PDA

View Full Version : McCutlergate: Updated poll on forum sentiment...


Pages : [1] 2

Popps
03-16-2009, 12:22 PM
So, now that the two sides have reached an impasse, where do you feel the blame sits for this situation ending up where it has?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 12:26 PM
Bus and Jay. Easy.

If he really wanted to be here, he would have come to the table after it was said (twice, in three days) that Cutler would not be traded. Period. He wouldn't have whined through the media to act as if he was being mistreated, he wouldn't have put his houses up for sale. He just wouldn't have done those things.

Let him rot on the bench.

Florida_Bronco
03-16-2009, 12:28 PM
Both.

LonghornBronco
03-16-2009, 12:28 PM
I would like to have a choice of Bus Cook. Based on what everyone is saying Jay was on board and wanted a few hours to "think about it", more like consult my agent on how to spin this into inreconcileable differences.

Also I'm wondering why Pat changed his mind about Jay being "the man around here".

AlienBronco
03-16-2009, 12:29 PM
So Bowlen, isn't taken into account? McD / Cutler feud will cost him Millions?

Pseudofool
03-16-2009, 12:31 PM
Bus Cook. The new contract talk should settle who's to blame. Who has something to gain, here? It isn't McD.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 12:32 PM
Bus Cook. The new contract talk should settle who's to blame. Who has something to gain, here? It isn't McD.



There would be no new contract talk if the genie had been kept in the lamp.

Popps
03-16-2009, 12:33 PM
So Bowlen, isn't taken into account? McD / Cutler feud will cost him Millions?

Or save him millions.

Popps
03-16-2009, 12:34 PM
I would like to have a choice of Bus Cook. Based on what everyone is saying Jay was on board and wanted a few hours to "think about it", more like consult my agent on how to spin this into inreconcileable differences. .

It's in the option, Jay and his agent.

They showed up to the meetings together, so they pretty much operate as one person.

(Cutlerbus)

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 12:35 PM
There would be no new contract talk if the genie had been kept in the lamp.

There MIGHT HAVE BEEN contract talk if he'd gone about this the right way: IE, talking to the FO and McD in private about what he'd need to feel comfortable.

Putting his house up for sale and running to every media outlet possible is NOT a mature, business-like way of handling things.

montrose
03-16-2009, 12:36 PM
I blame everyone at this point. Everybody's f'ed up in some way here.

Pseudofool
03-16-2009, 12:39 PM
There would be no new contract talk if the genie had been kept in the lamp.Are you really suggesting that Bus Cook wasn't trying to leverage the situation into getting a new contract? The situation was irresolvable once the notion of a new contract entered Cook's and Cutler's mind. It doesn't matter who was at fault, as they both saw a wedge to negotiate a new deal.

BroncoMatt
03-16-2009, 12:41 PM
After every conversation between the team and the player the player goes and runs to the press. The player has an agenda here. I know I am going a little Parcells here.

He wants a new contract. Fine, nobody would be upset with that if he just said if the team can treat this as a business than he can too, but he isn't. He is running his mouth about how butthurt he is.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 12:43 PM
Are you really suggesting that Bus Cook wasn't trying to leverage the situation into getting a new contract? The situation was irresolvable once the notion of a new contract entered Cook's and Cutler's mind. It doesn't matter who was at fault, as they both so a wedge to negotiate a new deal.


That's not what I suggested at all. I'm certain that now that Bus Cook is involved, he's angling for the Broncos to show Cutler the "security." McDaniels rubbed the magic lamp, and let the genie out of the bottle. Bus Cook is the genie.

AlienBronco
03-16-2009, 12:44 PM
Or save him millions.

???Save millions how so??? By getting rid of Coach with Hall of fame credential and getting OC to learn coaching. That's seems like setting McD in a position to fail!

Pseudofool
03-16-2009, 12:46 PM
That's not what I suggested at all. I'm certain that now that Bus Cook is involved, he's angling for the Broncos to show Cutler the "security." McDaniels rubbed the magic lamp, and let the genie out of the bottle. Bus Cook is the genie.Do you believe there was ever a way for McD to resolve the situation once the initial "genie" was released (i.e. that a trade was in the works)?

broncocalijohn
03-16-2009, 12:49 PM
I believe Jay was wronged when he was led to believe that Cutler was the Man in Denver. But throw everyone in the front office under the "Bus (Cook)" and I now side with the Broncos. Honor your contract and you can leave when it is up. I dont think we can afford to go into the season with Simms or drafted rookie. We have other needs come the NFL Draft and this team needs to get turned around asap so I am not sure on fining him everyday he doesnt show to mini camp. It could be a costly bluff for the 2009 season.

frerottenextelway
03-16-2009, 12:51 PM
Since when isn't Jay honoring his contract? Didn't he say he would be there when he's contractually obligated to (which is not now)?

Popps
03-16-2009, 12:51 PM
???Save millions how so??? By getting rid of Coach with Hall of fame credential and getting OC to learn coaching. That's seems like setting McD in a position to fail!

It was a reference to Cutlerbus holding the organization at gunpoint for a massive contract extension, which is likely what this is all about.

BroncoMatt
03-16-2009, 12:51 PM
I also think jay is afraid McD will actually hold him accountable. He was the man in college and Shanny molly coddled him.

Popps
03-16-2009, 12:53 PM
Since when isn't Jay honoring his contract? Didn't he say he would be there when he's contractually obligated to (which is not now)?

Not showing up for team meetings and demanding a trade would be your first hint.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 12:53 PM
Do you believe there was ever a way for McD to resolve the situation once the initial "genie" was released (i.e. that a trade was in the works)?


No. I've been very upfront that I don't think this situation is going to work out (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=77804) since it first started.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 12:54 PM
Since when isn't Jay honoring his contract? Didn't he say he would be there when he's contractually obligated to (which is not now)?

Uh... well... he has asked to be traded. And left Denver intentionally just to not attend the mandatory meeting and workouts. Do you really think he'll show for minicamp? He's contractually obligated to do so.

BABronco
03-16-2009, 12:55 PM
your poll is missing one option: both.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 12:56 PM
Uh... well... he has asked to be traded. And left Denver intentionally just to not attend the mandatory meeting and workouts. Do you really think he'll show for minicamp? He's contractually obligated to do so.

This meeting wasn't contractually mandatory, and it would have broken the CBA to make it mandatory. Jay has said he'll show up to any of the manditory camps in April. I suppose we'll see about that.

frerottenextelway
03-16-2009, 12:58 PM
Not showing up for team meetings and demanding a trade would be your first hint.

Are these meetings contractually required?

Hint: No.

frerottenextelway
03-16-2009, 01:01 PM
This meeting wasn't contractually mandatory, and it would have broken the CBA to make it mandatory. Jay has said he'll show up to any of the manditory camps in April. I suppose we'll see about that.

Yep. And ''we'll see'' is a lot different than ''he has'' as the OP falsely claimed.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 01:01 PM
This meeting wasn't contractually mandatory, and it would have broken the CBA to make it mandatory. Jay has said he'll show up to any of the manditory camps in April. I suppose we'll see about that.

I suppose we will.

And if this is the case (I haven't seen any quotes from him saying he would be at any contractually-obligated camps), then we have no issue. Why even discuss a trade? He can either play or not, and if he doesn't, he's only hurting his own value.

Meck77
03-16-2009, 01:09 PM
There would be no new contract talk if the genie had been kept in the lamp.

Really? And how do you know that? Talked to Jay lately?

I think either way Jay was looking for a new deal and an opportunity presented itself during the coaching change and he took advantage of it.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 01:12 PM
Really? And how do you know that? Talked to Jay lately?

I think either way Jay was looking for a new deal and an opportunity presented itself during the coaching change and he took advantage of it.


We think similar things, except that I think the opportunity presented itself with the trade talks.

Popps
03-16-2009, 01:15 PM
Are these meetings contractually required?

Hint: No.

Good point.

Skipping team meetings and demanding trades is actually a good sign.

I take it back. Jay is being a great leader right now and really wants to make this work.

Popps
03-16-2009, 01:17 PM
Really? And how do you know that? Talked to Jay lately?

I think either way Jay was looking for a new deal and an opportunity presented itself during the coaching change and he took advantage of it.

Again, Jay claims he didn't ask for a trade when Bates was canned. Who knows if that's true or not, but he did admit to being worked up over it.

There's a train of thought that would lead one to believe it was at that time that Bus stepped in and began telling Jay he needed to "secure his future."

Pure speculation, but the more this plays out... the more the Bus Cook angle seems to be seeping in.

colonelbeef
03-16-2009, 01:17 PM
Both.

definitely both, but management is ultimately responsible here, with Bus Cook being the wild card

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 01:18 PM
Good point.

Skipping team meetings and demanding trades is actually a good sign.

I take it back. Jay is being a great leader right now and really wants to make this work.

Don't forget putting his house on the market! That was a brilliant sign that he wants to be here... or he wants more money so he can buy a new house!

SureShot
03-16-2009, 01:19 PM
Interesting results so far.

Meck77
03-16-2009, 01:20 PM
We think similar things, except that I think the opportunity presented itself with the trade talks.

Ok then. Either way Jay is basically lifting his middle finger to all Broncos fans and the Broncos organization out of GREED. Maybe it's just the realtor in me but when I write a contract or one is presented to me I honor the law and what that paper means. Jay Cutler wipes his ass with contracts.

Anyone have an email address for ole Jay? I sure would like to send one to him or someone who handles his fan mail.

frerottenextelway
03-16-2009, 01:21 PM
Good point.

Skipping team meetings and demanding trades is actually a good sign.

I take it back. Jay is being a great leader right now and really wants to make this work.

Sidestepping is pathetic. You lied, got caught, and are too cowardly to correct it or admit it.

frerottenextelway
03-16-2009, 01:24 PM
Don't forget putting his house on the market! That was a brilliant sign that he wants to be here... or he wants more money so he can buy a new house!

Was the sale of his house part of his contract too? There was a specific allegation made by Popps against Cutler, which is factually false. Instead of admitting it, correcting it, and moving on like a man would do, he's sidestepping by changing the subject.

BroncoBuff
03-16-2009, 01:28 PM
So, now that the two sides have reached an impasse, where do you feel the blame sits for this situation ending up where it has?

Just as with your DJ Williams polls, as you said yourself Popps, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.

IT IS McDANIELS' FAULT!




(Fair poll wording, though. You didn't slant the choices like I thought you would when I clicked in ;D)

Popps
03-16-2009, 01:28 PM
Was the sale of his house part of his contract too? There was a specific allegation made by Popps against Cutler, which is factually false. Instead of admitting it, correcting it, and moving on like a man would do, he's sidestepping by changing the subject.

"Part of the contract?"

When did I say that. What I said was, I don't find the timing coincidental, nor do I believe Jay's bull**** that he and his folks are selling their houses just by "chance."

C'mon, who ****ing believes that? Anyone? Honestly? Please raise your hand if you believe that, because you're a very special person if you do.

vancejohnson82
03-16-2009, 01:30 PM
Just as with your DJ Williams polls, as you said yourself Popps, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.

IT IS McDANIELS' FAULT!




(Fair poll wording, though. You didn't slant the choices like I thought you would when I clicked in ;D)

funny how in the last 15 minutes the Cutler fans got 23 more votes....

i would like to see the names

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:30 PM
Bus and Jay. Easy.

If he really wanted to be here, he would have come to the table after it was said (twice, in three days) that Cutler would not be traded. Period. He wouldn't have whined through the media to act as if he was being mistreated, he wouldn't have put his houses up for sale. He just wouldn't have done those things.

Let him rot on the bench.

That's a load of horse sheet.

He's not wanted here so he's got to explore other options. Every time McD and Col. Xanders open their traps the situation deteriorates. Those two jackmonkeys couldn't sell Valtrex at a Faders Fun Camp. Seriously, I think Bowlen felt our FO needed to be ADA compliant and hired the two biggest mismanaging retards he could find.

Sure, the organization gets to go after any player they want but they should also know that this sort of thing will undermine a player's trust that the organization wants him for the long term. That's why when big deals like this are considered they have to either go all in our stay all out. Our FO morons went half assed and have been squished just like a grape. F'ing morons. These are professional athletes, they're defined by their arrested development and ego. A big part of being a successful coach in the NFL is managing egos and personalities and McKid is right on par with the rest of these prima donnas with his ego panties all in a bunch. And all of this because McKid needed his binky and pacifier, Matt Cassell. "oooh I can't run my O without my Matty boy" butt love trade scenario jackass move by McD. And WTF is Xanders? Window dressing? Does this jackass DO anything besides trail McD on his knees, nose planted firmly between the chosen one's cheeks? Meanwhile, in the bottom of a whiskey bottle, Pat Bowlen believes he's regained control of his franchise.

