective football fan truly believe Plummer has a snowball's chance in the proverbial hot place of even being in the running for Pro Bowl honors this season? ???

[broncocalijohn]

Well, you're certainly less than 100 IQ and shooting you would be a waste of ammo.

But you do need practice on easy targets. You never know whaen you get an actual meeting with Mock or Boob. I think it is mock. When I saw STFU, i figured it was mock making the thread. I havent put Cutler on the start list of mine, but the anger of this newbie needs to be cradled with love that he lacks elsewhere. Or, we can shoot him for target practice. Your choice slap!

[penguintheory]

Does any objective football fan truly believe Plummer has a snowball's chance in the proverbial hot place of even being in the running for Pro Bowl honors this season? ???

However you want to slice it. I'm trying to put Jake in the most positive possible light, and what I'm saying is that even when we do our best to make a sow's ear into a silk purse.... well, Mr. Plummer still looks very much like a sow's ear.

I was giving him due credit for his Pro Bowl appearance (however contrived) last year.

[Blueflame]

However you want to slice it. I'm trying to put Jake in the most positive possible light, and what I'm saying is that even when we do our best to make a sow's ear into a silk purse.... well, Mr. Plummer still looks very much like a sow's ear.

I was giving him due credit for his Pro Bowl appearance (however contrived) last year.

If Plummer was playing at the same level as he was last season, I wouldn't have posted a negative word about him... but reality says there's no way he'd be considered as an third-or-fourth-or even fifth-choice alternate for the next Pro Bowl. His cumulative QB rating for '06 has to be lower than it's been since '99...

[Popps]

If Plummer was playing at the same level as he was last season, I wouldn't have posted a negative word about him... but reality says there's no way he'd be considered as an third-or-fourth-or even fifth-choice alternate for the next Pro Bowl. His cumulative QB rating for '06 has to be lower than it's been since '99...

Right.

Did you watch the game today, Blueflame?

Our defense was embarrassed again. Just wondering, because you're only talking about the QB again.

The QB was actually non-issue, unless you want to credit him for playing pretty well.

The story was our defense failing a test they've been studying for for three years.

[BroncoFanCam]

Personally, I think things have been so crappy for so long with Jake, that when he performs as he should, it makes it seem like he's superman. :super:

We are so glad he isn't making left-handed "passes", or making 4 turnovers a game, that we all feel pretty good afterwards... That is sad.

[Garcia Bronco]

except for the folks wishing injury of ill on the guy, the "haters" are generally right about Plummer...and that's why we got Cutler....Jake's days are indeed numbered....it's just not time yet.....that's all.

[Blueflame]

Right.

Did you watch the game today, Blueflame?

Our defense was embarrassed again. Just wondering, because you're only talking about the QB again.

The QB was actually non-issue, unless you want to credit him for playing pretty well.

The story was our defense failing a test they've been studying for for three years.

Of course I watched the game. Burned it to DVD, too... not that it's a disc I'll put in all that often. Momentum was with the Broncos until Plummer's fumble. That turnover put the Colts right back in the game, like it or not.

[BroncoFanCam]

Of course I watched the game. Burned it to DVD, too... not that it's a disc I'll put in all that often. Momentum was with the Broncos until Plummer's fumble. That turnover put the Colts right back in the game, like it or not.As seems to be the standard M.O. by Jake "The Garter Snake" Plummer (there's no more venom in this snake)... Costly turnovers at the worst possible of times.

[lazarus4444]

Plummer played average with a coupld of good plays. It was good to see him make those plays. I'm not worried about the fumble. Yes, it was at a bad time and gave momentum to the Colts but Manning would have moved the ball anyway. The point is, Plummer didn't screw up enough that the game got out of hand. His not screwing up gave the D a chance to win it for us and they didn't come through. So, with that said, he had a good game for him but I still would prefer cutler in there even though this loss is on the D.

[WoodMan]

only 1 turnover today and it cost us 7 points. Who made that turnover again?

Dwight Freeney;)

[Smiling Assassin27]

Yeah, cuz Cutler would've NEVER fumbled that ball...*rolling eyes*

Plummer played well yesterday, period. He's got virtually NO responsibility for this loss. Hell, if the defense stops the Colts even ONCE in the 4th, it's over. If Shanny doesn't turn into a giant pu$$ and goes for the win and not the tie, maybe it's a different game.

[Blueflame]

Yeah, cuz Cutler would've NEVER fumbled that ball...*rolling eyes*

Plummer played well yesterday, period. He's got virtually NO responsibility for this loss. Hell, if the defense stops the Colts even ONCE in the 4th, it's over. If Shanny doesn't turn into a giant pu$$ and goes for the win and not the tie, maybe it's a different game.

Sorry... but Plummer was directly responsible for 7 Indianapolis points. That's not "virtually NO responsibility" in a game that was won by 3 points.

[Broncos4tw]

Jake played fine imo. He wasn't stellar, but he was solid, and if he played that well every game, I'd be content. But he doesn't. He has had one good game, one better than average, and a slew of crappy games this year.

The fumble? I can't see how you can fault him. It wasn't like he was hanging it out there, someone stripped him of it. Happens to the best of RBs, so no biggie. You can't say "go make some plays with your feet Jake!" and then get pissy if this sort of thing happens. He has had much worse fumbles than this. :wiggle:

But as far as "hating" the QB, I have no feeling for this guy whatsoever. I cheer for him when he does well, and I scream at him when he plays crappy. I just want the QB on the field that gives us the best chance to win. I still don't know that this is Jake.

But really, there is no reason to get so defensive. Just because you worship the ground he walks on OP, doesn't mean everyone else does. And it doesn't make us lesser Bronco fans. Some of us want the TEAM to win, we don't give a crap if Jake is feeling unloved at the end of the day. He needs to get the job done or ship out. There is a reason we are paying the guy MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. And it isn't to go out and play like a rookie.

So spare the venom and angst would ya? I'll support him as long as he plays like this every week. I felt he stepped up and played a very solid game (for him). If you want a textbook awesome day for a QB, please see "Manning" for reference.

[Circle Orange]

P.S. Thanks to Mike Bell for providing the gamebreaking play that could've sealed it for us... maybe one day we'll have a quarterback that can provide that kind of superhuman spark for the passing game as well.

I've got a good hunch he'll wear a number between 5 and 7.


:rofl: You mean Bubby Brister's coming back?

Not to pick on Jake, but didn't his last pass bounce off the turf?

[Circle Orange]

According to many we haven't been a truly effective running team since TD. I for one disagree. That being said, I think most agree that around here the goal is always to win the Super Bowl (Shanahan's words). We have (had?) a Super Bowl caliber defense, or at the very least quite a good one, but the offense has yet to match that performance.

"Well enough".... this is a phrase Plummer fans are in love with. Well enough? Come on now, we've got to get a quarterback in there who can WIN GAMES not just not lose them for us. I'm not asking for him to be run out of town, hanged, shot between the eyes, or even benched in favor of Cutler against a team like the Colts where the QB has a ton of responsibility...... but please, will we quit acting like he's been earning his paycheck lately?

THAT'S IT! We need to glue the Colt's O with the Broncos D...problem solved! ;D

[Dedhed]

Classic fool post. Our team is a running team. We are not a passing team like the Colts. Nobody's saying Plummer was a god today. He played well enough to win, converting 3rd downs, running for first downs and a TD, and avoiding sacks. No ints, no almost ints.

Plummer's rating today, since you guys are so in love with high ratings: 104.2.

Thank god most Bronco fans aren't like half of the people here.
Man, can you smell the irony here? The apologists have been justifying every Plummer shortcoming with a "W". First "L" in weeks, and they look everywhere else. Shocking.

It's the definition of "Homerism". If you apologists going to base your support on a black and white issue, don't crawl into the grey the first time the outcome doesn't suit your fancy.

[mosca]

Sorry... but Plummer was directly responsible for 7 Indianapolis points. That's not "virtually NO responsibility" in a game that was won by 3 points.
No way... that's a stretch there. His fumble did contribute to the Colts getting great redzone field possession, but it did not directly lead to the Colts' TD. That responsibility has to go to Manning and Co. executing well, props to them, and to our D for laying down as they did the rest of the game. Now, if he had thrown an INT at the same spot that was returned for a TD, then I'd say that he was directly responsible for 7 Colts pts., but the fumble... no. You're simplifying it too much.

[epicSocialism4tw]

This thread is teh ghey.

[mosca]

Man, can you smell the irony here? The apologists have been justifying every Plummer shortcoming with a "W". First "L" in weeks, and they look everywhere else. Shocking.

It's the definition of "Homerism". If you apologists going to base your support on a black and white issue, don't crawl into the grey the first time the outcome doesn't suit your fancy.
Not everyone has justified Jake's piss-poor play because of the Ws. Most everyone on here has acknowledged that he's played crappy. That simply doesn't automatically translate into benching him when we were getting wins. Big difference between saying "yeah, he's played crappy, we can keep him in 'cause we're winning games" and "yeah, he's played crappy, we're winning, but... bench him! put in Cutler!" Plummer hasn't won us any games this year and, at the same time, he didn't lose today's game either.

[Crushaholic]

Man, can you smell the irony here? The apologists have been justifying every Plummer shortcoming with a "W". First "L" in weeks, and they look everywhere else. Shocking.

It's the definition of "Homerism". If you apologists going to base your support on a black and white issue, don't crawl into the grey the first time the outcome doesn't suit your fancy.

If Jake had a 50% completion rate with 2 or 3 picks, I would say he had a hand in the loss. However, we were up 10-6 at halftime and Indy found a way to exploit our soft defense. Jake didn't lose this game for us. We could have overcome his one fumble easily if we had put some pressure on Manning and/or changed up our coverage schemes. We didn't do that, so we lost the game...

[Bronco Bob]

Sorry... but Plummer was directly responsible for 7 Indianapolis points. That's not "virtually NO responsibility" in a game that was won by 3 points.

I must have stepped out to take a pee when that happened.
Did Plummer throw an interception that the Colts ran
in for a touchdown. I did see the O-line break down and
let Dwight Freeney come in and cause a fumble. I then saw
the Broncos fail to get a punt off in time which led to a
Dungy challenge. I then saw the Denver D allow Manning
to get a touchdown off of it.
But I never saw a single play where Plummer was directly
responsible for a Colts TD. Can you elaborate which play
that was?

[Dedhed]

Plummer hasn't won us any games this year and, at the same time, he didn't lose today's game either.

Irrelevance is not what I look for in a quarterback and team leader.

[Bronco Bob]

If Jake had a 50% completion rate with 2 or 3 picks, I would say he had a hand in the loss. However, we were up 10-6 at halftime and Indy found a way to exploit our soft defense. Jake didn't lose this game for us. We could have overcome his one fumble easily if we had put some pressure on Manning and/or changed up our coverage schemes. We didn't do that, so we lost the game...

We were up 14-6 at halftime, a Plummer QB sneak for a TD and a Plummer
15 yard pass to Walker for a TD. The Plummer haters love to hang the
fumble on Jake. So where was the sacks and ints against Manning?
Maybe if the D had sacked Manning a time or two they might have
gotten a fumble. Maybe if the D had put pressure on Manning he
might have made a bad throw leading to an int. Instead Manning
had time to eat a ham sandwich and drink a cup of coffee waiting
for Reggie Wayne to get open against DWill on play after play.

[Crushaholic]

We were up 14-6 at halftime, a Plummer QB sneak for a TD and a Plummer
15 yard pass to Walker for a TD.

You're right. It was 14-6. Geez, that seems like an eternity ago...~Popps~

[Dedhed]

We were up 14-6 at halftime, a Plummer QB sneak for a TD and a Plummer
15 yard pass to Walker for a TD. The Plummer haters love to hang the
fumble on Jake. So where was the sacks and ints against Manning?
Maybe if the D had sacked Manning a time or two they might have
gotten a fumble. Maybe if the D had put pressure on Manning he
might have made a bad throw leading to an int. Instead Manning
had time to eat a ham sandwich and drink a cup of coffee waiting
for Reggie Wayne to get open against DWill on play after play.

If Plummer gets equal credit for a win in a game where he's awful (5 of 7 btw) shouldn't he take equal credit in a loss where he's ok?

[watermock]

We more than doubled our point total. I said two things before the game. We would have to score between 27-31 to win. Ugg. They didn't turn the ball over once while we did once, and yes, it was a forced fumble. 31 should of been enough.

I also said if Jake had a good game the apologists would come out of the woodwork. Hell...Jake almost raised his rating into the top 30 @65.2. You STFU. Noone is blaming Jake for this loss even tho he had the only turnover.

If we could of even gotten a FG yet alone a TD on our first drive of the second half, we would of firmly taken command and the steam out of INDY. We had the chance to grab the top seed for now with tiebreakers.

I haven't been this devestated since the Jacksonville playoff loss. The SB losses sucked, but we didn't give those game away, we lost to the better teams. This was a slugfest decided by TKO with ten seconds left in the 15th round.

Manning might be the best QB of all time before it's all said and done. He's certainly top 5 allready IMO.