The whole f'ing lot of them are the stooges and an embarassment. Our FO has officially fallen to Fade levels with their ineptitude and it's sickening, f'ing sickening.

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:32 PM
funny how in the last 15 minutes the Cutler fans got 23 more votes....

i would like to see the names

Here's one:

RaiderH8r-F McDaniels. He's the coach he should have known how to better handle the entire situation. He decided to stick his hands in thetoilet bowl and now he's surprised the whole thing is covered in sh!t?

I've been in the NFL exactly 0 years and I know more than this clown.

Drek
03-16-2009, 01:35 PM
That's not what I suggested at all. I'm certain that now that Bus Cook is involved, he's angling for the Broncos to show Cutler the "security." McDaniels rubbed the magic lamp, and let the genie out of the bottle. Bus Cook is the genie.

So you're saying that McDaniels shouldn't be able to do his job (try making the Broncos better in all phases) as it pertains to Cutler because it might give his agent leverage?

Thats the only way McDaniels comes out the villain so many here want to spin him as. He did his damn job and looked into ways we could improve our team. That shouldn't be grounds for a player who supposedly is a "franchise QB" to act butt hurt and see his agent start trying to leverage it for a new deal.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-16-2009, 01:36 PM
That's a load of horse sheet.

He's not wanted here so he's got to explore other options. Every time McD and Col. Xanders open their traps the situation deteriorates. Those two jackmonkeys couldn't sell Valtrex at a Faders Fun Camp. Seriously, I think Bowlen felt our FO needed to be ADA compliant and hired the two biggest mismanaging retards he could find.

Sure, the organization gets to go after any player they want but they should also know that this sort of thing will undermine a player's trust that the organization wants him for the long term. That's why when big deals like this are considered they have to either go all in our stay all out. Our FO morons went half assed and have been squished just like a grape. F'ing morons. These are professional athletes, they're defined by their arrested development and ego. A big part of being a successful coach in the NFL is managing egos and personalities and McKid is right on par with the rest of these prima donnas with his ego panties all in a bunch. And all of this because McKid needed his binky and pacifier, Matt Cassell. "oooh I can't run my O without my Matty boy" butt love trade scenario jackass move by McD. And WTF is Xanders? Window dressing? Does this jackass DO anything besides trail McD on his knees, nose planted firmly between the chosen one's cheeks? Meanwhile, in the bottom of a whiskey bottle, Pat Bowlen believes he's regained control of his franchise.

The whole f'ing lot of them are the stooges and an embarassment. Our FO has officially fallen to Fade levels with their ineptitude and it's sickening, f'ing sickening.

REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY? every time McD and Xanders run to the media like little bitches, keeping the story alive for YET ANOTHER NEWS CYCLE, it deteriorates? It couldn't be your boyfriend Cutler and his personal injury attorney of an agent running to the media, with their "unnamed sources" about how Cutler is so upset, could it now? No, it's GOTTA be that McDaniels is going behind his own back to tell the media how upset Cutler is.

Give me a ****ing break.

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:38 PM
So you're saying that McDaniels shouldn't be able to do his job (try making the Broncos better in all phases) as it pertains to Cutler because it might give his agent leverage?

Thats the only way McDaniels comes out the villain so many here want to spin him as. He did his damn job and looked into ways we could improve our team. That shouldn't be grounds for a player who supposedly is a "franchise QB" to act butt hurt and see his agent start trying to leverage it for a new deal.

McDaniels went about his job in a slipshod and dumbass fashion. There's a reason why people never hear about trades or moves involving marquis young talent; smart clubs keep a lid on that ****, don't do it, or, if they do consider it they make the move. Our guys went half ass like a bunch of newbies test driving their new Ferrari and went and ran into a tree.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 01:39 PM
So you're saying that McDaniels shouldn't be able to do his job (try making the Broncos better in all phases) as it pertains to Cutler because it might give his agent leverage?

Not at all. What I'm saying is that there's a right way to do things, and a wrong way to do things. I think McDaniels did the right thing by entertaining the offers, and even pursuing them to see if he could maximize Cutler's value. I think he did the wrong thing by not calling Cutler to give him a heads up about the situation before it ended up breaking all over the Internet and having a suprised Bus Cook be the first person to fill Jay in on the situation.

Kaylore
03-16-2009, 01:43 PM
We think similar things, except that I think the opportunity presented itself with the trade talks.

Yeah that's it. Cutler and Bus Cook were happy with the salary he was making after making the pro-bowl, but that darn meanie-face McDaniels wanted to trade for his former player so they decided they'd show him!

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:45 PM
REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY? every time McD and Xanders run to the media like little b****es, keeping the story alive for YET ANOTHER NEWS CYCLE, it deteriorates? It couldn't be your boyfriend Cutler and his personal injury attorney of an agent running to the media, with their "unnamed sources" about how Cutler is so upset, could it now? No, it's GOTTA be that McDaniels is going behind his own back to tell the media how upset Cutler is.

Give me a ****ing break.

The entire situation, top to bottom, left to right, and everything in between has come about because McKid and Col. Xanders are morons. If you're going to talk about moving talent, YOU HAVE TO MOVE THEM AT THAT TIME! If not, the cat gets out of the bag and the ensuing sh!tstorm is exactly what we're witnessing. Of course Cook is using this as leverage for his client, that's what he's supposed to do. The FO is supposed to have known better than to trod this path in such a half ass fashion because this is exactly the fall out they risk. Cutler and his agent are doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing, looking for long term assurances and guarantees before making a commitment to the Broncos. Because of McD and Xanders that is now going to cost Denver plenty. Because McD "entertained notions, ideas thoughts" about how to "make Denver better" he's cost the Broncos leverage in dealing with Cutler or any trade partners going forward. Remember, Randy Moss to NE for a 4th round pick? Does any of this ring any f'ing bells with you people? Our FO and new coach have done considerable damage in "thinking about how to make the team better". Hold your nose boys, our FO has cooked up a mess of turd burgers and every fan is going to have to take a bite. So yeah, I'm pissed at our dumbasses.

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:48 PM
Yeah that's it. Cutler and Bus Cook were happy with the salary he was making after making the pro-bowl, but that darn meanie-face McDaniels wanted to trade for his former player so they decided they'd show him!

Cutler and Cook are just treating this like business. If you don't like how they've got Denver over the barrell the blame for that goes on our FO.

I don't blame Cook one bit. He realizes he's dealing with newbies and morons in our FO and he's lept at the opportunity to better his client's position. That's what he's paid to do. Again, all of this stems from our FO's stunning lack of ability or cognition in dealing with the situation.

vancejohnson82
03-16-2009, 01:48 PM
McDaniels went about his job in a slipshod and dumbass fashion. There's a reason why people never hear about trades or moves involving marquis young talent; smart clubs keep a lid on that ****, don't do it, or, if they do consider it they make the move. Our guys went half ass like a bunch of newbies test driving their new Ferrari and went and ran into a tree.


I was going to respond to one of your diatribes....but I don't really think it's worth it anymore....the people who try and defend Cutler, constantly just keep rehashing the "liar" tag and then throw in something about Bowlen being drunk and a Mc(fill in the blank) creative name...its childish and brings nothing new to the table....the trade was leaked by other clubs, hence why the news broke in the Boston Herald

It's "marquee talent", I believe...

RaiderH8r
03-16-2009, 01:54 PM
I was going to respond to one of your diatribes....but I don't really think it's worth it anymore....the people who try and defend Cutler, constantly just keep rehashing the "liar" tag and then throw in something about Bowlen being drunk and a Mc(fill in the blank) creative name...its childish and brings nothing new to the table....the trade was leaked by other clubs, hence why the news broke in the Boston Herald

It's "marquee talent", I believe...

Well played on the spelling error.

Don't care about the liar tag.

The McD defenders like to chime in to Jay's supporters that Jay should suck it up, that's the business. Well, guess what? Jay and Bus are taking care of business and it's because of McD and Xanders' ineptitude. Jay and his agent are treating this situation just like a business. Don't like it? The blame for that falls squarely on McD and Xanders. They took no time in crippling the organization and if people are true to their belief that loyalty lies with the organization then there should be a little more outrage at the epic stupidity of these two clowns.

Broncoman13
03-16-2009, 01:59 PM
Yeah that's it. Cutler and Bus Cook were happy with the salary he was making after making the pro-bowl, but that darn meanie-face McDaniels wanted to trade for his former player so they decided they'd show him!

I know you're more or less being facetious, but McD opened the door for them to capitalize on. You're damn right Cutler probably viewed himself as "underpaid" after going to the Probowl and being around guys like Manning who are making 15x more money. But, had McD not opened this door it would have been easy to pin this on Cutler and therefore save face for the entire Broncos organization. As it stands now, you have a fan base that is grossly split.

McD is in a no-win situation. Bowlen would gladly pay Cutler at this point if it made everything go away. But, McD doesn't know that Cutler is the answer (and at this point I don't blame him) so he's not giving Bowlen that ringing endorsement either. On the flipside, if Cutler is run out of town and McD doesn't succeed with WHOMEVER he brings in to play QB, he's going to be run out of town himself! Right, wrong, or indifferent... McD, Bowlen, and to a lesser extent Cutler are all screwed in this mess. The fans lose out in the long run.

GreatBronco16
03-16-2009, 02:26 PM
Bowlen would gladly pay Cutler at this point if it made everything go away. But, McD doesn't know that Cutler is the answer (and at this point I don't blame him) so he's not giving Bowlen that ringing endorsement either.


I'm sure that Shanny had promised Jay an extension before he got fired. I'm even more sure that Bowlen knew about it and was ok with it. What I'm not sure of, is why Bowlen just doesn't tell McD that he is getting his contract, and McD needs to make it work.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 08:34 PM
Can anyone remember the last time a player demanded a trade and had about half the fans on his side? It's unheard of. That's how badly the Broncos have botched this situation.

UberBroncoMan
03-16-2009, 08:40 PM
There should be a BOTH column... but I'll just go for who caused this to get out of hand in the beginning and who had the power to end it before it got worse.

watermock
03-16-2009, 08:45 PM
It was a reference to Cutlerbus holding the organization at gunpoint for a massive contract extension, which is likely what this is all about.

I want you to show me where either has demanded a new contract.

All they have asked for is a trade.

Popps
03-16-2009, 09:23 PM
Can anyone remember the last time a player demanded a trade and had about half the fans on his side? It's unheard of. That's how badly the Broncos have botched this situation.

Wow, what a leap of ignorance.

Hey goofball, if this EXACT same scenario would have played out, but only with Karl Paymah. Do you think half of the forum would be on his side?

Half of the people here are on his side because they're blinded by his right arm. Talented players have that effect on people.

This has nothing to do with anything more than people justifying Cutlerbus' holding the organization hostage because people can't see past his fantasy football stats.

If he was a marginal talent, and was holding out for more money... the forum would be unanimously telling him to go **** himself under these same circumstances.

In fact... the mere fact that half of the people CAN see through Cutlerbus' charade tells you how badly CUTLER has butchered this thing up from the beginning, not handling his job like a man and not honoring his contract.

That's right... despite his obvious talent and big arm, half of this forum thinks he's to blame here. THAT, my friend... is your tell in this situation.

Popps
03-16-2009, 09:24 PM
I want you to show me where either has demanded a new contract.

All they have asked for is a trade.

LOL

Oh, O.K... so he just hates you, but you still love him?

Funny.

Half of this forum is Cutlerbus' bitch, then. Right?

bronco610
03-16-2009, 09:31 PM
Why is there not a both option. ???

Broncoman13
03-16-2009, 09:38 PM
Popps you haven't had the opportunity to hear everything that is being said here in Denver. You can't go to the Walmart on Bowles and 470 without hearing about the Cutler mess. And I assure you that most 'people' (whether they are fans like you and me I can't guess) feel that the Broncos have opened this door and are responsible for the current mess. Right, wrong or indifferent... perception is most people's reality and the perception is that Cutler got screwed by the Broncos. I personally think that the Broncos played right into Bus' hands so that he could get Cutler a new contract, but my opinion is certainly in the minority here in Denver!

Wow, what a leap of ignorance.

Hey goofball, if this EXACT same scenario would have played out, but only with Karl Paymah. Do you think half of the forum would be on his side?

Half of the people here are on his side because they're blinded by his right arm. Talented players have that effect on people.

This has nothing to do with anything more than people justifying Cutlerbus' holding the organization hostage because people can't see past his fantasy football stats.

If he was a marginal talent, and was holding out for more money... the forum would be unanimously telling him to go **** himself under these same circumstances.