[orange 4 life]

Plummer homers, please crawl back into your holes immediately. Plummer proved today yet again, he can't be called upon to be a gamebreaker, ever. Whoopee, so he didn't directly cause a loss this week. Is that something we should cheer for? I wonder if all you Plummer homers are enamored with mediocrity in your actual lives as well.

you and your type are fvvkking delusional.

plummer made the big throws, and he made the big runs.
his 3rd down run was gorgeous, and his ability to escape the pass rush on the final drive at least allowed us to kick a field goal.
cutler has a stronger arm, but cutler wouldve got sacked on that play.

we scored 31 points. what more do you want?

bottom line is cutler will likely be a very good qb.
that said, it doesnt make ANY difference who is at qb when you play that kind of defense.

we didnt make em punt the ENTIRE game after the 1st drive, and even that one was due to a pass behind clark that he couldve caught anyway.
we didnt stop em all day, just like the previous two playoff games.

taco's theory of the offense controlling the ball actually (8 play 80 yards, 14 plays 91 yards, etc.) ALMOST worked, but again, when you cant ever get a stop, you cant win a game.
it was like watching that chiefs/colts playoff game a few years back.
whoever has it last wins.

plummer played extremely well, as evidenced by the running lanes opening up in the 2nd half.
the offense played extremely well.

and the defense, which had been phenominal up to this point, was so horrifically bad it was literally painful to watch.
no turnovers, no punts, no sacks. hell, did we even HIT manning?
MAYBE once?

bad game. plummer and the 2nd half running game were the only reasons we were in it at all.
in a couple years, it'll likely be cutler in this same situation, and the same people will blame him. ludicrous.

okay small minded.
go back to bashing the qb.
gotta go work....thank God.

jake

[-Slap-]

If Plummer gets equal credit for a win in a game where he's awful (5 of 7 btw) shouldn't he take equal credit in a loss where he's ok?

Good question.

[Tredici]

If only we could've credited a win to Jake.

[Hulamau]

Have a good one guys and ... Go Broncos!!!

I'm leaving now for the airport for England for 3 weeks. Aloha!

[broncos_mtnman]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

I agree, Jake had a decent game.

And to think, it only took him 12 weeks to have one. 4 weeks of preseason and 8 weeks of regular season, and our 10+ year veteran QB, in his 4th year in Shanny's system, FINALLY has a good game.

Talk about low expectations.

Have no worries Bronco fans.

Jake did this against the 18th ranked defense in the NFL. Next week, he has to face a top 10 defense on the road. He'll be back to his old self in no time.

:thanku:

[broncos_mtnman]

If Plummer gets equal credit for a win in a game where he's awful (5 of 7 btw) shouldn't he take equal credit in a loss where he's ok?

Not if you're a Jakester.

Jake is ALWAYS the reason we win, and someone else is ALWAYS at fault when we lose.

:loopy:

[Sassy]

Sorry... but Plummer was directly responsible for 7 Indianapolis points. That's not "virtually NO responsibility" in a game that was won by 3 points.

...and our D was NOT "directly responsible" for the 34 points that Indy put on the board...come on Blue...that was a great play by Freeney...The way the Colts played they would have gotten those points anyway...OUR D could not stop them.

However, I had a feeling the FG by Jason wouldn't be enough. I think we should have gone for the TD on 4 and 9 as crazy as it would have been.

[penguintheory]

If only we could've credited a win to Jake.

Yes, maybe we can one day actually give Jake credit for winning a game for us.

[BMF Bronco]

Yes, maybe we can one day actually give Jake credit for winning a game for us.

two words...

Ravens Game!

[smalltowngrll]

It seems that everyone forgot that our D couldn't stop Indy from putting points on the board. Even without the TO they still would have scored since we couldn't stop them. Think about it...we were getting ready to punt the ball.

I've said it before, I'll say it again....It's a team sport. It takes a team to win and a team to lose. I don't understand why it's so difficult for all of the know-it-alls on this board to get that fact!

[BMF Bronco]

Because that makes too much damned sense for some.

[Dedhed]

Good question.

One the apologists seem intent to ignore.

[orange 4 life]

Not if you're a Jakester.

Jake is ALWAYS the reason we win, and someone else is ALWAYS at fault when we lose.

:loopy:

not at all.
not for anyone who is realistic anyway.

its a team game, and we've been extremely good as a team with jake under center. pretty simple.

the defense was the main reason we got the 1st five wins, and the offense was the only reason we were even IN the game yesterday.
unfortunately, the defense couldnt make any plays in crunchtime, and the offense had to settle for 3 on the final drive.
although jake did an amazing job avoiding the blitz and although he was near flawless throughout the game, he couldnt get that ball to his receiver, and we lost a heartbreaker.

jake gets credit for wins and losses, and the TEAM gets credit for wins and losses.
when we lose games, we look to find out why, and we should.
when we win games, we want to find ways to be better, and we should, but bashing the qb that was on the field for the win (especially considering his track record) just doesnt make any sense to me.

as for this game, unfortunately it was a new look defense and the same result.
32 of 39? are you serious?

in the 1st game of '03, al wilson was at the line screaming out audibles (many of which were fake) and the defense was moving all over the place.
yesterday, we just sat back in the same spots and waited flat footed for manning to pick us apart.

was it arrogance?

who knows, but clearly what we shouldve been doing was making an effort to confuse him. making more of an effort to at least HIT him even if not sacking him.

bottom line is after 7 weeks it looks like the offense isnt NEARLY as bad as many thought they were, and the defense isnt nearly as good.

if the offense can continue to play well and the defense can bounce back, you still have to like where we stand.
we lost a HUGE game when it comes to homefield, but we followed the same script as we did last season, and last seasons 13-3 would be fantastic.

here's to hoping we can put it all together. ^5

jake

[orange 4 life]

Sorry... but Plummer was directly responsible for 7 Indianapolis points. That's not "virtually NO responsibility" in a game that was won by 3 points.

wow. youre delusional.

for one, you might wanna look at the protection.

then, even if you wanna say that he shouldve still been able to hang onto the ball, you might wanna go back and look at the drive charts.

you said you watched the game right?

okay, then you know that the ONLY time we forced a punt was when manning threw behind an open dallas clark.

they wouldve scored anyway.

plummer and the offense were the only reason we were even in that game.

[ZONA]

How about you STFU (who ever started this thread). If Plummer would have played like this all season long so far, there wouldn't be anybody jumping up and down asking for his head. He had a good game. He buys himself another week. So get over it and quit worring about people punkin on Plummer. He's deserved most of it.

[Blueflame]

wow. youre delusional.

for one, you might wanna look at the protection.

then, even if you wanna say that he shouldve still been able to hang onto the ball, you might wanna go back and look at the drive charts.

you said you watched the game right?

okay, then you know that the ONLY time we forced a punt was when manning threw behind an open dallas clark.

they wouldve scored anyway.

plummer and the offense were the only reason we were even in that game.

I think it's "delusional" to totally absolve a QB of all responsibility for the resulting 7 points when he has turned over the ball at the 12-yardline (as the poster I quoted appeared to be trying to do). Sure, it was a great defensive play by Freeney... and yes, the O-line could have protected Plummer better (we all knew the O-line's performance was very likely to decline due to Lepsis' injury) but ultimately, the ball that hit the ground fell from Plummer's hands and therefore the responsibility for the turnover is his. Whether or not the Colts "would've scored anyway" is moot, as the fumble left them in position to put a minimum of 3 on the board regardless of what the defense did, short of another great Bailey INT in the endzone.

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....

[Sassy]

If, If, If...

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....
__________________
All our D would have had to do is hold ONE of those drives to a FG...and we would have won...so it goes BOTH ways. So why is the lone blame on Jake?

[Blueflame]

If, If, If...

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....
__________________
All our D would have had to do is hold ONE of those drives to a FG...and we would have won...so it goes BOTH ways. So why is the lone blame on Jake?

From post #46 of this thread... the comment that was quoted in my post:

"Plummer played well yesterday, period. He's got virtually NO responsibility for this loss."

I respectfully disagree. Plummer bears some responsibility for the loss because his fumble cost the team 7 points. This is not to say... or even suggest... that the defense, O-line, playcalling... or anything else could not be viewed as having some responsibility as well. It just means that I do not agree that Plummer is absolved completely from any responsibility for yesterday's loss.

[ro_50]

Maybe we should enact the 100 post rule after this post. Look, Jake Plummer played well and no one is going to blame him for the loss yesterday unless they are just flat-out hate the quarterback or are the biggest Jay Cutler homers in the world, but facts are facts, if his best game involved passing for 175 semi-yards, then this is going to be his best, he can't get any better than yesterday and despite that, he lost a critical fumble against a team where you can't make turnovers.

Again, no one is pinning this loss on Plummer, but his best game of the day is just decent on the grand scale of quarterbacks.

[SprintRightOption]

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....

Gee that sure sounds like you are blaming Plummer for the loss because you state he is responsible for 7 in a 3 point game.

For all you in this thread calling people like me that don't blame Plummer for 100% of everything everytime "Plummer apoligists" or "Plummer homers", well I have a more fitting description of you: "Logic Haters".

The Logic Haters want to blame Plummer always, and it is false to say that isn't happening. There are more than 3 threads pinning the majority of this loss on him (Anubis', the "on my way off the plummer bandwagon", long beach bronco's, etc.) When you consider that the Colts scored on every possession after the first one (other than the kneel down), and they were moving without using the clock, the fumble makes little difference. Is there any doubt at all if Manning needed a TD on the last drive he would've gotten it? They moved to the 20 without using timouts in a minute; they would've scored a TD if they wanted one.

Some Logic Haters say without the fumble, we had momemtum and would've "salted it away". The score was 14-13 when the fumble happened, the Colts had just driven down the field for an easy TD, I think they had the momemtum. The only second half possessions that weren't TDs were a 3rd and 1 where manning led Clark too much and they kicked a FG, and the final posession when they only needed a FG, but would almost certainly gotten a TD if they needed it.

I was pissed about the fumble and part of the blame is Plummer, part is to the strip, part to the oline, and part to the punt team for dawdling around long enough for Dungy to challenge. But it is anti-logic to say that fumble is a big part of why we lost.

The Logic Haters say Plummer has had a bad game for 6 and a marginal game yesterday. Actual facts show that Plummer played well against NE and was was with Walker on the Madden trailer "players of the game", with 250 yards, and a 101 rating. Plummer helped put 10 on the board against Balt in the 4th quarter after a bonehead int in the first quarter. Against Oakland he played a faultless game and followed the conservative, run-out-the-clock gameplan in the second half. So, in the 3 hardest games against the other 3 AFC division leaders, plummer played well or played well in the 4th quarter to win the game. Those are the facts.

The Logic Haters bring up preseason and say it took 11 games to game a decent game from him. Logic says that Plummer had a better rating than Cutler in preseason and was flawless. Who cares, but it refutes another Logic Hater.

The Logic Haters complained after NE that the completion percentage was too low.

The Logic Haters say things like people like me "worship the ground he walks on" about Plummer, when Popps and others of us have repeatedly been critical of Plummers play for big parts of the season, when it was warranted by actual facts. Who has been on his jock like you think? Where's the evidence?

For you guys, you are a Plummer hater if you point out that Plummer has not had 4 turnovers in most of the games this year(it happened only once, in game 1). Same if you have the temerity to say that plummer sucked in the first half against Balitmore but was clutch when it mattered. Same if you point out that 2003-5 were better for him than most of 2006, so hopefully he will get back to that form since he is capable of it. Same if you wonder if a raw Cutler could come in and lead us to a Superbowl win. To those who base things on facts and truth, that is not a "Plummer homer/apoligist". That is calling a spade a spade.

It is obvious that those of you who have a big problem with Plummer ( dedhed, blueflame, maven, freak6, etc.) are not going to let a little thing like truth or perspective get in the way of your arguments. That's fine, Plummer has done lots of boneheaded things and sometimes plays like a rookie. It's a decent opinion, but it doesn't need all the arrogant condescension and flat out lies or fact manipulation.

So, please carry on with your "Plummer has never done a single thing that isn't completely terrible." meme. The truth hasn't stopped you yet.

[Blueflame]

Gee that sure sounds like you are blaming Plummer for the loss because you state he is responsible for 7 in a 3 point game.

For all you in this thread calling people like me that don't blame Plummer for 100% of everything everytime "Plummer apoligists" or "Plummer homers", well I have a more fitting description of you: "Logic Haters".

The Logic Haters want to blame Plummer always, and it is false to say that isn't happening. There are more than 3 threads pinning the majority of this loss on him (Anubis', the "on my way off the plummer bandwagon", long beach bronco's, etc.) When you consider that the Colts scored on every possession after the first one (other than the kneel down), and they were moving without using the clock, the fumble makes little difference. Is there any doubt at all if Manning needed a TD on the last drive he would've gotten it? They moved to the 20 without using timouts in a minute; they would've scored a TD if they wanted one.

Some Logic Haters say without the fumble, we had momemtum and would've "salted it away". The score was 14-13 when the fumble happened, the Colts had just driven down the field for an easy TD, I think they had the momemtum. The only second half possessions that weren't TDs were a 3rd and 1 where manning led Clark too much and they kicked a FG, and the final posession when they only needed a FG, but would almost certainly gotten a TD if they needed it.

I was pissed about the fumble and part of the blame is Plummer, part is to the strip, part to the oline, and part to the punt team for dawdling around long enough for Dungy to challenge. But it is anti-logic to say that fumble is a big part of why we lost.

The Logic Haters say Plummer has had a bad game for 6 and a marginal game yesterday. Actual facts show that Plummer played well against NE and was was with Walker on the Madden trailer "players of the game", with 250 yards, and a 101 rating. Plummer helped put 10 on the board against Balt in the 4th quarter after a bonehead int in the first quarter. Against Oakland he played a faultless game and followed the conservative, run-out-the-clock gameplan in the second half. So, in the 3 hardest games against the other 3 AFC division leaders, plummer played well or played well in the 4th quarter to win the game. Those are the facts.

The Logic Haters bring up preseason and say it took 11 games to game a decent game from him. Logic says that Plummer had a better rating than Cutler in preseason and was flawless. Who cares, but it refutes another Logic Hater.

The Logic Haters complained after NE that the completion percentage was too low.

The Logic Haters say things like people like me "worship the ground he walks on" about Plummer, when Popps and others of us have repeatedly been critical of Plummers play for big parts of the season, when it was warranted by actual facts. Who has been on his jock like you think? Where's the evidence?

For you guys, you are a Plummer hater if you point out that Plummer has not had 4 turnovers in most of the games this year(it happened only once, in game 1). Same if you have the temerity to say that plummer sucked in the first half against Balitmore but was clutch when it mattered. Same if you point out that 2003-5 were better for him than most of 2006, so hopefully he will get back to that form since he is capable of it. Same if you wonder if a raw Cutler could come in and lead us to a Superbowl win. To those who base things on facts and truth, that is not a "Plummer homer/apoligist". That is calling a spade a spade.

It is obvious that those of you who have a big problem with Plummer ( dedhed, blueflame, maven, freak6, etc.) are not going to let a little thing like truth or perspective get in the way of your arguments. That's fine, Plummer has done lots of boneheaded things and sometimes plays like a rookie. It's a decent opinion, but it doesn't need all the arrogant condescension and flat out lies or fact manipulation.

So, please carry on with your "Plummer has never done a single thing that isn't completely terrible." meme. The truth hasn't stopped you yet.

So, tell me which part of the statement "Plummer's fumble gave the Colts 7 points in a game we lost by 3" is not the truth?

[BroncoFanCam]

If, If, If...

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....
__________________
All our D would have had to do is hold ONE of those drives to a FG...and we would have won...so it goes BOTH ways. So why is the lone blame on Jake?We all knew that Manning was going to put up serious numbers, it is almost inevitable when we play them.

That's why it is all the more IMPERATIVE that Jake not do stupid things to give them the ball on our own 10 yardline.

I am reading a lot of... "It was a great play, by a great player".

I think that's a lot of hogwash.

Whatever happened to protecting the ball?

Everytime Freeny touches someone, does that give them a free pass to put the pig on the turf? Hell no...

QB's need to make plays as much as possible, but when it's obvious the play is a bust, you A) Don't throw to covered/double-covered WR's, and B) Protect the ball, especially when you are inside your own 20.

Jake fails on both accounts.

[Wes Mantooth]

Can anyone tell me how Cutler would have done any different or better? How could he have one this game? QB play was not the problem folks. Let it go.

[Sassy]

Can anyone tell me how Cutler would have done any different or better? How could he have one this game? QB play was not the problem folks. Let it go.

That's just it...they can't ROFL! Why? Because CUT has NOT PLAYED AN NFL down! :wave: But that's ok...they don't seem to let that particular "fact" get in the way of their fantasies...

[Wes Mantooth]

That's just it...they can't ROFL! Why? Because CUT has NOT PLAYED AN NFL down! :wave: But that's ok...they don't seem to let that particular "fact" get in the way of their fantasies...

c'mon! you mean the pre-season doesn't count?

[maven]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

Why?

Watching Peyton pick on a weakness on our team is something our QB cannot achieve. Oh well...

[Rigs11]

I think it's "delusional" to totally absolve a QB of all responsibility for the resulting 7 points when he has turned over the ball at the 12-yardline (as the poster I quoted appeared to be trying to do). Sure, it was a great defensive play by Freeney... and yes, the O-line could have protected Plummer better (we all knew the O-line's performance was very likely to decline due to Lepsis' injury) but ultimately, the ball that hit the ground fell from Plummer's hands and therefore the responsibility for the turnover is his. Whether or not the Colts "would've scored anyway" is moot, as the fumble left them in position to put a minimum of 3 on the board regardless of what the defense did, short of another great Bailey INT in the endzone.

Go ahead and blame the "D" for the other 27 points and you'll get no argument from me. Nonetheless, Plummer's fumble accounted for 7 Colts points and we lost by 3.....
Oh come on. You mean to tell me if Plummer hadn't fumbled and Peyton had gotten the ball at the 40 instead of the ten that he wouldn't of scored?? The D lost the game plain and simple. Jake and company generated 31 points, what more do you people want?

[BroncoFanCam]

Can anyone tell me how Cutler would have done any different or better? How could he have one this game? QB play was not the problem folks. Let it go.Can you tell me that through 7 games Cutler couldn't have pathetic numbers like this...

A QB rating of 65.2
9 Turnovers
6 Touchdowns
A 53% Complettion percentage.

Fact is, those are horrendous numbers which mean he is not in the top 30 of 32 NFL teams as far as passer efficiency goes.

Cutler could at absolute worst only manage to drop 1-2 slots below a 10 year veteran who should be over his growing pains by now. And at least he would be getting some much needed experience, right now we are spinnning our wheels with very few (if any) positives being gained from it.

I think Jake played average enough to hang onto his job for Pitt, but chalk up another L there, and it's time for the new era to begin.

[DB84FAN]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.

[Rigs11]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.

Exactly. When Cutler is struggling they'll call for his head, and praise the defense. When the defense struggles they'll bring up how bad he played when he was struggling, and defect blame from the defense.

[BroncoFanCam]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.Very kind of you...

Rather than wishing teh best for a player that is potentially the face of the franchise for a very long while, you wish for him to do badly... very "sportsmanlike" of you...

We on the other hand have let Jake have his time, we don't need to wish bad things on him, he's got that base covered.

[BroncoFanCam]

Oh come on. You mean to tell me if Plummer hadn't fumbled and Peyton had gotten the ball at the 40 instead of the ten that he wouldn't of scored?? The D lost the game plain and simple. Jake and company generated 31 points, what more do you people want?Ummmmm...

I would imagine that would be the case...

The further away the ball is from the opponents goal line, the less likely they are to score. It's really quite amazing how that works. I'll give a quick run-down...

50 HARD
OWN 40 - Even HARDER
OWN 30 - HARDER STILL
OWN 20 - OMG THIS IS HARD!!!
OWN 10 - ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!

In contrast...

OPP 10 YARDLINE - THANKS FOR THE GIFT BOYS - LET ME PREPARE MY ENDZONE DANCE!!!!

[Blueflame]

Oh come on. You mean to tell me if Plummer hadn't fumbled and Peyton had gotten the ball at the 40 instead of the ten that he wouldn't of scored?? The D lost the game plain and simple. Jake and company generated 31 points, what more do you people want?

We don't know if the Colts would have scored or not, do we? We can idly speculate or hypothesize till Doomsday...but the point, again, is moot. Because Plummer did fumble at the 12 and the Colts promptly put 7 more on the scoreboard. Sorry, but I can't see how those 7 are on the defense. Interesting... when Plummer turned the ball over in the red zone against Cleveland, there was a lot of criticism and blame laid on him (for "ruining the defense's streak") when the Browns subsequently took it into the endzone. Some of it from the same posters who now insist that his fumble against Indy was not at all a factor in the loss yesterday.

[mattbeymvp]

Very kind of you...

Rather than wishing teh best for a player that is potentially the face of the franchise for a very long while, you wish for him to do badly... very "sportsmanlike" of you...

We on the other hand have let Jake have his time, we don't need to wish bad things on him, he's got that base covered.

There's a difference between wishing a player to do poorly and recognizing that nothing short of a Brady or Manning at the quarterback position will ever be enough for most of this fanbase.

You all turned on Griese, you turned on Jake, and you'll turn on Cutler too.

[Rigs11]

Ummmmm...

I would imagine that would be the case...

The further away the ball is from the opponents goal line, the less likely they are to score. It's really quite amazing how that works. I'll give a quick run-down...

50 HARD
OWN 40 - Even HARDER
OWN 30 - HARDER STILL
OWN 20 - OMG THIS IS HARD!!!
OWN 10 - ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!

In contrast...

OPP 10 YARDLINE - THANKS FOR THE GIFT BOYS - LET ME PREPARE MY ENDZONE DANCE!!!!

Did you watch Peyton shred the defense yesterday? Did it really matter where he started? Throw in all the talk about how our D was supposed to be even better when the opponent was in the red zone...

[Rigs11]

We don't know if the Colts would have scored or not, do we? We can idly speculate or hypothesize till Doomsday...but the point, again, is moot. Because Plummer did fumble at the 12 and the Colts promptly put 7 more on the scoreboard. Sorry, but I can't see how those 7 are on the defense. Interesting... when Plummer turned the ball over in the red zone against Cleveland, there was a lot of criticism and blame laid on him (for "ruining the defense's streak") when the Browns subsequently took it into the endzone. Some of it from the same posters who now insist that his fumble against Indy was not at all a factor in the loss yesterday.

Did you watch the game?? Peyton was scoring and it din't matter from where he started. Did you watch the last drive? As I stated before, the D was supposed to be even better when the opposing team was in the red zone because they had less room to work with. Yes it's all hypothetical, but do you really believe that as good as Peyton was that he wouldn't of scored had we punted?the D lost the game.

[penguintheory]

The Logic Haters want to blame Plummer always, and it is false to say that isn't happening.

Yikes. This is where you lost me. Nobody's "blaming" Plummer for this loss at all. Actually, I'm just incredulous that some Plummer fans seem to see our 34-31 loss to Indy as a moral victory because Plummer didn't screw up - in fact he played pretty darn well. Which in itself is a testament to the overall lack of faith in Plummer's ability to fill the role of an above-average quarterback on a Super Bowl contending team.

Like I said, I don't know why you're all so enamored with mediocrity. No, I did not mention Cutler once because I think against the Colts, Cutler would've done a lot worse. Jake was the best quarterback for the job, and probably will continue to be for the remainder of the season. That being said, it's just amazing how far our standards for quarterback play have dropped....

[Sassy]

We don't know if the Colts would have scored or not, do we? We can idly speculate or hypothesize till Doomsday...but the point, again, is moot. Because Plummer did fumble at the 12 and the Colts promptly put 7 more on the scoreboard. Sorry, but I can't see how those 7 are on the defense. Interesting... when Plummer turned the ball over in the red zone against Cleveland, there was a lot of criticism and blame laid on him (for "ruining the defense's streak") when the Browns subsequently took it into the endzone. Some of it from the same posters who now insist that his fumble against Indy was not at all a factor in the loss yesterday.

I don't think we're absolving Jake so much from his mistake as we are pointing out that there were OTHER things that could have resulted in he loss as well. Yes, that play didn't help but there were other things that hurt us worse...that being that our D couldn't stop the other team from scoring! If they would have done that at least once...Jake's fumble wouldn't have mattered...but they didn't and to some of you that fumble is your main reasoning that the Broncos lost the game. It's all Jake's fault...but of course, Javon not catching the ball, the Bells slipping, the D not stopping the O, Schef being short on a 3rd down conversion, etc....those don't have anything to do with the loss now do they? I agree Jake has had a crappy season ...but when he finally plays well...and yes, no one is perfect...he doesn't seem to get any credit. If that would have been Manning that did that on our team, I don't think he would have been ragged on as much as Jake has been.

[Blueflame]

Did you watch the game?? Peyton was scoring and it din't matter from where he started. Did you watch the last drive? As I stated before, the D was supposed to be even better when the opposing team was in the red zone because they had less room to work with. Yes it's all hypothetical, but do you really believe that as good as Peyton was that he wouldn't of scored had we punted?the D lost the game.

Of course I watched the game otherwise I wouldn't know Plummer fumbled, now, would I? ::)

Again, we can speculate ad infinitum on what "might" have happened if Plummer had held onto the ball. It was third and long, so we would have punted.

But that doesn't change the fact that he did fumble and Indy promptly took full advantage of the turnover. Hence, Plummer shares in the culpability for the loss.

[Blueflame]

I don't think we're absolving Jake so much from his mistake as we are pointing out that there were OTHER things that could have resulted in he loss as well. Yes, that play didn't help but there were other things that hurt us worse...that being that our D couldn't stop the other team from scoring! If they would have done that at least once...Jake's fumble wouldn't have mattered...but they didn't and to some of you that fumble is your main reasoning that the Broncos lost the game. It's all Jake's fault...but of course, Javon not catching the ball, the Bells slipping, the D not stopping the O, Schef being short on a 3rd down conversion, etc....those don't have anything to do with the loss now do they? I agree Jake has had a crappy season ...but when he finally plays well...and yes, no one is perfect...he doesn't seem to get any credit. If that would have been Manning that did that on our team, I don't think he would have been ragged on as much as Jake has been.

The post that I took issue with...did, indeed, attempt to totally absolve Plummer of all responsibility.

If that had been Manning back there under center for the Broncos and he fumbled on the 12, leading to a touchdown by our rival and then we lost the game by 3, you can bet your bottom dollar I'd be ragging on Manning as well. I hate it when the Broncos lose. It turns me into a.... well, you know (b-word).

[Sassy]

The post that I took issue with...did, indeed, attempt to totally absolve Plummer of all responsibility.

If that had been Manning back there under center for the Broncos and he fumbled on the 12, leading to a touchdown by our rival and then we lost the game by 3, you can bet your bottom dollar I'd be ragging on Manning as well. I hate it when the Broncos lose. It turns me into a.... well, you know (b-word).

Ha! I hear ya...I wasn't in too great of a mood last night myself! (Ask TJ! LOL!) Anyway, have a good night Blue...I'm off to bed!