In fact... the mere fact that half of the people CAN see through Cutlerbus' charade tells you how badly CUTLER has butchered this thing up from the beginning, not handling his job like a man and not honoring his contract.

That's right... despite his obvious talent and big arm, half of this forum thinks he's to blame here. THAT, my friend... is your tell in this situation.

GreatBronco16
03-16-2009, 09:41 PM
Can anyone remember the last time a player demanded a trade and had about half the fans on his side? It's unheard of. That's how badly the Broncos have botched this situation.

I must have missed the that one. Show me where 'ALL' the Bronco fans were polled, and half of them were on Jays side. Oh what's that? You're only going by this website where even all the registered users don't post nor vote on the polls? So Bronco fans only consist of about 200 people? Quit using your forum as a basis for 'All the fans'.

SoCalBronco
03-16-2009, 09:45 PM
I am even more strongly in Cutler's corner than before....now that McDaniels has officially confirmed that he's a liar. It's definitely on McD.

arghemtee
03-16-2009, 09:50 PM
I am even more strongly in Cutler's corner than before....now that McDaniels has officially confirmed that he's a liar. It's definitely on McD.

I don't see how Popps can just ignore this. McDaniels lied and lied until the last possible second. Cutler was calling him out the whole time.

If McDaniels would have told the truth in the first place, we may not be in this situation.

Popps
03-16-2009, 10:00 PM
I don't see how Popps can just ignore this.

Dude, your posts are so bad... the entire forum believed that you were Bob's alter ego.

So, no one is losing sleep over (or paying attention to) your posts.

Popps
03-16-2009, 10:02 PM
I am even more strongly in Cutler's corner than before....now that McDaniels has officially confirmed that he's a liar. It's definitely on McD.

That's in your imagination at work, SoCal.

It's like those guys who sit out in fields waiting to see UFOs, and eventually... their mind convinces them that they're seeing one.

They're not bad guys, they're just believing what they want to believe.

baja
03-16-2009, 10:07 PM
Why is there not a both option. ???

That's what I'm thinking. Oh and Bowlen too.

arghemtee
03-16-2009, 10:12 PM
Dude, your posts are so bad... the entire forum believed that you were Bob's alter ego.

So, no one is losing sleep over (or paying attention to) your posts.

Except you just replied to one.

You are delusional.

keep thinking McDaniels did not lie to Jay Cutler. He even came out and basically said he lied. If you would get off your knees, you would actually see that.

No wonder people say the forums can be more tolerable when you are on ignore. Ha!

~Crash~
03-16-2009, 10:17 PM
Most people that are pissed at Cutler like to skip the facts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cutler was almost traded for a one year wonder that one year wonder would of been payed over 13 million dolors for one year . I think cutler is right to say I want a huge pay raise.

arghemtee
03-16-2009, 10:20 PM
Most people that are pissed at Cutler like to skip the facts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cutler was almost traded for a one year wonder that one year wonder would of been payed over 13 million dolors for one year . I think cutler is right to say I want a huge pay raise.

How would people feel if Mike Shanahan attempted to trade Cutler for Derek Anderson last year?

People think this forum is crazy now? We would have Database Errors throughout the day.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 10:22 PM
I don't mean to get in the way of your quest to be right about everything Popps, but what I said was reasonable and correct. Whether it's on the radio, in the forums, or on the DPO site, despite the fact that Cutler is demanding a trade, he's got about half (if not over half) the fan base sympathizing with his position. It's unheard of. When is the last time a player demanded a trade and had the fans on his side? I can't even think of a single time it happened.

Los Broncos
03-16-2009, 10:22 PM
I voted Jay because he is a cry baby, I just don't know what to think anymore on this subject.

Everyone blaming each other, honor your contract or get the **** off the team.

baja
03-16-2009, 10:24 PM
Cutler never said he would not honor his contract.

Popps
03-16-2009, 10:32 PM
Cutler never said he would not honor his contract.

Baja, you're a smart guy.

Honestly, do you believe that? Do you believe it matters if he pays lip service to honoring his contract? He's demanded a trade, Baja. How "honorable" is that?

The team wants him to play, and he and his agent are saying no. What's honorable about that?

You really want to to plant your flag with some guy who, despite being under contract... skips a team meeting today, and says his time in Denver has "run its course?"

Who cares if he (supposedly) will "honor" his contract. Doesn't demanding a trade sort of nullify that? If he wanted to honor his contract, he would have put aside his differences and came to work.

McDaniels was willing to.

Jay was not.

Where's the honor there?

Popps
03-16-2009, 10:37 PM
I don't mean to get in the way of your quest to be right about everything Popps

Oh, don't worry... I have no need to be right about "everything," but if I did, you wouldn't be an issue.

that Cutler is demanding a trade, he's got about half (if not over half) the fan base sympathizing with his position. It's unheard of. When is the last time a player demanded a trade and had the fans on his side? I can't even think of a single time it happened.

Again, Taco. Cutler-throw-football-good.

If he throw-football-bad, no one gives a ****.

If he had moderate physical skills, he'd be run out of town on a rail and you know it. This is about people being afraid to move into the future with out a stat-pretty QB. Broncos fans had a legendary QB for so long, they're brainwashed into thinking you can't win without a rocket-armed, big-stat QB.

No one is "sympathizing" with his position. They're sympathizing with his arm, and using his "position" (however much position pouting and not honoring your contract gains you) as means to justify their stance that they hate the new coach.

As many have also pointed out, about half of the Cutler contingent here are Shanahan backers scorned. That couldn't be any more obvious.

baja
03-16-2009, 10:43 PM
Baja, you're a smart guy.

Honestly, do you believe that? Do you believe it matters if he pays lip service to honoring his contract? He's demanded a trade, Baja. How "honorable" is that?

The team wants him to play, and he and his agent are saying no. What's honorable about that?

You really want to to plant your flag with some guy who, despite being under contract... skips a team meeting today, and says his time in Denver has "run its course?"

Who cares if he (supposedly) will "honor" his contract. Doesn't demanding a trade sort of nullify that? If he wanted to honor his contract, he would have put aside his differences and came to work.

McDaniels was willing to.

Jay was not.

Where's the honor there?


Popps the reason you and TJ tetter totter so well is because you are equally distant from center. ;D

My approach to this is to deal in the known facts, one of which is Cutler has never said he will not report to mandatory functions.

Popps
03-16-2009, 10:52 PM
Popps the reason you and TJ tetter totter so well is because you are equally distant from center. ;D

My approach to this is to deal in the known facts, one of which is Cutler has never said he will not report to mandatory functions.

Was the meeting today mandatory, Baja? I believe the reports said that it was.

Beyond that, and a simple yes or no answer will do...

Do you feel that Jay Cutler is putting forth his best effort to honor his contract by skipping obligations (yes, a team leader is OBLIGATED to be at ALL meetings) and demanding a trade?

Yes or no?


Question two: Do you believe that Jay Cutler, with 365 days to choose from in a year.... just accidentally put his house up for sale on Friday?

Just a yes or no.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 10:58 PM
Baja, you're a smart guy.

Honestly, do you believe that? Do you believe it matters if he pays lip service to honoring his contract? He's demanded a trade, Baja. How "honorable" is that?

Uh... no. He... through his agent... went through the usual process of filing a formal request to be traded. This is not the same as a demand.

The team wants him to play, and he and his agent are saying no. What's honorable about that?

Sounds to me like he'll play if the team can't find an acceptable trade situation.

You really want to to plant your flag with some guy who, despite being under contract... skips a team meeting today, and says his time in Denver has "run its course?"

Who cares if he (supposedly) will "honor" his contract. Doesn't demanding a trade sort of nullify that? If he wanted to honor his contract, he would have put aside his differences and came to work.

McDaniels was willing to.

Jay was not.

Where's the honor there?

Simple, Popps... both Cutler and McD are treating the NFL like a business and pursuing what's personally beneficial.

OrangeRising
03-16-2009, 11:01 PM
I feel let down by the organization on the whole. I do. These people are supposed to be professionals and businessmen. Equal missed opportunity too; McDaniels, Cutler, and Bowlen. Xanders hasn't been a factor as far as I can tell, which should be a worry in itself. It's really hard to argue with whoever said the crisis grew after the genie popped out of the lamp. If this trade business never came up, there wouldn't have been a leverage point for the agent to exploit, although another pro bowl year would've probably brought on a new contract demand.

This Bus Cook character is an exploiter, and once given an issue, he did what he has done in the past; press for maximum advantage at all costs.

Bowlen should have become personally involved almost immediately when it became clear that misinformation and miscommunication were running up the fever on this thing.

As long as McDaniels and Co. have to deal with this nonsense, they aren't moving forward with crucial plans for his new offense, revamping the defense, the draft and everything else.

It's not only very trying on the emotions, it's a terrible drag on progress. The very worst possible situation at this early stage of the tenure of this coach and his staff. Still unbelievable from the outside looking in.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:02 PM
Was the meeting today mandatory, Baja? I believe the reports said that it was.

Beyond that, and a simple yes or no answer will do...

Do you feel that Jay Cutler is putting forth his best effort to honor his contract by skipping obligations (yes, a team leader is OBLIGATED to be at ALL meetings) and demanding a trade?

Yes or no?


Question two: Do you believe that Jay Cutler, with 365 days to choose from in a year.... just accidentally put his house up for sale on Friday?

Just a yes or no.

McD may have declared that today's meeting was mandatory... but I don't believe the NFLPA would support any attempt at enforcing that.

Yes, I believe Jay Cutler has given the team enough of his vacation time and is within his rights to be "off" now.

The timing of one house going on the market might be coincidental; two is less likely to be. But it's an irrelevant issue. He's well within his rights to sell property that he owns and who knows if he plans to buy other property in the Denver area or not? We don't.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:03 PM
Uh... no. He... through his agent... went through the usual process of filing a formal request to be traded. This is not the same as a demand.
.

OOOOHHHH, O.K... so he is a good teammate and leader. I get it. He DOES love those guys out there.

My bad. He formally requested it.

Gotcha.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:09 PM
OOOOHHHH, O.K... so he is a good teammate and leader. I get it. He DOES love those guys out there.

My bad. He formally requested it.

Gotcha.

There's a standard procedure... he's following it. And he's within his rights to do it.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 11:12 PM
Popps the reason you and TJ tetter totter so well is because you are equally distant from center. ;D



We're polar opposites. I deal with facts. He deals with feelings.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:15 PM
We're polar opposites. I deal with facts. He deals with feelings.

By facts, he means... calling people liars when he's outmaneuvered, and then cowering when called out to put his money where his mouth is.

The only "facts" you deal with are the ones in your imagination, Taco.

Jay Cutlerbus does not want to play for this team, despite being under contract to do so. If you want to hitch your wagon to a guy that hates your team... have at it.

baja
03-16-2009, 11:15 PM
Was the meeting today mandatory, Baja? I believe the reports said that it was.

Beyond that, and a simple yes or no answer will do...

Do you feel that Jay Cutler is putting forth his best effort to honor his contract by skipping obligations (yes, a team leader is OBLIGATED to be at ALL meetings) and demanding a trade?

Yes or no?


Question two: Do you believe that Jay Cutler, with 365 days to choose from in a year.... just accidentally put his house up for sale on Friday?

Just a yes or no.

;D Relax bro I knew the tetter totter crack would get ya.

OK for your questions, The meet today was not a contractually mandatory meeting.

Only the mini camps are as far as i know.

On the house thing that has been in the works for a while now.

Are they (Cut & Bus) playing games now? Most likely.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:16 PM
There's a standard procedure... he's following it. And he's within his rights to do it.

Sure... and he's a ****ty teammate.

Great leaders and teammates don't take their toys and go home in the middle of a contract.

He's letting the guys around him down.

The rest of the MEN are staying and manning up. You think they have respect for this prima donna for leaving them hanging?

Please.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:17 PM
;D Relax bro I knew the tetter totter crack would get ya.

OK for your questions, The meet today was not a contractually mandatory meeting.

Only the mini camps are as far as i know.

On the house thing that has been in the works for a while now.

Are they (Cut & Bus) playing games now? Most likely.

I know man, but c'mon... ANY sensible person waits a few days to list that house. We're in a friggin' depression and he's a millionaire. He had to list it FRIDAY?

C'mon, Baja. We can squabble over minutia with regards to his obligations, but that's just bull****. Jay put his house up for sale because he either wanted to make a statement, or planned to leave.

arghemtee
03-16-2009, 11:21 PM
McD may have declared that today's meeting was mandatory... but I don't believe the NFLPA would support any attempt at enforcing that.

Yes, I believe Jay Cutler has given the team enough of his vacation time and is within his rights to be "off" now.

The timing of one house going on the market might be coincidental; two is less likely to be. But it's an irrelevant issue. He's well within his rights to sell property that he owns and who knows if he plans to buy other property in the Denver area or not? We don't.

IIRC, Jay Cutler said he wanted to buy "40-70 acres". Correct me if I am wrong.

Taco John
03-16-2009, 11:22 PM
Jay Cutlerbus does not want to play for this team, despite being under contract to do so. If you want to hitch your wagon to a guy that hates your team... have at it.



I was the first person on this forum that called for trading Cutler when I recognized immediately that this thing wasn't going to work out. Even if we manage to keep the guy, I don't think it's going to work out.

Hitch my wagon? I think we have no choice but to trade the guy, but that doesn't mean I have to be blind about the fact that the Broncos have screwed this thing up miserably.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:27 PM
Sure... and he's a ****ty teammate.

Great leaders and teammates don't take their toys and go home in the middle of a contract.

He's letting the guys around him down.

The rest of the MEN are staying and manning up. You think they have respect for this prima donna for leaving them hanging?

Please.

He's acting in his own best interests and treating the NFL like a business since it's apparent that's what McD is doing.

Heav left to soon to answer this question... perhaps you can answer it....

Does anyone express regret over being "too late" to make a deal one has already rejected?

baja
03-16-2009, 11:29 PM
I know man, but c'mon... ANY sensible person waits a few days to list that house. We're in a friggin' depression and he's a millionaire. He had to list it FRIDAY?

C'mon, Baja. We can squabble over minutia with regards to his obligations, but that's just bull****. Jay put his house up for sale because he either wanted to make a statement, or planned to leave.

Well I think he was going to do it anyway but I will agree he was probably gleeful about the timing.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:40 PM
He's acting in his own best interests and treating the NFL like a business since it's apparent that's what McD is doing.
]

That's fine.

McDaniel wants him to come in and be part of the team.

Jay doesn't want to be a Bronco. He wants to leave those guys he "cares so much" about.

He wants to leave the guys that went to war with him in the dumps, even though it's in his contract to be their leader.

So, again... if you want to hitch your wagon to that, feel free. I won't be along for that ride until Jay shows up and acts like a man, like the rest of the MEN on this Denver team.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:49 PM
That's fine.

McDaniel wants him to come in and be part of the team.

Jay doesn't want to be a Bronco. He wants to leave those guys he "cares so much" about.

He wants to leave the guys that went to war with him in the dumps, even though it's in his contract to be their leader.

So, again... if you want to hitch your wagon to that, feel free. I won't be along for that ride until Jay shows up and acts like a man, like the rest of the MEN on this Denver team.

Perhaps that's what McD wants...

I notice that you missed my question... and it's seeming to become a thread-killer.

Does anyone express regret over being "too late" to make a deal one has already rejected?

It seems to me that if a person is lamenting being too late to make a deal, then they intended to become actively involved; their role was not passive. Which means... McD's own words prove that he did, in fact, lie not only to Jay, but to the media as well.

Popps
03-16-2009, 11:51 PM
Perhaps that's what McD wants...

I notice that you missed my question... and it's seeming to become a thread-killer.

Does anyone express regret over being "too late" to make a deal one has already rejected?



It's a silly question, which is probably why people are ignoring you.

We'll never know the details of what deal he means, what time it was offered or what he said yes, no or maybe to.

So, you can get caught up in your romance novel.

At the end of the day, Coach McDaniels wants Jay Cutler to be part of the team, and Jay Cutler doesn't want to be there.

So, he's abandoning the fans, his teammates and the city of Denver.

Again, feel free to hitch your wagon to a quitter. Knock yourself out.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:54 PM
It's a silly question, which is probably why people are ignoring you.

We'll never know the details of what deal he means, what time it was offered or what he said yes, no or maybe to.

So, you can get caught up in your romance novel.

At the end of the day, Coach McDaniels wants Jay Cutler to be part of the team, and Jay Cutler doesn't want to be there.

So, he's abandoning the fans, his teammates and the city of Denver.

Again, feel free to hitch your wagon to a quitter. Knock yourself out.

No. It's not a "silly" question. McD's own words do prove that he deliberately and intentionally lied. No amount of deflection is going to change that fact.

Blueflame
03-16-2009, 11:58 PM
Incidentally, Popps...the reason that question has been ignored is that there is no possible spin for McD's own words...

Broncoman13
03-17-2009, 05:40 AM
That's fine.

McDaniel wants him to come in and be part of the team.

Now that he's out of options and Bowlen is coming down on him for this mess. He's making blind promises to the team now. "I'll fix this." What happens if he doesn't fix this, what will the team think of those blind promises. McD is a leader and he can get the job done. I have zero doubt about that. But he's writing some pretty big checks that his ass can't cash!

Jay doesn't want to be a Bronco. He wants to leave those guys he "cares so much" about.

Too much pride for Jay. He's being a baby and it WILL affect many more people than just Jay Cutler. This has the potential to cost nearly the entier coaching staff their jobs in the long run. It will probably cost Bowlen millions in team merchandise sales. Thankfully he has a nice long list of people waiting on season tickets! I think the guys that you're talking about (the players) are the least of our worries. They will treat this like a business either way. If they are getting paid for their work it really doesn't matter if they win 3 games or 13 games now does it?

He wants to leave the guys that went to war with him in the dumps, even though it's in his contract to be their leader.

Actually he has committed to attending every mandatory function there is. I've seen you say the meeting was mandatory. Couldn't be. McD tried to make it mandatory and was quickly put in his place. It does go without saying that most coaches expect 100% attendance in these types of things and most players will actually request the time off or at least coordinate missing the events with their coaches. Pretty sure part of Cutler's contract was not to be traded after a pro-bowl season either.

So, again... if you want to hitch your wagon to that, feel free. I won't be along for that ride until Jay shows up and acts like a man, like the rest of the MEN on this Denver team.

Popps, why aren't you seeing all of the facts here? You have some excellent takes against Cutler, many of which I agree with. But turning a blind eye toward the Denver FO isn't the answer either. Why on earth would you not hold the front office accountable for their actions? Here is the real kicker with me. You thought that the timing was right for Shanahan to go. Kind of like me, you respected what he had done but felt he had grown a little stale and change would be good. The biggest problem was Shanahan had too much power. We needed a real GM and a real Coach and for there to be a separation of the two roles. Yet here we are a couple of months into a rookie coach's tenure and at 32 he has the same power that Shanahan had three months ago! Why aren't you besides yourself with that fact? Why would Bowlen put himself in the same situation with Xanders a twin of Sundquist and McD a twin of Shanny?

Mogulseeker
03-17-2009, 05:45 AM
I said Cutler and his agent, but only because I blame Bus Cook.

He's out to get his own, and he's taking BOTH Cutler and the Broncos down because of it. He his plenty of clients and he's working for what, 10%? It's a low risk situation for him - high risk for Cutler and the Broncos. He's playing both Denver and Cutler.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 07:32 AM
Oh, don't worry... I have no need to be right about "everything," but if I did, you wouldn't be an issue.



Again, Taco. Cutler-throw-football-good.

If he throw-football-bad, no one gives a ****.

If he had moderate physical skills, he'd be run out of town on a rail and you know it. This is about people being afraid to move into the future with out a stat-pretty QB. Broncos fans had a legendary QB for so long, they're brainwashed into thinking you can't win without a rocket-armed, big-stat QB.

No one is "sympathizing" with his position. They're sympathizing with his arm, and using his "position" (however much position pouting and not honoring your contract gains you) as means to justify their stance that they hate the new coach.

As many have also pointed out, about half of the Cutler contingent here are Shanahan backers scorned. That couldn't be any more obvious.

Wow, you've really cracked the code there sparky. Higher talent players engender more passion and a greater desire for teams to want them, and fans recognize the more talented the player the better asset to the team. Jesus I had never looked at it like that before.

McKid and his ass lump Xanders made this whole problem. They created it with their mismanagement, naivte', and stupidity. They are wholly unqualified as personnel management.

This is about me recognizing this entire situation did not have to happen. That this whole problem was created by two goons with the collective cognitive abilities of a jelly fish; floating with whichever way their whims take them with no regard with what to do next.

Cutler is a franchise QB quality player. McKid wanted his security blanket and the fact that our newbie coach could be so overwhelmingly blinded by his desire to deal with "his guys" that he would create such a laughable situation because of his myopia is a direct reflection of the fact that yes, Xanders and McD are too young and inexperienced to be given the amount of control they have at this point and my organization, my team are going to suffer. When players are worthless we shed them. Right now, in my mind, Cutler's talent is leaps and bounds better for this club than Xanders and McD. These are two kids who don't have the self control, patience, self-reflection, or long term vision to make effective FO people and that fact is clearly demonstrated by this whole fiasco.

Now, to Cutler. His position was made possible because of Xanders and McD. Now Cook and Cutler are playing the business side of the game. Don't like it? The culpability for that rests solely with McKid and his butt lump.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 07:36 AM
That this whole problem was created by two goons with the collective cognitive abilities of a jelly fish; floating with whichever way their whims take them with no regard with what to do next. Cutler is a franchise QB quality player. McKid wanted his security blanket and the fact that our newbie coach could be so overwhelmingly blinded by his desire to deal with "his guys" that he would create such a laughable situation because of his myopia is a direct reflection of the fact that yes, Xanders and McD are too young and inexperienced to be given the amount of control they have at this point and my organization, my team are going to suffer. When players are worthless we shed them. Right now, in my mind, Cutler's talent is leaps and bounds better for this club than Xanders and McD. These are two kids who don't have the self control, patience, self-reflection, or long term vision to make effective FO people and that fact is clearly demonstrated by this whole fiasco.

Now, to Cutler. His position was made possible because of Xanders and McD. Now Cook and Cutler are playing the business side of the game. Don't like it? The culpability for that rests solely with McKid and his butt lump.


You are wrong on both accounts here...

McDaniels knows EXACTLY which direction he wants to go in....some people just don't like it...

and culpability swings both ways....most of the people on this board besides a few, have admitted that....but keep up the good work with the Mc(fill in the blank) humor....you're doing a great job...

"Sparky"

oubronco
03-17-2009, 07:38 AM
I know man, but c'mon... ANY sensible person waits a few days to list that house. We're in a friggin' depression and he's a millionaire. He had to list it FRIDAY?

C'mon, Baja. We can squabble over minutia with regards to his obligations, but that's just bull****. Jay put his house up for sale because he either wanted to make a statement, or planned to leave.

I can agree with that

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 07:43 AM
That this whole problem was created by two goons with the collective cognitive abilities of a jelly fish; floating with whichever way their whims take them with no regard with what to do next. Cutler is a franchise QB quality player. McKid wanted his security blanket and the fact that our newbie coach could be so overwhelmingly blinded by his desire to deal with "his guys" that he would create such a laughable situation because of his myopia is a direct reflection of the fact that yes, Xanders and McD are too young and inexperienced to be given the amount of control they have at this point and my organization, my team are going to suffer. When players are worthless we shed them. Right now, in my mind, Cutler's talent is leaps and bounds better for this club than Xanders and McD. These are two kids who don't have the self control, patience, self-reflection, or long term vision to make effective FO people and that fact is clearly demonstrated by this whole fiasco.

Now, to Cutler. His position was made possible because of Xanders and McD. Now Cook and Cutler are playing the business side of the game. Don't like it? The culpability for that rests solely with McKid and his butt lump.


You are wrong on both accounts here...

McDaniels knows EXACTLY which direction he wants to go in....some people just don't like it...

and culpability swings both ways....most of the people on this board besides a few, have admitted that....but keep up the good work with the Mc(fill in the blank) humor....you're doing a great job...

"Sparky"


McKid and butt lump let the genie out of the bottle. They mismanaged the entire situation from day one. This whole thing is their fault. Cutler was told "this is a business, you are expendable." And now people are butthurt that Cutler is treating it as a business? F'ing unbelieveable.

What is his plan? Ditch a franchise QB for a flash in the pan high school back up and downgrade at LS? I guess it makes sense, we drop Cutler our LS will get plenty of reps with the punt unit.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 07:46 AM
Cutler is full of ****. "I was hoping we could have some coffee, a few laughs, and I'd move forward as a Bronco." But, Jay, you put your house and your parents house on the market just a couple days ago. You were NOT hoping for a resolution. You were either sending a message, or planning on leaving.

I know, I know, he's keeping his downtown party pad. Big deal. He's selling his primary residence, and some of you ignore this like he's selling a boat.

Hulamau
03-17-2009, 08:02 AM
Really? And how do you know that? Talked to Jay lately?

I think either way Jay was looking for a new deal and an opportunity presented itself during the coaching change and he took advantage of it.

ABSOLUTELY Meck!