[Hercules Rockefeller]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.

Then I expect the same people who defend Plummer to the end to defend Jay too. Jake still makes rookie mistakes in his 11th year, guess you all will give Jay the same benefit of the doubt too.

[Blueflame]

Ha! I hear ya...I wasn't in too great of a mood last night myself! (Ask TJ! LOL!) Anyway, have a good night Blue...I'm off to bed!

No doubt... been very cranky since Sunday evening. LOL Talk to ya later, Sass!

[mosca]

So, tell me which part of the statement "Plummer's fumble gave the Colts 7 points in a game we lost by 3" is not the truth?
What's not the truth? The entire statement, really. The fumble did not "give" the Colts any points at all. It gave them good field position, but no guarantee of any points on the board. Hell, they could have went 4-and-out, thrown an interception, missed a field goal, who knows. Of course, what matters is what really happened, and that was our D giving up another easy Manning TD pass. Plummer's fumble didn't help, but it did not "give" the Colts the TD. We do have 11 guys out there who are known as the "defense" who had the job of preventing that TD from being scored, and failed to do so.

[Blueflame]

What's not the truth? The entire statement, really. The fumble did not "give" the Colts any points at all. It gave them good field position, but no guarantee of any points on the board. Hell, they could have went 4-and-out, thrown an interception, missed a field goal, who knows. Of course, what matters is what really happened, and that was our D giving up another easy Manning TD pass. Plummer's fumble didn't help, but it did not "give" the Colts the TD. We do have 11 guys out there who are known as the "defense" who had the job of preventing that TD from being scored, and failed to do so.

Yeah, right... as if Adam Vinatieri was gonna miss from the 12 even if our defense performed heroically and shut 'em down three times in the shadow of the goalposts. ::) Like it or not, those 7 points are on Plummer.

[mosca]

Yeah, right... as if Adam Vinatieri was gonna miss from the 12 even if our defense performed heroically and shut 'em down three times in the shadow of the goalposts. ::) Like it or not, those 7 points are on Plummer.
He probably wouldn't miss, but you never know... far stranger things have happened in the NFL. Bad snaps, blocks, things like that do actually happen believe it or not. That's why they play the games, you know...

Even if they had settled for a FG, that's a lot better than giving up a TD. And even then, Plummer would have nothing to do with it...main reason being that he does not play on the defense! The difference between giving up 0, 3, or 7 points has everything to do with our defense's performance vs. Indy's offense. Nothing to do with Plummer except for the fact that his turnover led to Indy initially getting the ball.

[Blueflame]

He probably wouldn't miss, but you never know... far stranger things have happened in the NFL. Bad snaps, blocks, things like that do actually happen believe it or not. That's why they play the games, you know...

Even if they had settled for a FG, that's a lot better than giving up a TD. And even then, Plummer would have nothing to do with it...main reason being that he does not play on the defense! The difference between giving up 0, 3, or 7 points has everything to do with our defense's performance vs. Indy's offense. Nothing to do with Plummer except for the fact that his turnover led to Indy initially getting the ball.

A QB who fumbles the ball deep in his own team's territory has "nothing to do with" the opponent's resulting points? ??? Good luck trying to "sell" that take. In that case, why was everyone so ticked off at Plummer for the turnover that led to a Browns touchdown and broke the defense's "streak"? If he's responsible (because of turning over the ball near our endzone) for the Browns' TD, he's also responsible for the Colts' TD. The defense didn't put the opponent inside the red zone; Plummer did.

[mattbeymvp]

A QB who fumbles the ball deep in his own team's territory has "nothing to do with" the opponent's resulting points? ??? Good luck trying to "sell" that take. In that case, why was everyone so ticked off at Plummer for the turnover that led to a Browns touchdown and broke the defense's "streak"? If he's responsible (because of turning over the ball near our endzone) for the Browns' TD, he's also responsible for the Colts' TD. The defense didn't put the opponent inside the red zone; Plummer did.

And Plummer didn't miss the block that allowed Freeney to get to him did he?

So put 7 on Jake's shoulders if you want, that still leaves 27 for the defense to account for, 21 of which belong to a certain midget who coincidentally wears that same 27.

[Blueflame]

And Plummer didn't miss the block that allowed Freeney to get to him did he?

So put 7 on Jake's shoulders if you want, that still leaves 27 for the defense to account for, 21 of which belong to a certain midget who coincidentally wears that same 27.

Nope... the injured Matt Lepsis' replacement missed that block. Injuries are the wild card in the deck and sometimes a backup doesn't play at the same level as the injured starter might have.

So... there's a slice of responsibility for: the O-line, Plummer, the D-line (lack of pass rush), the secondary, special teams (field position) and perhaps a sliver for coaching (playcalling/adjustments). Oh... and injuries.

DWill is just a "sophomore"... he'll improve.

[Sassy]

"By the way, Jake is our quarterback this week," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said to a question that wasn't asked during his news conference.
LOL!

[epicSocialism4tw]

Nope... the injured Matt Lepsis' replacement missed that block. Injuries are the wild card in the deck and sometimes a backup doesn't play at the same level as the injured starter might have.

So... there's a slice of responsibility for: the O-line, Plummer, the D-line (lack of pass rush), the secondary, special teams (field position) and perhaps a sliver for coaching (playcalling/adjustments). Oh... and injuries.

DWill is just a "sophomore"... he'll improve.

When you refer to Plummer as part of the responsibility for the loss, you should also consider that he was one of the brightest spots on the team. Then it might be reasonable to consider that Jake's one problem moment was just a small blip on the screen compared to the good he did and juxtaposed with the inability of the defense to stop the other offense.

It's simple, really.

[epicSocialism4tw]

"By the way, Jake is our quarterback this week," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said to a question that wasn't asked during his news conference.
LOL!

Nice.

Hilarious! :strong:

[Blueflame]

When you refer to Plummer as part of the responsibility for the loss, you should also consider that he was one of the brightest spots on the team. Then it might be reasonable to consider that Jake's one problem moment was just a small blip on the screen compared to the good he did and juxtaposed with the inability of the defense to stop the other offense.

It's simple, really.

Well, except that he has turned over the ball deep in our territory in consecutive games... is it really a "blip on the screen" or is a pattern starting to develop?

The rap on Plummer is...and has always been... his inconsistency....

[epicSocialism4tw]

Well, except that he has turned over the ball deep in our territory in consecutive games... is it really a "blip on the screen" or is a pattern starting to develop?

The rap on Plummer is...and has always been... his inconsistency....

If you are going to label a QB's performance as "incosistent" when he has a turnover on his own side of the 50, then you have a pretty sweeping definition that will include every QB in the NFL.

He bucked that definition last season and the two seasons prior to that one. If he has one game with more picks than TD's than his entire season is labled incosistent.

That's just silly.

[Blueflame]

If you are going to label a QB's performance as "incosistent" when he has a turnover on his own side of the 50, then you have a pretty sweeping definition that will include every QB in the NFL.

He bucked that definition last season and the two seasons prior to that one. If he has one game with more picks than TD's than his entire season is labled incosistent.

That's just silly.

Jake Plummer's entire career is a study in inconsistency, Llama. He's always been... and probably always will be... a QB who can play well one minute and pull a rookie blunder the next. It's who he is and why the powers that be have him "on a leash"....

[Northman]

Jake Plummer's entire career is a study in inconsistency, Llama. He's always been... and probably always will be... a QB who can play well one minute and pull a rookie blunder the next. It's who he is and why the powers that be have him "on a leash"....



Spot on. Rep

[BroncoFanCam]

Did you watch the game?? Peyton was scoring and it din't matter from where he started. Did you watch the last drive? As I stated before, the D was supposed to be even better when the opposing team was in the red zone because they had less room to work with. Yes it's all hypothetical, but do you really believe that as good as Peyton was that he wouldn't of scored had we punted?the D lost the game.You speculate, I offer facts, you speculate again...

Isn't this a joyous game of ring around the rosie?

[Sassy]

Nice.

Hilarious! :strong:

He said last week he would answer it again this week for the media...he kept his promise :giggle:

[BlaK-Argentina]

"By the way, Jake is our quarterback this week," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said to a question that wasn't asked during his news conference.
LOL!

:D That's great! Gotta love Shanahan.

[Sassy]

:D That's great! Gotta love Shanahan.

My guess is he'll do it every week now! Ha!

[Dedhed]

For all you in this thread calling people like me that don't blame Plummer for 100% of everything everytime "Plummer apoligists" or "Plummer homers", well I have a more fitting description of you: "Logic Haters".

So, please carry on with your "Plummer has never done a single thing that isn't completely terrible." meme. The truth hasn't stopped you yet.
You apologists give him 100% support when the Broncos win in spite of his performance. You give 100% of the blame elsewhere when we lose. That's an apologist, and you are one.

You should do a little research regarding what poeple have said about Plummer before you mention them by name as having said "that Plummer has always sucked."

[BMF Bronco]

I wouldn't say we're giving 100% of the blame for the loss, yes, he could have made more completions, had Shanny called the plays. It just so happens Mike Bell was walking all over the colts d. What I am maily saying is that the Defense didn't step up with the offense. I was watching MNF last night and at half time they were clowning Denver's D, DWill in particular. They showed the 8 big plays that Wayne caught against him.

[Dedhed]

I wouldn't say we're giving 100% of the blame for the loss, yes, he could have made more completions, had Shanny called the plays. It just so happens Mike Bell was walking all over the colts d.

There's a very good reason Shanahan doesn't call Jake's number more often. It has nothing to do with Mike Bell, and everything to do with Jake Plummer. If you watched the Cleveland game you'll know what I'm talking about.

[BMF Bronco]

There's a very good reason Shanahan doesn't call Jake's number more often. It has nothing to do with Mike Bell, and everything to do with Jake Plummer. If you watched the Cleveland game you'll know what I'm talking about.

I did watch the Cleveland game, my question to you is did you watch the first half of the Indy game? When they actually took the risks, good things happened. Either Jake scrambled for the first, he hit a huge bomb across the field, yes he had one throw where he overthrew Javon, but I would rather have an overthrow than an underthrown ball resulting in an INT.

[orange 4 life]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.

i wish nothing but great things for cutler, and i hope he can be our second hall of famer.

that said, if we dont play defense at a championship level, it simply wont matter.

ill find it extremely IRONIC when the same people screaming for cutler now want him gone in a few years (and it WILL happen unless something changes on defense), and ill also find it equally disturbing and irritating, because ill be defending him just as i have plummer.
hell, its less about defending PLUMMER and MORE about pointing out that the qb just isnt whats holding us back from winning it all.

all you gotta do is watch the last three playoff losses, and its pretty plain to see why we're not going all the way.

sure, plummer (as well as EVERYONE on both sides of the ball) wasnt good against pitt either, but the primary reason we're not winning it all is very apparent, and the qb isnt that reason.

still, to say "i cant wait" means you'd actually want to relive this whole nightmare, and i sure as hell dont.
i hope we can find a way to play playoff defense, and i hope cutler is half the qb people here think he will be.
unfortunately, we dont know squat about cutler yet (plummer had better stats in preseason, so that theory is out the window) other than the fact that he's got a cannon for an arm, so ill stand behind the guy who's led us to the playoffs three straight years and to a 1st place 5-2 start again this year.

jake

[Dedhed]

I did watch the Cleveland game, my question to you is did you watch the first half of the Indy game? When they actually took the risks, good things happened. Either Jake scrambled for the first, he hit a huge bomb across the field, yes he had one throw where he overthrew Javon, but I would rather have an overthrow than an underthrown ball resulting in an INT.

And every underthrow and overthrow stops the clock and gives the best offense in the league more time to work with. Considering Jake has been working at barely over 50% this year, that's a lot of stopped clocks.

If you're going to beat a good team you have to play to your strengths. The game plan clearly shows that the coaches do not consider Jake in the "strengths" category. If we want to break it down into halves. The defense gave up 6 points and 0 TDs to the best offense in the league. That's a significantly more impressive first HALF than Plummer's...And means absolutely nothing.

[mosca]

And every underthrow and overthrow stops the clock and gives the best offense in the league more time to work with. Considering Jake has been working at barely over 50% this year, that's a lot of stopped clocks.

If you're going to beat a good team you have to play to your strengths. The game plan clearly shows that the coaches do not consider Jake in the "strengths" category. If we want to break it down into halves. The defense gave up 6 points and 0 TDs to the best offense in the league. That's a significantly more impressive first HALF than Plummer's...And means absolutely nothing.
I get the point... incomplete passes are a no-no, and we've seen quite a few of 'em this year. But as for Sunday's game, that overthrow to Javon in particular... that was a well-thrown ball, just a stride or two too far. I was actually surprised that he threw it so well, seeing how he's thrown the ball this year. I'm not gonna rag on him for that one, as I've seen just about every other QB in the league, including the good ones, throw a similar pass, just a hair too long, when they try to go long when a reciever's covered one-on-one.

[watermock]

I get the point... incomplete passes are a no-no, and we've seen quite a few of 'em this year. But as for Sunday's game, that overthrow to Javon in particular... that was a well-thrown ball, just a stride or two too far.

You complete the idiot test. It doesn't matter if it's off the finger tips or ten yards off line. How is being off a stride or two off acceptable?

I saw two passes off the mark all game by Manning.

He was 32 of 38 dimwit. He had two passes hurried and off target. He had one drop.

I had to simply laugh out loud..."He only missed him by a stride or two"...

It doesn't matter, it's wouldn't of made a difference if he missed the reciever by 200 strides. Did you see Manning miss a reciever not in stride?


I don't know where you apologists come up with this crap.

[mosca]

A QB who fumbles the ball deep in his own team's territory has "nothing to do with" the opponent's resulting points? ??? Good luck trying to "sell" that take.
Nice reading comprehension. Never said that Plummer had nothing to do with the opponent's resulting points... I said that "The difference between giving up 0, 3, or 7 points has everything to do with our defense's performance vs. Indy's offense. Nothing to do with Plummer except for the fact that his turnover led to Indy initially getting the ball." I see that you're still trying to oversimplify it.

In that case, why was everyone so ticked off at Plummer for the turnover that led to a Browns touchdown and broke the defense's "streak"? If he's responsible (because of turning over the ball near our endzone) for the Browns' TD, he's also responsible for the Colts' TD. The defense didn't put the opponent inside the red zone; Plummer did.
People were ticked because the Cleveland turnover was a boneheaded INT. The Indy turnover was a forced fumble after the pocket collapsed within 1-2 seconds. Big difference. The Cleveland turnover was much more of an easter egg for the opponent. Not all turnovers are one and the same. Once again, oversimplification.

At the same time, I won't go as far as to say that he was 100% responsible for the Browns' TD. Plummer wasn't out there covering Browns recievers or trying to tackle Reuben Droughns. He aided them in getting good field position, but once again the D gave up the TD in the redzone. Sucks to be in that position for the D, but hey, that's life, isn't it?

[watermock]

Answer it moron.

A well thrown ball hits the reciever in the hands. It's not one or two steps off.

Where do we come up with these people?

[mosca]

You complete the idiot test. It doesn't matter if it's off the finger tips or ten yards off line. How is being off a stride or two off acceptable?

I saw two passes off the mark all game by Manning.
I never said it was acceptable, I just said that I'm not gonna rag on Plummer for missing a reciever by two strides on a long bomb. It happens. Get over it. I guess if he's not Manning then it's just unacceptable. Ok then, I guess you'll be pissed off for a while 'cause the Colts and Giants have a monopoly on that family's QBs in the NFL.

[Dedhed]

I get the point... incomplete passes are a no-no, and we've seen quite a few of 'em this year. But as for Sunday's game, that overthrow to Javon in particular... that was a well-thrown ball, just a stride or two too far. I was actually surprised that he threw it so well, seeing how he's thrown the ball this year. I'm not gonna rag on him for that one, as I've seen just about every other QB in the league, including the good ones, throw a similar pass, just a hair too long, when they try to go long when a reciever's covered one-on-one.

?

[mosca]

?
!

[watermock]

It wasn't just off his fingertips, one stride or even two you dimwit.

Jesus Christ...He missed him by 6 yards and out of bounds.

STFU

[watermock]

Idon't even know what I'm arguing about when the argumentative moron admits the pass was uncatchable.

[mosca]

It wasn't just off his fingertips, one stride or even two you dimwit.

Jesus Christ...He missed him by 6 yards and out of bounds.

STFU
Right... to qoute yourself, Mock, "your an idiot." You don't think that 6 yards = a couple strides to Javon Walker at near topspeed?

[mosca]

Idon't even know what I'm arguing about when the argumentative moron admits the pass was uncatchable.
Haha...argumentative... From the guy who responded to his own post with this, 3 minutes later: "Answer it moron." Exactly, what are you arguing about? It's been acknowledged that the pass was overthrown and uncatchable from the start.

[watermock]

Right... to qoute yourself, Mock, "your an idiot." You don't think that 6 yards = a couple strides to Javon Walker at near topspeed?


I don't need to qoute myself. Only a complete idiot coult day a ball 6 yards overthrown is the reciever's fault.

This is so stupid it's completely comical.

I don't know why I'm wasting time....if you miss the pass by what you yourself claim is 6 yards, when he wasn't hurried, and say what?

[QUOTE]that was a well-thrown ball, just a stride or two too far.[QUOTE]

Never mind two strides are over 6 yards. STFU.

[mosca]

I don't need to qoute myself. Only a complete idiot coult day a ball 6 yards overthrown is the reciever's fault.

This is so stupid it's completely comical.

I don't know why I'm wasting time....if you miss the pass by what you yourself claim is 6 yards, when he wasn't hurried, and say what?

I agree with you, it sounds like you're wasting time, 'cause I really don't see your point. Who ever said that it was the reciever's fault? Either you're imagining things, or your hooked-on-phonics isn't working for you.

[Mile High Mojoe]

Again, Plummer Hater's Shut the **** up. NO Tatum, NO Defense. M. Bell was awesome. Plummer Hater's, did you even see the game? 31 points and we lose? Must be all Plummer's fault.

I know, I'm less than 100 posts. Shoot me.

Another mindless homer giving way to much credit to Plummer when the offense plays well and not enough of the blame when he stinks like a Kansas outhouse which he has almost all year. He hasn't graduated to the penthouse just yet.

[mosca]

Another mindless homer giving way to much credit to Plummer when the offense plays well and not enough of the blame when he stinks like a Kansas outhouse which he has almost all year. He hasn't graduated to the penthouse just yet.
The guy never gave any credit to Plummer in his post, actually. He was just telling Plummer haters to STFU. I guess the two equate in your mind.

[watermock]

he didn't throw for 200 yards and fumbled leading to the go ahead TD.

These are facts.

[Mile High Mojoe]

The guy never gave any credit to Plummer in his post, actually. He was just telling Plummer haters to STFU. I guess the two equate in your mind.

I am so sick and tired of hearing over and over again about poor poor Jake. He played a "good" game, not a "great" game against the Colts. I just can't wait until the Plummer era is over and done with. Jake remains me of the 98 pound weakling on a movie of the week. Expect for him there is no corny happy ending, or for us fans who have to suffer through his terrible games.

The undying love for him is boring me, fall on his sword if you want to, to me he's a lame duck who won't be able to find a job next year unless it's as a back up on a team like the Texans or the Lions.

[BMF Bronco]

And every underthrow and overthrow stops the clock and gives the best offense in the league more time to work with. Considering Jake has been working at barely over 50% this year, that's a lot of stopped clocks.

If you're going to beat a good team you have to play to your strengths. The game plan clearly shows that the coaches do not consider Jake in the "strengths" category. If we want to break it down into halves. The defense gave up 6 points and 0 TDs to the best offense in the league. That's a significantly more impressive first HALF than Plummer's...And means absolutely nothing.

Okay and in the second half Jake drove the offense, with the help of mike bell, to 17 points, and the defense allowed 24. I am not saying our defense sucks, because that's just assinine. What I am saying is that Jake played well enough to win us this game, point blank!

[BMF Bronco]

I am so sick and tired of hearing over and over again about poor poor Jake. He played a "good" game, not a "great" game against the Colts. I just can't wait until the Plummer era is over and done with. Jake remains me of the 98 pound weakling on a movie of the week. Expect for him there is no corny happy ending, or for us fans who have to suffer through his terrible games.

The undying love for him is boring me, fall on his sword if you want to, to me he's a lame duck who won't be able to find a job next year unless it's as a back up on a team like the Texans or the Lions.

So what were you saying about Elway in 94, 95 and 96?! if you don't like hearing about it, cease coming to the threads where his name is mentioned, and on this site, it's like95% of the threads, so you're going to have a lonely, lonely time here.

[Mile High Mojoe]

So what were you saying about Elway in 94, 95 and 96?! if you don't like hearing about it, cease coming to the threads where his name is mentioned, and on this site, it's like95% of the threads, so you're going to have a lonely, lonely time here.

Why is it that every single time poor poor Jake names comes up in this thread or any other thread someone has to toss in the Elway comparision?

Comparing Jake to Elway is the ultimate insult to him and the fans who love him.

Jake's had 10 years in the NFL, he got a job with Denver because he and Bledsoe were the only 2 free agent QB's available when we needed one. Prior to coming to Denver Jake had one playoff appearance with the Cards. Wow, let's put Jake in the HOF. Jake has had more than enough time to prove himself worthy of being an elite QB and has disappointed in the big games. The term smoke and mirrors should be the frame around poor poor Jake's stellar career.

Why the love and support continues to thrive for him is just beyond me.

[BMF Bronco]

Why is it that every single time poor poor Jake names comes up in this thread or any other thread someone has to toss in the Elway comparision?

Comparing Jake to Elway is the ultimate insult to him and the fans who love him.

Jake's had 10 years in the NFL, he got a job with Denver because he and Bledsoe were the only 2 free agent QB's available when we needed one. Prior to coming to Denver Jake had one playoff appearance with the Cards. Wow, let's put Jake in the HOF. Jake has had more than enough time to prove himself worthy of being an elite QB and has disappointed in the big games. The term smoke and mirrors should be the frame around poor poor Jake's stellar career.

Why the love and support continues to thrive for him is just beyond me.

One, I am not comparing their talents, I believe John Elway is the best quarterback, EVER. Look at the Jersey in my pictures. I am comparing the fact that prior to 1997 a good deal of the population was calling for Elway to retire, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE 96 DEBACLE AGAINST THE JAGS IN THE PLAYOFFS. And in that regard, there are plenty of comparisons. You Plummer haters tend to forget the scrutiny Elway went through before he won the big one!

Secondly, if you're talking about choking in big games and getting to the HOF, Manning will never go, how is his stellar playoff record.

[Rigs11]

Answer it moron.

A well thrown ball hits the reciever in the hands. It's not one or two steps off.

Where do we come up with these people?


You're the dimwit for comparing Plummer to manning and thinking that you're clever. Go buy a Colts jerey if you like peanuthead so much...dimwit.

[Mile High Mojoe]

One, I am not comparing their talents, I believe John Elway is the best quarterback, EVER. Look at the Jersey in my pictures. I am comparing the fact that prior to 1997 a good deal of the population was calling for Elway to retire, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE 96 DEBACLE AGAINST THE JAGS IN THE PLAYOFFS. And in that regard, there are plenty of comparisons. You Plummer haters tend to forget the scrutiny Elway went through before he won the big one!

Secondly, if you're talking about choking in big games and getting to the HOF, Manning will never go, how is his stellar playoff record.

On Elway's worst day, even after the Post Jags game, even when Maddox got drafted he was a better QB than Jake by the 10th power.

The Elway comparisions just never fit in a Jake arguement.

[BMF Bronco]

On Elway's worst day, even after the Post Jags game, even when Maddox got drafted he was a better QB than Jake by the 10th power.

The Elway comparisions just never fit in a Jake arguement.

Again, what part of not comparing talent between the two don't you understand?! Maddux was drafted way before 96 by the way, 92 was his first year and that is when the all too familiar, replace the started talk was underway.

[BroncoFanCam]

Again, what part of not comparing talent between the two don't you understand?! Maddux was drafted way before 96 by the way, 92 was his first year and that is when the all too familiar, replace the started talk was underway.I think most of the Elway/Trade talk in the early 90's was coming from Dan Reeves, and little else.

I think the VAST majority of fans thought that was the stupidest idea ever, (as Pat Bowlen did) and Reeves was gone.

[Mile High Mojoe]

Again, what part of not comparing talent between the two don't you understand?! Maddux was drafted way before 96 by the way, 92 was his first year and that is when the all too familiar, replace the started talk was underway.

Would it really matter what I said about Jake? I'm not going be a member of Jake Fan Club and I won't be one of the fans making excuses for the guy when he hasn't done anything to prove he's worthy of being supported.

The only way he wins my love is by getting the 3rd ring, if my expectations are to high for poor Jake then so be it.

[BMF Bronco]

I think most of the Elway/Trade talk in the early 90's was coming from Dan Reeves, and little else.

I think the VAST majority of fans thought that was the stupidest idea ever, (as Pat Bowlen did) and Reeves was gone.

I don't know man, I recall a ton of people calling for his trade, benching. And yes of course led by Satan Reeves.

[BMF Bronco]

Would it really matter what I said about Jake? I'm not going be a member of Jake Fan Club and I won't be one of the fans making excuses for the guy when he hasn't done anything to prove he's worthy of being supported.

The only way he wins my love is by getting the 3rd ring, if my expectations are to high for poor Jake then so be it.

That's all I was saying, if you don't like him and dont want to read about him, cease coming to the threads in which he's mentioned.

[BroncoFanCam]

I don't know man, I recall a ton of people calling for his trade, benching. And yes of course led by Satan Reeves.Yeah, I can't be certain either, but once I heard that talk, that's what I (and many around me at the time) thought.

We had all heard the rumors of those two not being able to get along, and their dysfuntional relationship. I know the first thing that came to my mind was... "We gotta get this guy outta here." (Reeves not John-boy)

John WAS the organization, anyone unable to see that was as dumb as Dan Reeves. Wanting John out that bad, and bringing in Tommy freaking Maddox were a couple of the worst moves in coaching history to me. (Followed closely by P.J. Carlesimo messing with Latrell Sprewell. ugh!~ )

[BMF Bronco]

)

John WAS the organization, anyone unable to see that was as dumb as Dan Reeves. Wanting John out that bad, and bringing in Tommy freaking Maddox were a couple of the worst moves in coaching history to me. (Followed closely by P.J. Carlesimo messing with Latrell Sprewell. ugh!~ )

I agree 100%!!!