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 08:07 AM
Cutler is full of ****. "I was hoping we could have some coffee, a few laughs, and I'd move forward as a Bronco." But, Jay, you put your house and your parents house on the market just a couple days ago. You were NOT hoping for a resolution. You were either sending a message, or planning on leaving.

I know, I know, he's keeping his downtown party pad. Big deal. He's selling his primary residence, and some of you ignore this like he's selling a boat.

That wasn't Jay's primary residence, that's just where he kept Marshall when he's on parole.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 08:22 AM
McKid and butt lump let the genie out of the bottle. They mismanaged the entire situation from day one. This whole thing is their fault. Cutler was told "this is a business, you are expendable." And now people are butthurt that Cutler is treating it as a business? F'ing unbelieveable.

What is his plan? Ditch a franchise QB for a flash in the pan high school back up and downgrade at LS? I guess it makes sense, we drop Cutler our LS will get plenty of reps with the punt unit.


this is why I'm having a hard time taking your posts seriously....

so Cutler has NO FAULT here???? NONE????? AT ALL????

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 08:33 AM
this is why I'm having a hard time taking your posts seriously....

so Cutler has NO FAULT here???? NONE????? AT ALL????

Any fault Cutler bears, and he does bear some, comes as a direct result of McKid and butt lump botching the deal in the first place. You can't just peek into Pandora's box, either open it or leave it closed but McKid went in half assed and after the fact and that was beyond stupid and into brain dead. I mean Terry Schiavo brain dead. Had they left it alone we'd be having a pretty stellar offseason and looking forward to draft day. Instead, here we are trying to figure out the best way to polish the turd.

So blame goes about 90% FO 5% Cutler and 5% that's just the business.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 08:45 AM
Any fault Cutler bears, and he does bear some, comes as a direct result of McKid and butt lump botching the deal in the first place. You can't just peek into Pandora's box, either open it or leave it closed but McKid went in half assed and after the fact and that was beyond stupid and into brain dead. I mean Terry Schiavo brain dead. Had they left it alone we'd be having a pretty stellar offseason and looking forward to draft day. Instead, here we are trying to figure out the best way to polish the turd.

So blame goes about 90% FO 5% Cutler and 5% that's just the business.


Let's say hypothetically the Patriots called up the Broncos and pitched a deal....McDaniels, in the wrong, says "let me think about it" and hangs up....never calls back, but during conversations with the organization decides not to trade Cutler..

than the Patriots brass goes out and leaks the story to the Boston Herald, knowing full well that this would cause melee in BroncoLand....

does your fault percentage stay the same?? no doubt McDaniels was played like a fiddle by Belicheck, but a whole 90%/??

My ratio, if this was the scenario, which I believe it was goes:

Organization/FO - 50%
Cutler - 40%
Outside Forces (agents, Pats leak) - 10%

Archer81
03-17-2009, 08:48 AM
That poll has really evened up. Yesterday it was 60-40 in Jay's favor.

:Broncos:

Taco John
03-17-2009, 08:49 AM
My ratio, if this was the scenario, which I believe it was goes:

Organization/FO - 50%
Cutler - 40%
Outside Forces (agents, Pats leak) - 10%



I think that's a good breakdown...

Taco John
03-17-2009, 08:50 AM
That poll has really evened up. Yesterday it was 60-40 in Jay's favor.

:Broncos:



Did it ever get that high? I highest percentage I saw was about 55% for Jay.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 08:59 AM
No. It's not a "silly" question. McD's own words do prove that he deliberately and intentionally lied. No amount of deflection is going to change that fact.

OK, you and SoCal and others keep saying McD "confirmed" he lied. I just went back over his various statements since this broke, and I see no confirmation of that whatsoever. Care to direct me to this proof?

In the beginning he said they "listened" to offers. "Listen" DOES NOT preclude consideration of what was heard. So, if that is what you folks are trying to hang your hat on, that dog won't hunt.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 09:10 AM
Let's say hypothetically the Patriots called up the Broncos and pitched a deal....McDaniels, in the wrong, says "let me think about it" and hangs up....never calls back, but during conversations with the organization decides not to trade Cutler..

than the Patriots brass goes out and leaks the story to the Boston Herald, knowing full well that this would cause melee in BroncoLand....

does your fault percentage stay the same?? no doubt McDaniels was played like a fiddle by Belicheck, but a whole 90%/??

My ratio, if this was the scenario, which I believe it was goes:

Organization/FO - 50%
Cutler - 40%
Outside Forces (agents, Pats leak) - 10%

McD has to know just picking up that phone begins to tread on thin ice. But dealing with the player and keeping him over informed from the FO perspective, controlling the story and the player's perspective are critical. "Yeah, we took the call and we hung up on the guy. I laughed the MFer out of the room. You're our guy." Even if every word of that is horsesheet that's gotta be the message so that when somebody like Belichick, known for this crap, lets the cat out of the bag the player doesn't hear it first from ESPN. That's where McD's idiocy really comes in to play. Because now Jay's butthurt but McD needs to show everybody he's got the big swinging dick on campus and he'll be damned if he's not going to lay it down to Cutler who's boss and let the player know who's expendable in the situation. Now it escalates with the player's attitude of "don't want me here. F you I don't want to be here."

McD is supposed to know better, how to deal with players, press, and other clubs. If he didn't learn any of this **** from Billycheats over in NE then McD is dumber than I thought and don't kid yourself. A good portion of NE's success is due to their ability and success dealing with players, agents, egos, and attitudes.

Archer81
03-17-2009, 09:12 AM
Did it ever get that high? I highest percentage I saw was about 55% for Jay.


Either way.


:Broncos:

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:14 AM
OK, you and SoCal and others keep saying McD "confirmed" he lied. I just went back over his various statements since this broke, and I see no confirmation of that whatsoever. Care to direct me to this proof?

In the beginning he said they "listened" to offers. "Listen" DOES NOT preclude consideration of what was heard. So, if that is what you folks are trying to hang your hat on, that dog won't hunt.

No one else has answered the question... perhaps you can.

Does anyone express regret over being "too late" to make a deal one has already rejected?

I've explained this a few times, but the wording McD used "too late to the dance" strongly suggests that had he been more timely in "getting to the dance", we'd already have Cassel and Cutler would be gone. No one laments being "too late to the dance" if they intend to sit on the sidelines. No, McD by his own words admits he intended to dance. And therefore, his claims that his role was passive... was a lie. He was only passive because he was "too late to the dance".

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 09:15 AM
Any fault Cutler bears, and he does bear some, comes as a direct result of McKid and butt lump botching the deal in the first place. You can't just peek into Pandora's box, either open it or leave it closed but McKid went in half assed and after the fact and that was beyond stupid and into brain dead. I mean Terry Schiavo brain dead. Had they left it alone we'd be having a pretty stellar offseason and looking forward to draft day. Instead, here we are trying to figure out the best way to polish the turd.

So blame goes about 90% FO 5% Cutler and 5% that's just the business.

Babe Ruth and Wayne Gretzky were both traded. So was Joe Montana. Yet Cutler is untradeable.

You have derailed.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 09:26 AM
No one else has answered the question... perhaps you can.

Does anyone express regret over being "too late" to make a deal one has already rejected?

I've explained this a few times, but the wording McD used "too late to the dance" strongly suggests that had he been more timely in "getting to the dance", we'd already have Cassel and Cutler would be gone. No one laments being "too late to the dance" if they intend to sit on the sidelines. No, McD by his own words admits he intended to dance. And therefore, his claims that his role was passive... was a lie. He was only passive because he was "too late to the dance".

That's stretching. McD said they didn't get any kind of serious offer until the first day of FA. By then, NE already had a deal in place with KC. So, I took "we were too late to the dance" to mean that it was too late for Denver to become seriously involved in any sort of discussions for Cassel, not that a deal would have been agreed to. In others, someone made them a proposal good enough to warrant consideration, but by that time it was too late in the game for it to matter. That is not inconsistent with anything he said prior.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 09:29 AM
That's stretching. McD said they didn't get any kind of serious offer until the first day of FA. By then, NE already had a deal in place with KC. So, I took "we were too late to the dance" to mean that it was too late for Denver to become seriously involved in any sort of discussions for Cassel, not that a deal would have been agreed to. In others, someone made them an offer good enough to warrant consideration, but by that time it was too late in the game for it to matter. That is not inconsistent with anything he said prior.

Thank you....exactly how I read it

and as a BRONCOS fan how can you lambast McD for taking a call that might make the team better???

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:41 AM
That's stretching. McD said they didn't get any kind of serious offer until the first day of FA. By then, NE already had a deal in place with KC. So, I took "we were too late to the dance" to mean that it was too late for Denver to become seriously involved in any sort of discussions for Cassel, not that a deal would have been agreed to. In others, someone made them a proposal good enough to warrant consideration, but by that time it was too late in the game for it to matter. That is not inconsistent with anything he said prior.

It's not a stretch at all. McD the same as said he would have pulled the trigger on a deal to acquire Cassel if he hadn't been too late. There's no way to spin his own words.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:42 AM
Thank you....exactly how I read it

and as a BRONCOS fan how can you lambast McD for taking a call that might make the team better???

Point is... he didn't just "take a call"... and he really did want to trade Jay for Matt.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 09:43 AM
It's not a stretch at all. McD the same as said he would have pulled the trigger on a deal to acquire Cassel if he hadn't been too late. There's no way to spin his own words.


where do you read this??????

when did he say this?????

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 09:46 AM
It's not a stretch at all. McD the same as said he would have pulled the trigger on a deal to acquire Cassel if he hadn't been too late. There's no way to spin his own words.

He said nothing of the kind. Where did he say or imply he would pull the trigger? You are the one twisting words. "Too late to the dance" implies precisely what I described in my previous post when put in context. Someone did not make a serious proposal until the first day of FA, by which time NE had already agreed to a deal with KC. So, "too late to the dance" CLEARLY means that by the time an offer worth considering was proposed, NE already had agreed to a deal. Nothing about that implies the deal would have actually happened. In fact, McD's statement about being busy working on six FA deals implies that it wasn't even something they considered a top priority. In short, nothing about McD's interview with King is inconsistent with prior comments. You guys are just stretching to say otherwise.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:48 AM
where do you read this??????

when did he say this?????

He said he was "too late to the dance".... again, no one who intends to sit on the sidelines laments being too late to the dance. No, McD intended to be a player in the Matt Cassel sweepstakes and his own words are the "proof" that everyone's been demanding.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:50 AM
He said nothing of the kind. Where did he say or imply he would pull the trigger? You are the one twisting words. "Too late to the dance" implies precisely what I described in my previous post when put in context. Someone did not make a serious proposal until the first day of FA, by which time NE had already agreed to a deal with KC. So, "too late to the dance" CLEARLY means that by the time an offer worth considering was proposed, NE already had agreed to a deal. Nothing about that implies the deal would have actually happened. In fact, McD's statement about being busy working on six FA deals implies that it wasn't even something they considered a top priority. In short, nothing about McD's interview with King is inconsistent with prior comments. You guys are just stretching to say otherwise.

It means that before he could "get to the dance", the "prom queen" had already gone home with someone else.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 09:50 AM
He said he was "too late to the dance".... again, no one who intends to sit on the sidelines laments being too late to the dance. No, McD intended to be a player in the Matt Cassel sweepstakes and his own words are the "proof" that everyone's been demanding.

you can read this two ways....

"It doesnt matter, we were too late to the dance anyway"

"We would have liked to have gotten it done but we were too late to the dance."

One simply states that it was never an option because of timing.....the other laments the fact that we couldnt get involved in the talks..

you are twisting words now...or just reading it differently

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 09:50 AM
Point is... he didn't just "take a call"... and he really did want to trade Jay for Matt.

SO ****ING WHAT???????????????????? Did he get Cassel? No. Did he want anyone but Cassel? No.

So what's the ****ing issue here. That he wanted a quarterback who already knows his more-complicated offense?

how absurd.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:51 AM
you can read this two ways....

"It doesnt matter, we were too late to the dance anyway"

"We would have liked to have gotten it done but we were too late to the dance."

One simply states that it was never an option because of timing.....the other laments the fact that we couldnt get involved in the talks..

you are twisting words now...or just reading it differently

There's only one way to interpret what he said.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 09:55 AM
SO ****ING WHAT???????????????????? Did he get Cassel? No. Did he want anyone but Cassel? No.

So what's the ****ing issue here. That he wanted a quarterback who already knows his more-complicated offense?

how absurd.