[mosca]

Again, what part of not comparing talent between the two don't you understand?! Maddux was drafted way before 96 by the way, 92 was his first year and that is when the all too familiar, replace the started talk was underway.
Don't bother trying to explain to this guy... If you mention Elway and Plummer (or Griese, or any other later Broncos QB) in the same sentence or post, no matter what point you may be trying to make, for whatever reason, you have broken one of the cardinal Bronco fan rules. Never, ever, mention another QB's name along with Elway for any reason. If you do so you will be automatically branded as trying to compare the talent of the two. Heresy! ;D

[mosca]

Why the love and support continues to thrive for him is just beyond me.
Maybe it's because he's a Bronco and the starting QB. It's part of being a true fan to support the team, no matter how well they're playing at the time. Doesn't mean you gotta be an apologist or constantly defend a player. But you support them, hoping that they play well enough for the team to win.

Hell, if the team brought in Ryan Leaf some day and had him be the starting QB I'd probably support him... It wouldn't be fun, but I would still hope for success.

[BroncoFanCam]

Maybe it's because he's a Bronco and the starting QB. It's part of being a true fan to support the team, no matter how well they're playing at the time. Doesn't mean you gotta be an apologist or constantly defend a player. But you support them, hoping that they play well enough for the team to win.

Hell, if the team brought in Ryan Leaf some day and had him be the starting QB I'd probably support him... It wouldn't be fun, but I would still hope for success.I am so sick and tired of this "true fan" bull crap...

Of course we all WANT & HOPE for Jake to do good, having faith that he will actually do it, is a whole other subject entirely.

Those of us who WANT & HOPE, although at the same time doubting his ability to actually come good, are no less Bronco fans than those of you praisng him at every single turn.

This "I am a better fan than you." mentality is completely ridiculous.

[watermock]

Suppose that someone like Bill Parcells takes an old friend, Bledsoe of the table for a Divison 2 QB who had never taken a regular season snap.

Bledsoe and Parcells go back more than a decade.

You think Parcells hates Drew Bledsoe or saw a chance to charge the offense when they were personal friends?

This is classic moronic idiocy from apologists. Two decent games out of 9 seems to satisfy them.

What was the last time that Jake took a team and simply willed it to a victory?

I didn't even say played. I said willed. Elway could will a win out even when he was struggling.

People need to take notice of Tony Romo...this was not only an established QB, Bledsoe is a friend to Parcells.

I'm not blaming Jake for the loss at all, but turning the ball over deep inside our own territory was a game changing play.

[watermock]

I have a cat roaming, sandwich and homade apple pie, a full drink and am simply too tired right now.

I'll be back.

http://www.netlash.com/dyn_new/UserFiles/Image/wolf_bad(1).jpg

I'm going to eat some pie for energy.

[mattbeymvp]

Suppose that someone like Bill Parcells takes an old friend, Bledsoe of the table for a Divison 2 QB who had never taken a regular season snap.

Bledsoe and Parcells go back more than a decade.

You think Parcells hates Drew Bledsoe or saw a chance to charge the offense when they were personal friends?

This is classic moronic idiocy from apologists. Two decent games out of 9 seems to satisfy them.

What was the last time that Jake took a team and simply willed it to a victory?

I didn't even say played. I said willed. Elway could will a win out even when he was struggling.

People need to take notice of Tony Romo...this was not only an established QB, Bledsoe is a friend to Parcells.

I'm not blaming Jake for the loss at all, but turning the ball over deep inside our own territory was a game changing play.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=251030007

[BroncoFanCam]

Suppose that someone like Bill Parcells takes an old friend, Bledsoe of the table for a Divison 2 QB who had never taken a regular season snap.

Bledsoe and Parcells go back more than a decade.

You think Parcells hates Drew Bledsoe or saw a chance to charge the offense when they were personal friends?

This is classic moronic idiocy from apologists. Two decent games out of 9 seems to satisfy them.

What was the last time that Jake took a team and simply willed it to a victory?

I didn't even say played. I said willed. Elway could will a win out even when he was struggling.

People need to take notice of Tony Romo...this was not only an established QB, Bledsoe is a friend to Parcells.

I'm not blaming Jake for the loss at all, but turning the ball over deep inside our own territory was a game changing play.Every coach has their breaking point, Shanny's is prolonged because of the W column. Where Parcels' boys have been dropping games.

Had we lost that game to KC, or one of the others (that were always within reach of the opposition), Jake may have already been riding pine. I would wager that a loss this week, regardless how Jakie-poo does, will result in a change.

[bdv]

Man! That was a tough loss! I'm still getting **** from all the transients up here in Summit County who just happened to pick the Colts as their favorite team. But if we had to lose, did it have to be the fault of our ****ing defense!?!? If we HAD to lose, why couldn't it have been a glorious 4 INT game so we could get Cutler ready for the playoffs?

Okay Plummer, you play that well against the Steelers and it looks like you're the man this season. Just please stay relatively consistent.

And Cutler... study hard. A QB can never know enough about this sport. :strong:

-Tim

[Mile High Mojoe]

Suppose that someone like Bill Parcells takes an old friend, Bledsoe of the table for a Divison 2 QB who had never taken a regular season snap.

Bledsoe and Parcells go back more than a decade.

You think Parcells hates Drew Bledsoe or saw a chance to charge the offense when they were personal friends?

This is classic moronic idiocy from apologists. Two decent games out of 9 seems to satisfy them.

What was the last time that Jake took a team and simply willed it to a victory?

I didn't even say played. I said willed. Elway could will a win out even when he was struggling.

People need to take notice of Tony Romo...this was not only an established QB, Bledsoe is a friend to Parcells.

I'm not blaming Jake for the loss at all, but turning the ball over deep inside our own territory was a game changing play.

I've been saying the exact same things you have here since Jake came to Denver but it falls on mostly deaf ears, not just here but an myspace as well. Their are a group of fans out there that somehow feel the Broncos will fall a apart and dive into the cellar, if a rookie starts for the Broncos.

He's had 4 years and 8 weeks this season to get off the snide and his game is still in the toilet. The Parcells comparision is one of the best I've seen yet to make an arguement that Jake has nearly played out his string. I just hope Shanny feels the same until then we go with a lame duck who will be lucky to get a backup job with the Texans or the Lions next year.

[mosca]

This is classic moronic idiocy from apologists. Two decent games out of 9 seems to satisfy them.
We've only played 7 games this season.

[SprintRightOption]

It wasn't just off his fingertips, one stride or even two you dimwit.

Jesus Christ...He missed him by 6 yards and out of bounds.

STFU

Are you EVER right about anything?!?

I just rewatched that play on Tivo. It was 6 inches past Walker's fingertips and the ball landed in bounds. That is inarguable because I just watched it several times. Simms even said "...JUST overthrown". It was one foot farther than a perfect basket catch. You couldn't be much more off with your 6 yards too long and out of bounds.

I am not defending Plummer, I am arguing against the Logic Haters who come up with outright lies or false statements in their attempt to bash parts of our team. That does not make me a Jake apoligist.

The funny thing about this is that watermock was doing his standard "your an idiot" to people like me who said last year before the October New England game that Brady is better than Plummer. Call someone who said Brady is better idiots! And that is probably not it his top 500 stupid takes.

[SprintRightOption]

You apologists give him 100% support when the Broncos win in spite of his performance. You give 100% of the blame elsewhere when we lose. That's an apologist, and you are one.

You should do a little research regarding what poeple have said about Plummer before you mention them by name as having said "that Plummer has always sucked."

That's completely false, you must have me confused with someone else. I was critical of his play when it was deserved, ie Ram game, first half of KC, Balt, and 4th quarter of Cleveland. If you don't agree that Jake is the worst QB ever or that he has never played well at any point this year, that does not equate to "100% support when the Broncos win in spite of his performance". I think the only previous encounter with you was when Coltsoja said that Plummer was below average from Nov 13th last year to the end, and I responded with facts that his rating was 87 in that period with decent yards and TD/INT ratio. That is not a Jake apoligist, that is a fact homer.

Again, the tactic of you and other Jake Haters is to take your apparent position this year (Jake is the worst QB in football, he has done zero to help the Broncos win this year) take the exact opposite of it (Jake is awesome, he has no blame this year, he is the main reason for all wins) then attribute that opinion to anyone who is less of a hater than you. And that's just silly.

[Mile High Mojoe]

That's completely false, you must have me confused with someone else. I was critical of his play when it was deserved, ie Ram game, first half of KC, Balt, and 4th quarter of Cleveland. If you don't agree that Jake is the worst QB ever or that he has never played well at any point this year, that does not equate to "100% support when the Broncos win in spite of his performance". I think the only previous encounter with you was when Coltsoja said that Plummer was below average from Nov 13th last year to the end, and I responded with facts that his rating was 87 in that period with decent yards and TD/INT ratio. That is not a Jake apoligist, that is a fact homer.

Again, the tactic of you and other Jake Haters is to take your apparent position this year (Jake is the worst QB in football, he has done zero to help the Broncos win this year) take the exact opposite of it (Jake is awesome, he has no blame this year, he is the main reason for all wins) then attribute that opinion to anyone who is less of a hater than you. And that's just silly.

Run some interference, quote some stats, muddy the water with whatever you want, Jake has sucked this year. The Broncos have won despite the fact their QB is a liability and not an asset. Jake's career is the true definition of smoke and mirrors. Without the solid running game that's been in Denver for almost 10 years, Jake's stats from a to z would be some of the worst in the league. Why oh why, must you homers defend him when he hasn't done anything yet to deserve it? Poor poor picked on and beaten up Jakeeepoo. Are you his agent or his Mom or Dad which is it?

[Dedhed]

Okay and in the second half Jake drove the offense, with the help of mike bell, to 17 points, and the defense allowed 24. I am not saying our defense sucks, because that's just assinine. What I am saying is that Jake played well enough to win us this game, point blank!
No he didn't. We lost. The apologists have been screaming that Jake's pitiful play has been "good enough" because we have been winning. Well when we lose, you can't go the other way. If 12-25 for 107 yards with 2 INTs and a fumble is good enough in a win, there's no way 13 completions for 176 yards is good enough in a loss.

Not a chance you get away with that assesment after the crap that's been slung around here lately.

[Dedhed]

That's completely false, you must have me confused with someone else. I was critical of his play when it was deserved, ie Ram game, first half of KC, Balt, and 4th quarter of Cleveland. If you don't agree that Jake is the worst QB ever or that he has never played well at any point this year, that does not equate to "100% support when the Broncos win in spite of his performance". I think the only previous encounter with you was when Coltsoja said that Plummer was below average from Nov 13th last year to the end, and I responded with facts that his rating was 87 in that period with decent yards and TD/INT ratio. That is not a Jake apoligist, that is a fact homer.

Again, the tactic of you and other Jake Haters is to take your apparent position this year (Jake is the worst QB in football, he has done zero to help the Broncos win this year) take the exact opposite of it (Jake is awesome, he has no blame this year, he is the main reason for all wins) then attribute that opinion to anyone who is less of a hater than you. And that's just silly.

Please go back and read posts of mine that date prior to about week 4 of this year.

[mosca]

Why oh why, must you homers defend him when he hasn't done anything yet to deserve it?
Right. He hasn't done a single good thing this year, in the 7 games played. Ha. It's all or nothing for you, isn't it. One extreme or the other in your world!

No need to defend him after games in which he's played well...which granted, haven't been many this year. But as for last week, his play speaks for itself. Go watch the game again...if it really pleases you, keep bashing him all you want. I'll try to keep reminding you of the folly of it when its unwarranted.

[mosca]

No he didn't. We lost. The apologists have been screaming that Jake's pitiful play has been "good enough" because we have been winning. Well when we lose, you can't go the other way. If 12-25 for 107 yards with 2 INTs and a fumble is good enough in a win, there's no way 13 completions for 176 yards is good enough in a loss.

It's really quite simple. 12-25 for 107 yds. with 2 INTs -is- good enough for the win when the D is playing lights out. 13 completions for 176 isn't when the D is playing like crap.

[Circle Orange]

Every coach has their breaking point, Shanny's is prolonged because of the W column. Where Parcels' boys have been dropping games.

Had we lost that game to KC, or one of the others (that were always within reach of the opposition), Jake may have already been riding pine. I would wager that a loss this week, regardless how Jakie-poo does, will result in a change.

I'm NOT a Cowboy fan, so I'd love nothing more than see Bledsoe walk up behind Parcells and give him the biggest 'dope slap' of his life on national tv. Of course he'd be outta there, but it sure would be fun to see! !Booya!

[Dedhed]

It's really quite simple. 12-25 for 107 yds. with 2 INTs -is- good enough for the win when the D is playing lights out. 13 completions for 176 isn't when the D is playing like crap.

Right, you apologists put a loss on the defense and credit Jake for a win. If we lose, Jake's performance isn't good enough to win, end of story. Is that difficult to understand?

You're saying he's "good enough" either way, and that's BS.

[BMF Bronco]

Right, you apologists put a loss on the defense and credit Jake for a win. If we lose, Jake's performance isn't good enough to win, end of story. Is that difficult to understand?

You're saying he's "good enough" either way, and that's BS.

You're an idiot, even ESPN.com said Jake played lights out and the onus falls on the defense.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2643150

Still, the game went back and forth for the full 60 minutes. Despite starting slow, Jake Plummer played an excellent game. In the first half, he used his feet on option runs and in moving pockets. He scored on a 1-yard touchdown and took the Broncos into halftime with a 14-6 lead after connecting with Javon Walker on a 14-yard touchdown strike with 22 seconds left in the first half.

[Alkazar]

After reading two pages of this thread (I've still got at least 5 more pages to go but...), I feel I've got to weigh in with my opinion. IMHO, Plummer's play this past weekend is exactly what I want from our QB. I do not expect another Elway (although I wouldn't turn it down if Cutler turned out to be Elway re-incarnated). My problem with Plummer is the inconsistent play. I've seen my share of Elway miscues to know nobody is perfect. But Plummer has a tendency to try and be "ELWAY" (trying to make miracles happen) and usually ends up blowing the game. I would rather ne not do that and just manage the game, which is what most QBs do.

[Alkazar]

I must have stepped out to take a pee when that happened.
Did Plummer throw an interception that the Colts ran
in for a touchdown. I did see the O-line break down and
let Dwight Freeney come in and cause a fumble. I then saw
the Broncos fail to get a punt off in time which led to a
Dungy challenge. I then saw the Denver D allow Manning
to get a touchdown off of it.
But I never saw a single play where Plummer was directly
responsible for a Colts TD. Can you elaborate which play
that was?

I'd like to answer this as well. To me, Plummer WAS directly responsible for the TD scored by Manning. He fumbled the ball where only the Faiders or 49ers couldn't have scored and even for those two teams they would have had to try extremely hard NOT to score. So yes, he was directly responsible for those 7 points but not for losing the game. In my opinion, it was our defense laying down in the second half that lost us the game.

[Alkazar]

I cannot wait for the same guys screaming at cutler to be off and brining in some else one or two years from now.

This is what I was saying a few years back ;)..................look where we are now.

[Dedhed]

You're an idiot, even ESPN.com said Jake played lights out and the onus falls on the defense.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2643150

Still, the game went back and forth for the full 60 minutes. Despite starting slow, Jake Plummer played an excellent game. In the first half, he used his feet on option runs and in moving pockets. He scored on a 1-yard touchdown and took the Broncos into halftime with a 14-6 lead after connecting with Javon Walker on a 14-yard touchdown strike with 22 seconds left in the first half.

Citing ESPiN as your backup leaves nothing left to be said.

[Dedhed]

After reading two pages of this thread (I've still got at least 5 more pages to go but...), I feel I've got to weigh in with my opinion. IMHO, Plummer's play this past weekend is exactly what I want from our QB. I do not expect another Elway (although I wouldn't turn it down if Cutler turned out to be Elway re-incarnated). My problem with Plummer is the inconsistent play. I've seen my share of Elway miscues to know nobody is perfect. But Plummer has a tendency to try and be "ELWAY" (trying to make miracles happen) and usually ends up blowing the game. I would rather ne not do that and just manage the game, which is what most QBs do.
And other QBs make a play when one needs to be made. Elway had more miscues than most around here would admit, but when a play needed to be made, he made it. Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger (pre-face plant) are similar.

[Popps]

You're an idiot, even ESPN.com said Jake played lights out and the onus falls on the defense.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2643150

Still, the game went back and forth for the full 60 minutes. Despite starting slow, Jake Plummer played an excellent game. In the first half, he used his feet on option runs and in moving pockets. He scored on a 1-yard touchdown and took the Broncos into halftime with a 14-6 lead after connecting with Javon Walker on a 14-yard touchdown strike with 22 seconds left in the first half.


The entire (unbiased) free world called this game for what it was... a defensive collapse.

You're not dealing with rational peoole here, dude. This is like talking to religious fanatics. They're dead set on what they believe and anyone who agrees must be wrong, even if they are deep in the minority.

I was b****ing about this lack of pass-rush long before Jake got to town. But, because I don't blame Plummer for our obvious defensive collapses, I must be a "Jake Homer."

Don't worry, I'll still be here... rooting for Cutler in the coming years... and bashing our defensive line if we don't get serious about it.

Thinking beyond the QB position just takes more effort than a lot of people want to put into it.

[Dedhed]

The entire (unbiased) free world called this game for what it was... a defensive collapse.

You're not dealing with rational peoole here, dude. This is like talking to religious fanatics. They're dead set on what they believe and anyone who agrees must be wrong, even if they are deep in the minority.

I was b****ing about this lack of pass-rush long before Jake got to town. But, because I don't blame Plummer for our obvious defensive collapses, I must be a "Jake Homer."

Don't worry, I'll still be here... rooting for Cutler in the coming years... and bashing our defensive line if we don't get serious about it.

Thinking beyond the QB position just takes more effort than a lot of people want to put into it.I'm calling this game what it is: A LOSS. It's a "win" for the apologists b/c they can say "Jake played well enough to win this game."

[watermock]

The entire (unbiased) free world called this game for what it was... a defensive collapse.

You're not dealing with rational peoole here, dude. This is like talking to religious fanatics. They're dead set on what they believe and anyone who agrees must be wrong, even if they are deep in the minority.

I was b****ing about this lack of pass-rush long before Jake got to town. But, because I don't blame Plummer for our obvious defensive collapses, I must be a "Jake Homer."

Don't worry, I'll still be here... rooting for Cutler in the coming years... and bashing our defensive line if we don't get serious about it.

Thinking beyond the QB position just takes more effort than a lot of people want to put into it.

I'm still waiting for a post by Popps I can remotely agree with. Now people that don't knobslobber over Plummer are akin to irrational religious fanatics. Morons that don't see other problems like the pass rush. Your a complete idiot.

What part of JAKE PLUMMER STILL ISN'T RATED IN THE TOP 30 IN THE NFL escapes you. What part of WE HAD TO GET TO MANNING OR HE WOULD PICK US TO DEATH escapes you?

Your a dimwit...everyone on the board is complaining about the pass rush, but if you critique Jake and might see a viable option, we have tunnel vision.

Another dimwitted argument is about how the minority wants a change. I'm sure the numbers got better for Jake after a good performance (altho he gave up a game changing turnover). Want me to make a poll to actually see the sentiments?

I have been screaming for years just like everyone for a pass rush to get to Manning. You think that your the genius that has analysed that need all by your lonesome?

You want to blame someone for ignorance, why not start with Shanahan and Sundquist and Coyer? They have assembled a front line that resembles the girls from the Brady bunch including Mrs. Brady in pass rush.

But noone but your superior intellect has ever mentioned it...according to you.

I'm getting madder by the second. Remember when I said it would take 27 to 31 points to win? You act like I expected to hold them to under 20 and for awhile it looked like they might. If WE HAD SCORED ON THE OPENING KICKOFF OF THE SECOND HALF (Jake) OR NOT TURNED THE BALL OVER AT THE 12 YARD LINE WE WOULD OF WON.

If we had left Cecil in at HB we would of won. If DWill had made a single play rather than talk crap like that idiot CJ we would of won.

Sorry dude, if your looking at people to say that Jake's game somehow vindicated his play in 5 of 7 games, feel free to bark like a weiner dog.

[watermock]

We've only played 7 games this season.

I'm going back to the playoff games.

[Mile High Mojoe]

I'm still waiting for a post by Popps I can remotely agree with. Now people that don't knobslobber over Plummer are akin to irrational religious fanatics. Morons that don't see other problems like the pass rush. Your a complete idiot.

What part of JAKE PLUMMER STILL ISN'T RATED IN THE TOP 30 IN THE NFL escapes you. What part of WE HAD TO GET TO MANNING OR HE WOULD PICK US TO DEATH escapes you?

Your a dimwit...everyone on the board is complaining about the pass rush, but if you critique Jake and might see a viable option, we have tunnel vision.

Another dimwitted argument is about how the minority wants a change. I'm sure the numbers got better for Jake after a good performance (altho he gave up a game changing turnover). Want me to make a poll to actually see the sentiments?

I have been screaming for years just like everyone for a pass rush to get to Manning. You think that your the genius that has analysed that need all by your lonesome?

You want to blame someone for ignorance, why not start with Shanahan and Sundquist and Coyer? They have assembled a front line that resembles the girls from the Brady bunch including Mrs. Brady in pass rush.

But noone but your superior intellect has ever mentioned it...according to you.

I'm getting madder by the second. Remember when I said it would take 27 to 31 points to win? You act like I expected to hold them to under 20 and for awhile it looked like they might. If WE HAD SCORED ON THE OPENING KICKOFF OF THE SECOND HALF (Jake) OR NOT TURNED THE BALL OVER AT THE 12 YARD LINE WE WOULD OF WON.

If we had left Cecil in at HB we would of won. If DWill had made a single play rather than talk crap like that idiot CJ we would of won.

Sorry dude, if your looking at people to say that Jake's game somehow vindicated his play in 5 of 7 games, feel free to bark like a weiner dog.

Couldn't have said it any better Bro. Stats, past performance or any arguement that we haters on Jake throw out there seem to keep ringing in hollowed out heads. Your comments have mirrored what most smart thinking Broncos fans feel but doesn't seem to get through to people like the aboved mentioned.

I'm so sick of Plummer and his game I feel like breaking his noodle arm so we can get on with the business of developing Cutler. The sooner the better.

[watermock]

Talking Head:

"Still, the game went back and forth for the full 60 minutes. Despite starting slow, Jake Plummer played an excellent game. In the first half, he used his feet on option runs and in moving pockets. He scored on a 1-yard touchdown and took the Broncos into halftime with a 14-6 lead after connecting with Javon Walker on a 14-yard touchdown strike with 22 seconds left in the first half."

I like that sissy Clayton, but to say he had a slow start is misleading. We scored TD's on our second and thirds possesions. We only had three, and the first started at our own 10. I don't call that starting slow, or playing "lights out" in the later stages of the game.

Also, it was the first two possesions to open the second half that turned the game on it's head. We had a 3 and out and Jake fumbled because we were too stupid to keep help in to save Pears. Bad coaching decision there. Good old 5 wide deep in our own territory. At least that's what I remember. It was Shotgun.

The point is there was nothing wrong with the first half possesions. We got the ball at the 10 and Ernster punted the ball thru the end zone.

It was the early second half that killed us. Clayton doesn't have to make an intelligent statement for you to buy it as gospel and change his actual comment. The player that played lights out at QB wasn't named Jake.

If he had actually paid attention Clayton would of seen the game turned early in the second half.

[watermock]

Couldn't have said it any better Bro. Stats, past performance or any arguement that we haters on Jake throw out there seem to keep ringing in hollowed out heads. Your comments have mirrored what most smart thinking Broncos fans feel but doesn't seem to get through to people like the aboved mentioned.

I'm so sick of Plummer and his game I feel like breaking his noodle arm so we can get on with the business of developing Cutler. The sooner the better.

I don't hate Jake, I like Jake actually. It's just he's struggled dating back to the 05 playoffs. Again, it's not like we have Jeff George sitting on the sidelines or BVP. It's an eager beaver with tons of talent.

[BMF Bronco]

Couldn't have said it any better Bro. Stats, past performance or any arguement that we haters on Jake throw out there seem to keep ringing in hollowed out heads. Your comments have mirrored what most smart thinking Broncos fans feel but doesn't seem to get through to people like the aboved mentioned.

I'm so sick of Plummer and his game I feel like breaking his noodle arm so we can get on with the business of developing Cutler. The sooner the better.

Dude, you just exemplified your pathetic stature in this one statement. Not liking a QB is one thing, but wishing harm on a QB, ESPECIALLY OUR OWN, is plain and simple ignorance shining through. Way to show class bud! And you claim to be a fan, moron.

[watermock]

He didn't make a literal statement. He's responsible for his own statements, but hey dude that has no clue...maybe he knows we aren't going anywhere this year the way Jake is playing OVERALL.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

Dude, you just exemplified your pathetic stature in this one statement. Not liking a QB is one thing, but wishing harm on a QB, ESPECIALLY OUR OWN, is plain and simple ignorance shining through. Way to show class bud! And you claim to be a fan, moron.

Amen

[Mile High Mojoe]

Dude, you just exemplified your pathetic stature in this one statement. Not liking a QB is one thing, but wishing harm on a QB, ESPECIALLY OUR OWN, is plain and simple ignorance shining through. Way to show class bud! And you claim to be a fan, moron.

Okay so I exaggerated. I don't wish any harm on Jake, I like mock just believe that Cutler brings more to the table with his phyical abilities than Plummer does. Sure his head doesn't have it yet but that only comes with playing time and experience. If we drop the Steelers and the Raiders game it's time to put Jake on the bench.

I always love how Jake Lovers come to his defense by saying those of us who don't like his play or want him out of lineup are nonfans. I could spent hours defending myself on that one but why? I've lived and died with this team for 40 years. You resorting to calling me a moron is like water off my back, you calling a me nonfan makes me want to beat the chit out of you.

[watermock]

I'm not sure that WASN'T literal. Hilarious!

What makes you think his head isn't right yet? 4 year starter in the SEC that carried a horrible Vandy team that had nada, ZERO players invited to the combine. He performed at the Combine when the others of the Big Three ran off and hid in their Pro Days designed to hide weaknesses. He played in the Senior Bowl, and apparently in practice, he and Vernon Davis were the talk of the week tearing up the place.

He had a 137 preseason, and seemed to find Scheff long before Plummer finally did yesterday.

He said he would be in camp on time, and sped down to catch the end of the initial meeting, then signed that same day.

He has said that he didn't have any problems with the playbook, that was 6 months ago. He's prototype size, has run the option, shotgun, under center. Elite for a QB 10 speed dash which is more important than a Vick 40 anyway.

He's been diplomatic but confident. This isn't someone that raw at all. He's been here 6 months now, and played in a pro offense.

The river card is that Jake has struggled dating back to the playoffs last year.