The point is that his own words amply demonstrate that he did more than "just answer the phone"... the effort to minimize and deny that he really did want Cassel more than Cutler is where the lies come in. It's not the fact that he wanted Cassel; it's that he's trying to feign innocence now. I'm saying he should man up and admit what he did.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 09:59 AM
The point is that his own words amply demonstrate that he did more than "just answer the phone"... the effort to minimize and deny that he really did want Cassel more than Cutler is where the lies come in. It's not the fact that he wanted Cassel; it's that he's trying to feign innocence now. I'm saying he should man up and admit what he did.

So. ****ing. What.

he wanted a trade that would have brought HUGE value AND a starting quarterback to Denver. All for one player. he was trying to make the team better. THAT IS WHAT HE'S PAID TO DO.

Cutler feeling hurt about it is absolutely insane.

Babe Ruth. Wayne Gretzky. Joe Montana. All traded. But Jay Cutler is untouchable? Do you know how ****ing flaming retarded that is?

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 10:00 AM
There's only one way to interpret what he said.

now thats just silly....

one thing about the whole "I Hate McDaniels" camp is that you guys sure know how to stick your head in the sand and wave your fingers

It's like your friend inviting you to a game but it was about 15 minutes before kickoff and then somebody asks you "Would you have like to have gone?"

"It doesnt matter, it was too late anyway"

so the question becomes irrelevant

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 10:01 AM
Babe Ruth and Wayne Gretzky were both traded. So was Joe Montana. Yet Cutler is untradeable.

You have derailed.

I did not say that he is untradeable. You are reading what you want.

What I am saying, what I've said all along, is that 1. Current trade scenarios all present a downgrade at the QB position over what we have and 2. more importantly the personnel side has continually crapped down their leg and created a mess where none need to have existed with their bumbling, stupidity, inexperience, and ineptitude.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 10:02 AM
So. ****ing. What.

he wanted a trade that would have brought HUGE value AND a starting quarterback to Denver. All for one player. he was trying to make the team better. THAT IS WHAT HE'S PAID TO DO.

Cutler feeling hurt about it is absolutely insane.

Babe Ruth. Wayne Gretzky. Joe Montana. All traded. But Jay Cutler is untouchable? Do you know how ****ing flaming retarded that is?

but you don't understand Moose....he's not supposed to make the TEAM better....

just the situation for ONE player...

ridiculous

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:06 AM
I did not say that he is untradeable. You are reading what you want.

What I am saying, what I've said all along, is that 1. Current trade scenarios all present a downgrade at the QB position over what we have and 2. more importantly the personnel side has continually crapped down their leg and created a mess where none need to have existed with their bumbling, stupidity, inexperience, and ineptitude.

If you take a slight downgrade at QB (and it's VERY slight, considering Cassel A) knows the system and B) won 11 games last season) in order to improve the entire team, don't you make that move? I do. Savvy personnel men would make that move.

Those with Cutler's balls in their mouths can't possibly consider that maybe, just maybe, a trade that brings great value in return for a star player could, in fact, make the TEAM better.

As a fan of the TEAM, not Jay Cutler, but the TEAM, I want to make the TEAM better. I don't give a flying **** about Cutler's feelings in the whole matter.

And yes, going from Cutler to Cassel AND getting several picks in the draft in return improves the TEAM.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:07 AM
He said he was "too late to the dance".... again, no one who intends to sit on the sidelines laments being too late to the dance. No, McD intended to be a player in the Matt Cassel sweepstakes and his own words are the "proof" that everyone's been demanding.

No, it isn't proof, and your saying so does not make it so. I'll admit it is open to interpretation, but I think the scenario I lined out is perfectly plausible and in fact more likely. Seriously, you think he'd admit in the press he lied about anything even if it were true? C'mon.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:09 AM
There's only one way to interpret what he said.

That is pure bull****. The scenario I outlined is perfectly plausible and in fact the most reasonable interpretation given the full context of what was said. You are being intellectually dishonest to say otherwise.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:27 AM
So. ****ing. What.

he wanted a trade that would have brought HUGE value AND a starting quarterback to Denver. All for one player. he was trying to make the team better. THAT IS WHAT HE'S PAID TO DO.

Cutler feeling hurt about it is absolutely insane.

Babe Ruth. Wayne Gretzky. Joe Montana. All traded. But Jay Cutler is untouchable? Do you know how ****ing flaming retarded that is?

It would be "so ****ing What" if he owned what he did instead of trying to minimize it. There's a huge difference between "All I did was answer the phone, listen to an offer and then reject the offer" and "I was too late to get in on the Cassel sweepstakes". Fact is... he did not reject the offer....

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:31 AM
No, it isn't proof, and your saying so does not make it so. I'll admit it is open to interpretation, but I think the scenario I lined out is perfectly plausible and in fact more likely. Seriously, you think he'd admit in the press he lied about anything even if it were true? C'mon.

The problem is not that McD would have liked to trade Cutler for Cassel. The problem is that he's trying to pretend that he wouldn't have... that he rejected the offer, when the truth is that what kept the deal from happening is time.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:32 AM
That is pure bull****. The scenario I outlined is perfectly plausible and in fact the most reasonable interpretation given the full context of what was said. You are being intellectually dishonest to say otherwise.

The one being dishonest here is McD.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:32 AM
It would be "so ****ing What" if he owned what he did instead of trying to minimize it. There's a huge difference between "All I did was answer the phone, listen to an offer and then reject the offer" and "I was too late to get in on the Cassel sweepstakes". Fact is... he did not reject the offer....

It's STILL so ****ing what. Know why? BECAUSE IT'S IN THE ****ING PAST. IT'S OVER. Cassel is in Kansas City, in case you haven't picked up a newspaper in the last two weeks, and he's no longer available. SO WHAT IS THE ****ING PROBLEM?

Oh right. Poor little Jay's feelings are hurt. Cry me a ****ing river.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:35 AM
The one being dishonest here is McD.

Except you have no proof (and, no, this scenario with an alternate viable interpretation in not proof).

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:41 AM
The problem is not that McD would have liked to trade Cutler for Cassel. The problem is that he's trying to pretend that he wouldn't have... that he rejected the offer, when the truth is that what kept the deal from happening is time.

Did he say that? I don't recall seeing a quote where he said flat out they rejected any offers. I only recall his initial response being that they got calls about Cutler and listened, but will not be trading Jay. That wouldn't mean they didn't consider a proposal. Maybe someone can find his exact quote from when situation initially broke. I tried google but didn't see it.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:41 AM
It's STILL so ****ing what. Know why? BECAUSE IT'S IN THE ****ING PAST. IT'S OVER. Cassel is in Kansas City, in case you haven't picked up a newspaper in the last two weeks, and he's no longer available. SO WHAT IS THE ****ING PROBLEM?

Oh right. Poor little Jay's feelings are hurt. Cry me a ****ing river.

It's not over because McD still won't own what he tried to do.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:43 AM
Did he say that? I don't recall seeing a quote where he said flat out they rejected any offers. I only recall his initial response being that they got calls about Cutler and listened, but will not be trading Jay. That wouldn't mean they didn't consider a proposal. Maybe someone can find his exact quote from when situation initially broke. I tried google but didn't see it.

I believe the original story was that all the Broncos did was listen to offers...which they then rejected.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:44 AM
It's not over because McD still won't own what he tried to do.

Own up to what? He said flat out to King his version of what happened. You claim that it is a tacit admission of some lie. Well, if you're right, then OK...he's admitted it! I think your interpretation is wrong, but if it's right then he HAS admitted it. So what the hell is your beef?

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:46 AM
I believe the original story was that all the Broncos did was listen to offers...which they then rejected.

No, I only remember the first part...I think the "rejected" part is your addition. But if we could take a look at the original quote, that would be helpful. I am not above a mea culpa. If the original quote did say flat out that they rejected all offers, then, yeah, there was some dishonesty. I remember that they "listened" and that they said Jay wouldn't be traded. Neither statement would preclude that they gave consideration to a proposal.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 10:47 AM
I believe the original story was that all the Broncos did was listen to offers...which they then rejected.

second time in five posts you have created a quote....

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:47 AM
Own up to what? He said flat out to King his version of what happened. You claim that it is a tacit admission of some lie. Well, if you're right, then OK...he's admitted it! I think your interpretation is wrong, but if it's right then he HAS admitted it. So what the hell is your beef?

My beef? I believe the beef is between McD and Jay... and it's my opinion that Jay thinks McD should have been open and candid with him... like a man... from the minute the phone rang.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:48 AM
second time in five posts you have created a quote....

Your point is? ??? ???

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:49 AM
second time in five posts you have created a quote....

Shocking.

Blueflame has Cutler's balls in her mouth. Forgive her if she can't speak clearly.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:51 AM
My beef? I believe the beef is between McD and Jay... and it's my opinion that Jay thinks McD should have been open and candid with him... like a man... from the minute the phone rang.

You're changing the subject. You said McD should "own up" to lying. Well, if his King interview "proves" he lied as you claim, then he HAS manned up to it.

(Of course, there is another more reasonable interpretation of McD's comments which I've already outlined, but I'm taking you on your own internal logic here)

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:52 AM
Shocking.

Blueflame has Cutler's balls in her mouth. Forgive her if she can't speak clearly.

Very classy post.

(btw... the minute the conversation goes personal... it means I won.)

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 10:53 AM
Your point is? ??? ???

Um, the point is you are making up things the front office said without posting the actual quote. I don't believe anyone ever stated that every proposal was rejected. Do you have an actual quote that shows otherwise? Hell, there may be one, but I don't recall it.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 10:53 AM
Your point is? ??? ???

you're just making things up out of thin air and posting them as fact....that's a bit of a problem when debating

but I can see why you're agreeing with Cutler, because he is doing the same thing..

The Eagles were looking to trade McNabb CONSTANTLY....and you know what the guy did??? Nothing....he didnt sell his house...he didnt pout to the media...he didnt get his agent involved in the mess....he just played football

he was benched midgame during the season and stood on the sidelines and cheered his team on....then led his team to the playoffs....never once throwing a hissy fit

if Cutler were to be benched at halftime, he would drive home

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:57 AM
Very classy post.

(btw... the minute the conversation goes personal... it means I won.)

the minute you make a point that isn't 90% hypothetical or completely fabricated, it means you might have a chance at winning.

And I'm not here to be classy.

barryr
03-17-2009, 10:57 AM
you're just making things up out of thin air and posting them as fact....that's a bit of a problem when debating

but I can see why you're agreeing with Cutler, because he is doing the same thing..

The Eagles were looking to trade McNabb CONSTANTLY....and you know what the guy did??? Nothing....he didnt sell his house...he didnt pout to the media...he didnt get his agent involved in the mess....he just played football

he was benched midgame during the season and stood on the sidelines and cheered his team on....then led his team to the playoffs....never once throwing a hissy fit

if Cutler were to be benched at halftime, he would drive home

So true, and Elway himself name was mentioned in trade talks and actually may have been a deal in place, yet Elway didn't miss workouts or hide behind his agent either. Heck, Bledsoe took being replaced by Brady much better than Cutler has handled this.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 10:57 AM
Um, the point is you are making up things the front office said without posting the actual quote. I don't believe anyone ever stated that every proposal was rejected. Do you have an actual quote that shows otherwise? Hell, there may be one, but I don't recall it.

I remember reading it in one of the very first "damage control" articles after the whole issue hit the media.

And I didn't make up the "late to the dance" quote. That one's more current.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:58 AM
So true, and Elway himself name was mentioned in trade talks and actually may have been a deal in place, yet Elway didn't miss workouts or hide behind his agent either. Heck, Bledsoe took being replaced by Brady much better than Cutler has handled this.

Maybe Cutler can move to Texas and coach golf with Ryan Leaf.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 10:59 AM
I remember reading it in one of the very first "damage control" articles after the whole issue hit the media.

And I didn't make up the "late to the dance" quote. That one's more current.

yea....but you took the "late to the dance" comment and brought it out of context....

i stated a few posts ago that the comment coudl be interpreted 2 ways...and you said there is no way to interpret that two ways....which is where i cant understand your point

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 10:59 AM
I remember reading it in one of the very first "damage control" articles after the whole issue hit the media.

And I didn't make up the "late to the dance" quote. That one's more current.

Hmmm. Was the article labeled "damage control," or are you just rejecting reality in favor of your own?

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:02 AM
yea....but you took the "late to the dance" comment and brought it out of context....

i stated a few posts ago that the comment coudl be interpreted 2 ways...and you said there is no way to interpret that two ways....which is where i cant understand your point

No, I didn't take it out of context. Here's your context on "late for the dance"

http://m.si.com/news/sp/to_nfl_sports/detail/1466971;jsessionid=4C69CAB9907003420584F29ECD8BA51 B.cnnsilive9i

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:03 AM
I remember reading it in one of the very first "damage control" articles after the whole issue hit the media.

I'd like to see it again. Can you provide it for us? I've been searching and don't see it.