[BMF Bronco]

I always love how Jake Lovers come to his defense by saying those of us who don't like his play or want him out of lineup are nonfans. I could spent hours defending myself on that one but why? I've lived and died with this team for 40 years. You resorting to calling me a moron is like water off my back, you calling a me nonfan makes me want to beat the chit out of you.

I am not calling you a non-fan for not supporting Jake, I am calling you moronic non-fan for the statement you made about him breaking his arm. Now with the reference to beating the **** out of me, my friend, I travel to Bend, Oregon to see STG, PM me your number and I will call you up next time I am in Bend!

[Mile High Mojoe]

I'm not sure that WASN'T literal. Hilarious!

Literal or non-literal that is the question. To the "Poor Poor Jake Defenders Fan Club" I say, bring it on. Lineup yet another long boring laundry list of excuses for poor poor Jakeeepoo. I'm just sure the next batch will completely reverse my moronic brain and I'll be become the a true blue Jake Zombie that one should be expected to be if I'm a "Real" Broncos fan.

[watermock]

Stop being a drama queen. He can defend himself and it was a poor choice of words. All that meant is the sooner the better by my interpretation. But Drama Queen on.

[BMF Bronco]

Stop being a drama queen. He can defend himself and it was a poor choice of words. All that meant is the sooner the better by my interpretation. But Drama Queen on.

Kiss my ass mock, someone wants to call me out, I am going to bark. You of all people shouldn't be calling anyone a drama queen pally!

[watermock]

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/entertainment/0302/gallery.simpsons.characters/gallery.mr.burns.jpg

I'm callin' on Jimmay and Timmay from the Crips...

[watermock]

Kiss my ass mock, someone wants to call me out, I am going to bark. You of all people shouldn't be calling anyone a drama queen pally!

You would be amusing for Beezlebub. He's got every dog in the hood mad as hell. He loves teasing them.

[BMF Bronco]

you never cease to amaze me

[mosca]

I'm going back to the playoff games.
You may as well include every game from last season in your analysis, then, or maybe every game that Plummer's played for Denver. Dunno why only the two playoff games from last season and all the games this season get included in the your 9 game analysis.

[orange 4 life]

Would it really matter what I said about Jake? I'm not going be a member of Jake Fan Club and I won't be one of the fans making excuses for the guy when he hasn't done anything to prove he's worthy of being supported.

The only way he wins my love is by getting the 3rd ring, if my expectations are to high for poor Jake then so be it.

wow.

so you didnt support elway his first FOURTEEN years?

your expectations were too high for poor johnny too?

what a joke.
we went to the playoffs 1 of 4 seasons before jake got here and 3 of 3 since.
obviously in your little world that isnt enough to garner some support, but if youve "lived and died with this team for 40 years" like you claim, then you should know thats a pretty damn good achievement.

add to that that plummer has the best TD to turnover ratio in bronco history and all three playoff collapses were first and foremost defensive COLLAPSES and plummer has done enough to have a statue built in most cities.

if you wanna raise the bar so high that anything besides a ring means a qb sucks then thats your problem, but to start hoping for our starters "noodle arm to break" says enough about you.
if youve lived and died with the team for 40 years, then support the guys on the field, and realize we have a win/win situation with plummer and cutler.
cutler will PROBABLY be a very good (and hopefully GREAT) NFL qb, but the FACT of it is that we dont know that. in FACT and in reality (two words that many bronco fans dont understand) all we know about cutler is that he has a cannon for a right arm and he looked great in PREseason.
guess what?
plummer looked even BETTER in preseason. kinda shoots that theory out of the water, but go on wishing injury on the starter and "homering" (God what a stupid word that is) for a rookie you know nothing about. keep on being that great fan that you are. :thumbs:

moron.
no fan moron.

dont like it?

come kick my ass too. :kiss:

jake

[orange 4 life]

You complete the idiot test. It doesn't matter if it's off the finger tips or ten yards off line. How is being off a stride or two off acceptable?

I saw two passes off the mark all game by Manning.

He was 32 of 38 dimwit. He had two passes hurried and off target. He had one drop.

I had to simply laugh out loud..."He only missed him by a stride or two"...

It doesn't matter, it's wouldn't of made a difference if he missed the reciever by 200 strides. Did you see Manning miss a reciever not in stride?


I don't know where you apologists come up with this crap.

youre out of control dude.
maybe you always have been.
way to just ignore my pm's.

you think "great" qb's complete every deep ball they throw?

actually, manning BADLY missed a couple of deep balls, one of which probably shouldve been picked, and that was during a game where he could almost walk on water.
our defense laid back and watched, manning lit us up like a frigging christmas tree (a big christmas tree), and he STILL missed a couple deep balls.

anyone that expects a deep ball to be thrown on the money every time needs their head examined.
that or put down the booze. :thumbs:

[orange 4 life]

Answer it moron.

A well thrown ball hits the reciever in the hands. It's not one or two steps off.

Where do we come up with these people?

its answered dipsh!t.

[orange 4 life]

On Elway's worst day, even after the Post Jags game, even when Maddox got drafted he was a better QB than Jake by the 10th power.

The Elway comparisions just never fit in a Jake arguement.

God youre dumb.

no one made an "elway comparison".

its pretty simple. try and follow.

YOU said that the ONLY way to get your support is to win a ring.
according to YOUR twisted logic, that means YOU didnt support elway for his first fourteen years, since he hadnt won a ring.

get it?

it aint rocket science.

[watermock]

As an apologist, why don't you? He had a fine regular season as Good Jake with just a few hiccups of Bad Jake. He started sucking starting with New England where the defense carried him, then the D fell apart in the Pitt game, but so did Jake. That's been discussed as an equal opportunity gaff in all phases of the game. It doesn't change the fact that Jake had 4 turnovers.

So when I said 8 games, I was wrong.

I meant 9. What I keep trying to get thru your thick skulls is this isn't a new phenomenon. I don't know why the light switched off starting with New England.

I think if your OBJECTIVE you take the occasional bad game for granted. Even the great ones have them. It's a TREND that is what disturbs those that will want a change IF JAKE COLLAPSES AGAINST PITT. Others want to wait and would pull the plug in an Oakland loss.

I would say the chances for a change are damn near 90% if he stinks it up against Oakland, for many reasons. You want to get on Shanny's bad side, ask SOB when he laid a turd at home against Oakland. Shanny also likes fighting N.E. but repects them I believe. When Deltha shrugged like "I could give a fvvck when he was completely lazy against N.E. a few years ago, but he had other missteps. Going to the back of the Jet after a loss and yuckin' it up, and the famous "I'm going to Disneyworld" dance when he got a runback of a punt against Seattle like he'd just won the game when it was allready over.

Shanny's doghouse has some sort of trick trap door. Not many escape.

[orange 4 life]

Run some interference, quote some stats, muddy the water with whatever you want, Jake has sucked this year. The Broncos have won despite the fact their QB is a liability and not an asset. Jake's career is the true definition of smoke and mirrors. Without the solid running game that's been in Denver for almost 10 years, Jake's stats from a to z would be some of the worst in the league. Why oh why, must you homers defend him when he hasn't done anything yet to deserve it? Poor poor picked on and beaten up Jakeeepoo. Are you his agent or his Mom or Dad which is it?

he's just a BRONCO fan mile high moron.
you could learn something from him.

[Alkazar]

I don't care which side of the fence anyone is on, we need to stop the vitriolic stipidity that I see going on all over this board. For the most part we're all Bronco fans, and while we obviously have differing opinions about the QB position, the Defense's last performance or whatever, we should calmly discuss it and not attack each other. I could care less who starts what, lets all just make an effort to end it!























God, now I sound like my parents!

[BMF Bronco]

I don't care which side of the fence anyone is on, we need to stop the vitriolic stipidity that I see going on all over this board. For the most part we're all Bronco fans, and while we obviously have differing opinions about the QB position, the Defense's last performance or whatever, we should calmly discuss it and not attack each other. I could care less who starts what, lets all just make an effort to end it!























God, now I sound like my parents!

STFU Alk! j/k I agree

[Alkazar]

Its cool bro, it just seems like there's a civil war about to break out on the board sometimes.

[watermock]

Its cool bro, it just seems like there's a civil war about to break out on the board sometimes.

Call me the Great Instigator. Honestly, my opinion was called the minority so I posted a poll. Nuf said.

[orange 4 life]

I don't care which side of the fence anyone is on, we need to stop the vitriolic stipidity that I see going on all over this board. For the most part we're all Bronco fans, and while we obviously have differing opinions about the QB position, the Defense's last performance or whatever, we should calmly discuss it and not attack each other. I could care less who starts what, lets all just make an effort to end it!


thats whats making this season so much less enjoyable than it should be.

sure, im right there in the midst of it, and i will be again if and when cutler gets jumped in a few years because we still havent got the ring (and we wont until we can play championship defense), but i sure dont like it.

we are all bronco fans, and that used to be enough.

now we've gotta war amongst ourselves.
the indy fans at last weeks games were so damn obnoxious that they almost made raider fan look good.
ive never even come CLOSE to getting into a fight, but i did a couple times sunday. good thing i didnt, since my gimp ass wouldve got creamed!! i had to hide the cane!!

anyway, the point is that even these idiotic (and they were REALLY idiotic. you can tell its a basketball state) obnoxious fans were laughing at us because there were so many debates during the game about cutler and plummer.
people actually NOT watching the plays themselves so they could argue.

plummer is our qb, he's been VERY good for the organization, and ill support him until he's gone.
when cutler is the qb and become one of the team leaders, ill support HIM 100%, and ill support him until the end too.

my only stake in who plays is who gives us a better chance to win.
right now its clearly plummer, and beyond that i just dont care.
when cutler is that guy, THEN ill worry about jay cutler.
until then, he's just the backup qb that i pray doesnt get on the field.

[Blueflame]

I don't care which side of the fence anyone is on, we need to stop the vitriolic stipidity that I see going on all over this board. For the most part we're all Bronco fans, and while we obviously have differing opinions about the QB position, the Defense's last performance or whatever, we should calmly discuss it and not attack each other. I could care less who starts what, lets all just make an effort to end it!

God, now I sound like my parents!

Good post, Alk... sometimes it seems that we could use a reminder that it's possible to disagree without launching into personal attacks on each other. Civility sometimes seems like a foreign concept in a heated QB debate... LOL

[cdesignmaster]

Let's try this again. 31 pts, no running back, defense breaks, but also makes timely turnovers. Jake not great, but a great 3 TD to 0 turnovers. Great game Javon offensively and good team effort all around on turnovers. 400+ yards given up on defense is nothing to be proud of. 31-20 we win by 11, 17-7, we win by 10, I was more comfortable when Plummer was on a leash and the defense played great. I've always liked Jake and will always be his number 1 fan because I love the Broncos. When it's Jay's turn, I'll back him just the same. I rout for the team, not one individual player. Go Broncos!!!

[Sassy]

I'd have taken Jake over quite a few qb's today...including Brady, Ben, Manning (both of them), and Rex....

[cdesignmaster]

Just thought I'd bump this back to the front so I can use it again after whipping up on the Faiders.

[Northman]

Just thought I'd bump this back to the front so I can use it again after whipping up on the Faiders.


Typical.

[Mile High Mojoe]

thats whats making this season so much less enjoyable than it should be.

sure, im right there in the midst of it, and i will be again if and when cutler gets jumped in a few years because we still havent got the ring (and we wont until we can play championship defense), but i sure dont like it.

we are all bronco fans, and that used to be enough.

now we've gotta war amongst ourselves.
the indy fans at last weeks games were so damn obnoxious that they almost made raider fan look good.
ive never even come CLOSE to getting into a fight, but i did a couple times sunday. good thing i didnt, since my gimp ass wouldve got creamed!! i had to hide the cane!!

anyway, the point is that even these idiotic (and they were REALLY idiotic. you can tell its a basketball state) obnoxious fans were laughing at us because there were so many debates during the game about cutler and plummer.
people actually NOT watching the plays themselves so they could argue.

plummer is our qb, he's been VERY good for the organization, and ill support him until he's gone.
when cutler is the qb and become one of the team leaders, ill support HIM 100%, and ill support him until the end too.

my only stake in who plays is who gives us a better chance to win.
right now its clearly plummer, and beyond that i just dont care.
when cutler is that guy, THEN ill worry about jay cutler.
until then, he's just the backup qb that i pray doesnt get on the field.

You know I called for a ceasefire on the Jake debate. I didn't reopen this thread, someone else did. I'm giving Jake my support the next 3 weeks if he tanks in all 3 games and is the primary reason for us losing the games, I'll be the first in line to burn him at the stake. It's now or never for him, let's give him a chance and see if he can shock us all. I'm rooting for him GO JAKE!

Now give it rest and SHUT UP!

[Paladin]

It has been said, probably many, many years ago (Like olden times. Say, before Saint Vince Lombardi or even Mock) "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."

I'm just saying........

[Dudeskey]

One day y'all won't have Plummer to kick around anymore. Then you can move on to ****ting on Cutler

[watermock]

One day y'all won't have Plummer to kick around anymore. Then you can move on to ****ting on Cutler

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/gen/resources/watergate/nixon.farewell.jpg

Jake Plummer...June 1...2007

[Dudeskey]

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/gen/resources/watergate/nixon.farewell.jpg

Jake Plummer...June 1...2007

You nailed it bro. Thats exactly who I was thinking of lol

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Plummer sucks.

[Sassy]

Plummer sucks.

I'll take a "sucky" QB if the team is 6-2 at the half...wait and see...