And I didn't make up the "late to the dance" quote. That one's more current.

Yep. And I gave you the most reasonable interpretation of that quote. The only way your interpretation gains traction is if, in fact, someone in the front office did say that all proposals were flat out rejected. But I haven't seen a quote confirming such, have been unable to find one after a fairly extensive search, and you seem unwilling to provide us one as confirmation.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:04 AM
Hmmm. Was the article labeled "damage control," or are you just rejecting reality in favor of your own?

Give me a few. I'm looking for it. (no it wasn't labeled "damage control" but that's what it clearly was).

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 11:05 AM
No, I didn't take it out of context. Here's your context on "late for the dance"

http://m.si.com/news/sp/to_nfl_sports/detail/1466971;jsessionid=4C69CAB9907003420584F29ECD8BA51 B.cnnsilive9i

And right under your favorite quote EVAR, the "late for the dance" one that you so actively and exuberantly and wrongly shop as "proof," there's this little nugget that you must have just forgotten:

"Do I understand about Jay being hurt that we'd consider this?'' McDaniels said. "Sure. But I can tell you that it wasn't like there was any grand plan by us to trade Jay Cutler. That wasn't the case. But when we've told them [Cutler and Cook], I think it's fallen on deaf ears.''

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:06 AM
No, I didn't take it out of context. Here's your context on "late for the dance"

http://m.si.com/news/sp/to_nfl_sports/detail/1466971;jsessionid=4C69CAB9907003420584F29ECD8BA51 B.cnnsilive9i

Sorry, but that doesn't confirm or support your interpretation. The only thing that will do that--that is, confirm or suggest outright dishonesty--would be for you to provide a quote from McD where he states that all trade proposal were outright rejected. There may be one, and you will get a mea culpa from me if you find it. Otherwise, your interpretation has no legs.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:06 AM
Interesting article and poll here...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/139753-if-the-denver-broncos-lose-jay-cutler-they-have-nobody-but-themselves-to-blame/poll_results#poll

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 11:06 AM
Give me a few. I'm looking for it. (no it wasn't labeled "damage control" but that's what it clearly was).

"clearly" what it was... to you? Or maybe just an honest interpretation of what went on, that you choose to view as "damage control" because you disagree with the idea of trading Cutler?

Thought so. Drive through.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 11:07 AM
I asked McDaniels if he'd been interested in Cassel before the contact by the two teams at the combine, going back to when he knew Cassel might be on the market and available in trade from the Patriots. "No, that's totally untrue,'' he said.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England -- a second-round pick for Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel. Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs.

Exactly...he's stating that any negotiations barely got off the ground because "they were late to the dance"

Hence, any question about "Would you have liked Cassel over Cutler" is irrelevant....

He doesnt say, "we woudl have LOVED to have Cassel in here but we gave an offer too late" or "we tried to get the Pats to do the deal but it was too late"

he simply says its a non-issue because the timing didnt work out so talks never really got anywhere...

DONE

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:07 AM
And right under your favorite quote EVAR, the "late for the dance" one that you so actively and exuberantly and wrongly shop as "proof," there's this little nugget that you must have just forgotten:

"Do I understand about Jay being hurt that we'd consider this?'' McDaniels said. "Sure. But I can tell you that it wasn't like there was any grand plan by us to trade Jay Cutler. That wasn't the case. But when we've told them [Cutler and Cook], I think it's fallen on deaf ears.''

Yep. That really hurt her interpretations credibility. Will be interesting to see if she can find a quote that says all trade proposals were rejected. I don't think there is one, but we shall see.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:09 AM
I asked McDaniels if he'd been interested in Cassel before the contact by the two teams at the combine, going back to when he knew Cassel might be on the market and available in trade from the Patriots. "No, that's totally untrue,'' he said.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England -- a second-round pick for Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel. Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs.

Exactly...he's stating that any negotiations barely got off the ground because "they were late to the dance"

Hence, any question about "Would you have liked Cassel over Cutler" is irrelevant....

He doesnt say, "we woudl have LOVED to have Cassel in here but we gave an offer too late" or "we tried to get the Pats to do the deal but it was too late"

he simply says its a non-issue because the timing didnt work out so talks never really got anywhere...

DONE

That's how it reads to me, too.

I mean, seriously, even if McD DID prefer Cassel to Cutler, and even if he DID lie about anything, does anyone really think he'd admit it to Peter King. C'mon now.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 11:10 AM
I asked McDaniels if he'd been interested in Cassel before the contact by the two teams at the combine, going back to when he knew Cassel might be on the market and available in trade from the Patriots. "No, that's totally untrue,'' he said.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England -- a second-round pick for Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel. Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs.

Exactly...he's stating that any negotiations barely got off the ground because "they were late to the dance"

Hence, any question about "Would you have liked Cassel over Cutler" is irrelevant....

He doesnt say, "we woudl have LOVED to have Cassel in here but we gave an offer too late" or "we tried to get the Pats to do the deal but it was too late"

he simply says its a non-issue because the timing didnt work out so talks never really got anywhere...

DONE

Perfectly stated. Bringin' da rep.

oubronco
03-17-2009, 11:11 AM
Shocking.

Blueflame has Cutler's balls in her mouth. Forgive her if she can't speak clearly.

DUDE

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 11:12 AM
DUDE

SWEET!

oubronco
03-17-2009, 11:13 AM
that was funny

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 11:13 AM
that article was written by a 20 year old kid who probably is swayed by the superstar status of Jay

not saying that young people cant have a view but from an "organizational success' standpoint they might not get the big picture

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:36 AM
It's not easy finding 2+ week old articles...

Here's one that used the word "rejected"....

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/139840-people-management-101-why-josh-mcdaniels-and-denver-are-a-mess

Excerpt: "The source of this trouble is likely not his fault. Denver got trade offers, Denver listened to trade offers, Denver rejected trade offers."

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 11:41 AM
It's not easy finding 2+ week old articles...

Here's one that used the word "rejected"....

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/139840-people-management-101-why-josh-mcdaniels-and-denver-are-a-mess

Excerpt: "The source of this trouble is likely not his fault. Denver got trade offers, Denver listened to trade offers, Denver rejected trade offers."

That's an op/ed piece, not a "damage control article." Fail.

Also: who is that quote attributed to? McDaniels? I did a word search on pages 1 and 2 of that article, and "rejected" was nowhere to be found.

Weird how that works.

Double fail.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:44 AM
It's not easy finding 2+ week old articles...

Here's one that used the word "rejected"....

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/139840-people-management-101-why-josh-mcdaniels-and-denver-are-a-mess

Excerpt: "The source of this trouble is likely not his fault. Denver got trade offers, Denver listened to trade offers, Denver rejected trade offers."

Unfortunately, that doesn't give an actual quote or even the source of the info. It's an op/ed piece. Hardly proof. I've done a pretty extensive search and I don't believe anyone in the organization has been quoted as saying they "rejected" all offers. As such, the King article does not verify any dishonesty on McDs part.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:57 AM
Unfortunately, that doesn't give an actual quote or even the source of the info. It's an op/ed piece. Hardly proof. I've done a pretty extensive search and I don't believe anyone in the organization has been quoted as saying they "rejected" all offers. As such, the King article does not verify any dishonesty on McDs part.

I've spent as much time as I care to trying to find an old article just 'cause there's nitpicking over a single word. ("rejected") The results of the reader polls in those bleacher report articles I linked were rather enlightening, however. Dunno if you guys checked 'em out... ;)

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 12:03 PM
I've spent as much time as I care to trying to find an old article just 'cause there's nitpicking over a single word. ("rejected") The results of the reader polls in those bleacher report articles I linked were rather enlightening, however. Dunno if you guys checked 'em out... ;)

the Bleacher Report is a bunch of bloggers who, for the most part, are not Broncos fans and will take the "superstar" over the "boring management" whenever it is convenient...

they don't watch Broncos games, read the Mane or follow the team with the same amount of zeal that the people here do (even the ones who disagree with me)...

so I'll go for an opinion on the Broncos there the day I ask Travis Henry to give my kid the "birds and the bees" talk

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:03 PM
I've spent as much time as I care to trying to find an old article just 'cause there's nitpicking over a single word. ("rejected") The results of the reader polls in those bleacher report articles I linked were rather enlightening, however. Dunno if you guys checked 'em out... ;)

Try to follow along. I'll go slow.

You called an "excerpt" something that does not appear in the article at all. Do I need to get the definition of "excerpt" for you?



Main Entry:
1ex·cerpt Listen to the pronunciation of 1excerpt Listen to the pronunciation of 1excerpt
Pronunciation:
\ek-ˈsərpt, eg-ˈzərpt, ˈek-ˌ, ˈeg-ˌ\
Function:
transitive verb
Etymology:
Latin excerptus, past participle of excerpere, from ex- + carpere to gather, pluck — more at harvest
Date:
15th century

1 : to select (a passage) for quoting : extract 2 : to take or publish extracts from (as a book)
— ex·cerp·tor or ex·cerpt·er noun
— ex·cerp·tion Listen to the pronunciation of excerption \ek-ˈsərp-shən, eg-ˈzərp-\ noun

You're trying to make a point. We asked for proof. You offered none.

F A I L.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:06 PM
Try to follow along. I'll go slow.

You called an "excerpt" something that does not appear in the article at all. Do I need to get the definition of "excerpt" for you?



Main Entry:
1ex·cerpt Listen to the pronunciation of 1excerpt Listen to the pronunciation of 1excerpt
Pronunciation:
\ek-ˈsərpt, eg-ˈzərpt, ˈek-ˌ, ˈeg-ˌ\
Function:
transitive verb
Etymology:
Latin excerptus, past participle of excerpere, from ex- + carpere to gather, pluck — more at harvest
Date:
15th century

1 : to select (a passage) for quoting : extract 2 : to take or publish extracts from (as a book)
— ex·cerp·tor or ex·cerpt·er noun
— ex·cerp·tion Listen to the pronunciation of excerption \ek-ˈsərp-shən, eg-ˈzərp-\ noun

You're trying to make a point. We asked for proof. You offered none.

F A I L.

Um... I copied and pasted the excerpt directly from the article... so you're wrong. ::)

F A I L

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:10 PM
Um... I copied and pasted the excerpt directly from the article... so you're wrong. ::)

F A I L

Except that it doesn't exist in that article. Oops! guess you don't know what you're talking about!

But then, we've known that for about two pages minimum.

ETA: just checked again. Not there.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:13 PM
the Bleacher Report is a bunch of bloggers who, for the most part, are not Broncos fans and will take the "superstar" over the "boring management" whenever it is convenient...

they don't watch Broncos games, read the Mane or follow the team with the same amount of zeal that the people here do (even the ones who disagree with me)...

so I'll go for an opinion on the Broncos there the day I ask Travis Henry to give my kid the "birds and the bees" talk

LOL OK whatever.... neither of us is gonna change the other's mind on this topic.

I still stand by the conclusion that McD was very much interested in trading Cutler for Cassel and running out of time is the only reason why it didn't happen.

I also have a further theory... purely speculative on my part. I think McD was nothing more than a chump who was "played for a fool". IMHO, it's no coincidence or accident that the story broke in the Boston media.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:16 PM
Except that it doesn't exist in that article. Oops! guess you don't know what you're talking about!

But then, we've known that for about two pages minimum.

ETA: just checked again. Not there.

Then you're not very observant.

Entire article:

"The situation in Denver has continued to disintigrate and it's hard to imagine how much worse it could become. Assuming Cutler does not show on Monday, the Broncos will have some very tough decisions to make and soon.

But the source of this isn't so much about football, though the details take place in that world.

It's about people management. It's about being able to handle the people you have working for and with you with tact and getting them do do what you want without causing a fight.

So far I can't say I see any of those skills in Denver Head Coach Josh McDaniels.

The source of this trouble is likely not his fault. Denver got trade offers, Denver listened to trade offers, Denver rejected trade offers.

Not calling Jay Cutler and his agent immediately was an error in judgment, compounded by Cutler learning about about it from an ESPN story, and his agent hearing about it from other agents, not the Broncos organization.

Ultimately, that's not necessarily McDaniels' fault. The GM, the team president, the owner—they should have called Cutler or his agent before it got out to media.

A simple "Hey we got this offer, we had to listen to it, but you're our guy and we aren't actively shopping you," might have prevented this whole thing."

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 12:17 PM
LOL OK whatever.... neither of us is gonna change the other's mind on this topic.

I still stand by the conclusion that McD was very much interested in trading Cutler for Cassel and running out of time is the only reason why it didn't happen.

I also have a further theory... purely speculative on my part. I think McD was nothing more than a chump who was "played for a fool". IMHO, it's no coincidence or accident that the story broke in the Boston media.

yea...the New York media was having a chuckle at McDaniels expense saying that Belicheck leaked the story as a "welcome to the NFL" message to his former assistant....I believe that...

and I also believe McDaniels thought about trading Cutler...

I just dont know why Cutler feels that this is something that he should take to the next level and see as a roadblock that can't be overcome...

For example, Tyson Chandler (on the Hornets) was recently TRADED...actually TRADED...to Oklahoma City...he failed the physical (or in many's opinion, the other team thought twice about the trade) and then was forced to come back and play ball for the team who just traded him...

and he did so....without really a word of negativity...

why can't Cutler do this on a much smaller scale

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:22 PM
yea...the New York media was having a chuckle at McDaniels expense saying that Belicheck leaked the story as a "welcome to the NFL" message to his former assistant....I believe that...

and I also believe McDaniels thought about trading Cutler...

I just dont know why Cutler feels that this is something that he should take to the next level and see as a roadblock that can't be overcome...

For example, Tyson Chandler (on the Hornets) was recently TRADED...actually TRADED...to Oklahoma City...he failed the physical (or in many's opinion, the other team thought twice about the trade) and then was forced to come back and play ball for the team who just traded him...

and he did so....without really a word of negativity...

why can't Cutler do this on a much smaller scale

My take is that Cutler felt that he should have heard about the possibility of him being traded from McD; not after the fact from his agent. That's how a real man would have handled it... keeping him in the dark was a stupid, stupid blunder that blew up in McD's face.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:24 PM
My take is that Cutler felt that he should have heard about the possibility of him being traded from McD; not after the fact from his agent. That's how a real man would have handled it... keeping him in the dark was a stupid, stupid blunder that blew up in McD's face.

And? What matters now is what happens NOW. The blunder happened. If Cutler really wants to stay, he can stay. It's been stated at least 4 times now that "Cutler will not be traded." So...

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:29 PM
And? What matters now is what happens NOW. The blunder happened. If Cutler really wants to stay, he can stay. It's been stated at least 4 times now that "Cutler will not be traded." So...

So after McD made it clear that he's not really committed to having Cutler as his starting QB, Cutler has apparently decided that he's not 100% committed to playing for McD. And I don't blame him for that. Plus, he can be paid much more $$ if he negotiates a new contract now with another franchise instead of playing out his rookie contract in Denver.

Not gonna acknowledge being wrong on the excerpt, eh? Kinda ended up looking like a dumbass, didn't ya? :P

Popps
03-17-2009, 12:29 PM
And? What matters now is what happens NOW. The blunder happened. If Cutler really wants to stay, he can stay. It's been stated at least 4 times now that "Cutler will not be traded." So...

The staff has said in no uncertain terms that they want him to lead the team.

Jay chose to skip team meetings and demand a trade.

Again, this like chasing after a girl that has said she doesn't want you. Taking Jay's side at this point is pretty pathetic.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:33 PM
So after McD made it clear that he's not really committed to having Cutler as his starting QB, Cutler has apparently decided that he's not 100% committed to playing for McD. And I don't blame him for that. Plus, he can be paid much more $$ if he negotiates a new contract now with another franchise instead of playing out his rookie contract in Denver.

Not gonna acknowledge being wrong on the excerpt, eh? Kinda ended up looking like a dumbass, didn't ya? :P

AND??? Cutler claims he was ready to move forward as a Bronco. Yet he's not 100% committed to playing for McD. Sounds like a load of bull****. And yet you keep shoveling.

Yes, my text search really messed up on finding that non-quote from a columnist/blogger. I feel like such a dumbass.

Arguing with you makes me feel like a dumbass. Wanna know why? Because it's like arguing with a rock. A really stupid rock.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:34 PM
The staff has said in no uncertain terms that they want him to lead the team.

Jay chose to skip team meetings and demand a trade.

Again, this like chasing after a girl that has said she doesn't want you. Taking Jay's side at this point is pretty pathetic.

It's more like chasing after your girlfriend after she stomped off in a snit because you unsuccessfully tried to ditch her for someone else and ended up creeping back with your tail between your legs begging for forgiveness.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:35 PM
It's more like chasing after your girlfriend after she stomped off in a snit because you unsuccessfully tried to ditch her for someone else and ended up creeping back with your tail between your legs begging for forgiveness.

Yes, except that it's a ****ing business, not a ****ing relationship. Are you completely retarded?

FEELINGS HAVE NO PLACE IN BUSINESS. If you get your feelings hurt easily, you don't belong in business.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:36 PM
AND??? Cutler claims he was ready to move forward as a Bronco. Yet he's not 100% committed to playing for McD. Sounds like a load of bull****. And yet you keep shoveling.

Yes, my text search really messed up on finding that non-quote from a columnist/blogger. I feel like such a dumbass.

Arguing with you makes me feel like a dumbass. Wanna know why? Because it's like arguing with a rock. A really stupid rock.

You're right. It is. Good that you recognize your intellectual limitations.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:37 PM
Yes, except that it's a ****ing business, not a ****ing relationship. Are you completely retarded?

FEELINGS HAVE NO PLACE IN BUSINESS. If you get your feelings hurt easily, you don't belong in business.

Going personal again? Nice. I win again.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:39 PM
You're right. It is. Good that you recognize your intellectual limitations.

And it's good that you recognize that you're a really stupid rock.

And you can't win without making a point. You claimed McD lied. Then quoted a blogger. YOU FAIL.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 12:41 PM
It's more like chasing after your girlfriend after she stomped off in a snit because you unsuccessfully tried to ditch her for someone else and ended up creeping back with your tail between your legs begging for forgiveness.

I cannot believe I am going to move forward with this comparison but here goes...

No, it's like a girl coming up to you at a bar and asking you for your phone number and you brush her off....then your girlfriend gets all pissy and storms off even though you did the right thing

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:41 PM
And it's good that you recognize that you're a really stupid rock.

And you can't win without making a point. You claimed McD lied. Then quoted a blogger. YOU FAIL.

It's a simple concept. Those who can argue their point don't have to resort to swearing or personal attacks.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:44 PM
I cannot believe I am going to move forward with this comparison but here goes...

No, it's like a girl coming up to you at a bar and asking you for your phone number and you brush her off....then your girlfriend gets all pissy and storms off even though you did the right thing

Still not quite accurate... it's like you see a former girlfriend in a bar and start to make a move on her, but before you can, she leaves with someone else. And then your girlfriend finds out and pouts... and you're left trying to placate her. Perhaps you have to buy her an expensive gift before she'll put out again...

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:44 PM
It's a simple concept. Those who can argue their point don't have to resort to swearing or personal attacks.

Your points fail. Every time.

Maybe you should try cursing or calling names. Because leaving that stuff out sure isn't helping your "I LOVE JAY" case.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 12:49 PM
Still not quite accurate... it's like you see a former girlfriend in a bar and start to make a move on her, but before you can, she leaves with someone else. And then your girlfriend finds out and pouts... and you're left trying to placate her. Perhaps you have to buy her an expensive gift before she'll put out again...


no we are just arguing our point through this scenario.....

my argument woudl be that we were just talking, I found out she had a boyfriend and then when my girlfriend came up and asked me if I woudl date my ex I said, "It's completely irrelevant because I'm with you, and she's with someone else." (there is your late to the dance comment)

then she storms off and won't answer my phone calls and puts her house up for sale...

then I decide to pick up this 6'4" blonde left-handed girl at the bar who only has one spleen and I say, "if you don't want to make this work, I'll just go to the dance with her."

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 12:50 PM
Your points fail. Every time.

Maybe you should try cursing or calling names. Because leaving that stuff out sure isn't helping your "I LOVE JAY" case.

Hahahaha.... still intent on keeping it personal, eh? Back on topic, please.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 12:58 PM
Hahahaha.... still intent on keeping it personal, eh? Back on topic, please.

On topic: Show us proof that McD lied.

Can't find any? Fail. Again.

That's not personal. Please know that I'd say the same thing to my mother if she repeatedly made bull**** posts.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2009, 12:58 PM
Yes, except that it's a ****ing business, not a ****ing relationship. Are you completely retarded?

FEELINGS HAVE NO PLACE IN BUSINESS. If you get your feelings hurt easily, you don't belong in business.

Yep it's a business and Jay and his agent are playing it as one and you're all pissy at them for using the leverage handed to them by Denver's FO. Dude, why are you pissed at Jay and his agent for doing what agents do? Jay's been told in no uncertain terms that he is expendable and that he can easily be replaced by a douchebag like Cassell. Jay's letting the team know that they can pony up the cash or he can find someone who will. It's all business but you're making it personal. Get your face out of McD's arse and come up for some air once in awhile.

This whole thing comes about because the idiots in the FO don't know how to manage a football team, its personalities, players or egos.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:01 PM
no we are just arguing our point through this scenario.....

my argument woudl be that we were just talking, I found out she had a boyfriend and then when my girlfriend came up and asked me if I woudl date my ex I said, "It's completely irrelevant because I'm with you, and she's with someone else." (there is your late to the dance comment)

then she storms off and won't answer my phone calls and puts her house up for sale...

then I decide to pick up this 6'4" blonde left-handed girl at the bar who only has one spleen and I say, "if you don't want to make this work, I'll just go to the dance with her."

Ah... but didn't we reach a consensus of opinion that McD was interested in dumping Cutler for Cassel?

So... it would be a lot more than "just talking"... it would be that you were considering dumping your girlfriend for the ex gf... except that you ran out of time and your ex instead hooked up with someone else.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:04 PM
This whole thing comes about because the idiots in the FO don't know how to manage a football team, its personalities, players or egos.

And I'm sure next time they'll come to you first, since you have so much experience in all those areas. You come from a message board! With experience knowing everything! You'll be the savior.

/rolleyes

Cutler's treating it like a business, and that's fine. he could have asked for a new contract from the very start instead of saying what he's said and doing what he's done, which involved not showing up, not meeting with team officials, not returning phone calls, acting "hurt" that he was maybe coulda been almost traded, selling his home, etc.

If you want out, or want a new contract, SAY that. Don't say you're hurt that you could have been traded, then demand a trade. Don't leak stories to the media about how upset you are. Want out? Say so. Be a ****ing MAN about it.

McDaniels has gone on record several times, saying that they're not trading Jay Cutler. He's handled the fallout pretty well. Cutler looks like a schmuck.

Say, since you told me to get my face out of McD's ass, does that mean I won the argument? That's blueflame's claim to fame.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:04 PM
On topic: Show us proof that McD lied.

Can't find any? Fail. Again.

That's not personal. Please know that I'd say the same thing to my mother if she repeatedly made bull**** posts.

Question... do you believe McD was at all interested in trading Cutler for Cassel?

Question 2... do you believe that McD would have seriously considering pulling that trigger if time had allowed?

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:04 PM
Ah... but didn't we reach a consensus of opinion that McD was interested in dumping Cutler for Cassel?

So... it would be a lot more than "just talking"... it would be that you were considering dumping your girlfriend for the ex gf... except that you ran out of time and your ex instead hooked up with someone else.

theres no way to read into someones intentions on a hypothetical situation that never happened due to time contstraints...nor shoudl anyone have to answer to that...

Girlfriend (Cutler) - "So, if she DID stick around...and I WASN'T here....would have hooked up with her"

Me (McDaniels) - "That question isn't even possible to answer because the opportunity never really presented itself...."

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:07 PM
Question... do you believe McD was at all interested in trading Cutler for Cassel?

Question 2... do you believe that McD would have seriously considering pulling that trigger if time had allowed?

Question 1 - YES


Question 2 - IMPOSSIBLE to answer...but yes i think he would ahve seriously considered it



But that's his job....to listen and think about ways to make the team better...and if Jay thinks its his job to leave Denver now, so be it....I don't understand why Broncos fans feel the need to leave with him....he doesnt care about you, McDaniels does....McDaniels wants whats best for the team...not Jay

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:08 PM
theres no way to read into someones intentions on a hypothetical situation that never happened due to time contstraints...nor shoudl anyone have to answer to that...

Girlfriend (Cutler) - "So, if she DID stick around...and I WASN'T here....would have hooked up with her"

Me (McDaniels) - "That question isn't even possible to answer because the opportunity never really presented itself...."

But does it matter? If your girlfriend's perception is that you would have been willing to dump her for your ex, then trust is still gone and your hands are going to be full trying to get back to where you were before, if that's even possible.

Same goes for Jay/McD... when one party feels that the other betrayed them, then regaining trust isn't going to be an instantaneous, easy matter.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:10 PM
Question... do you believe McD was at all interested in trading Cutler for Cassel?

Question 2... do you believe that McD would have seriously considering pulling that trigger if time had allowed?

1. Yes. I think he was interested in bringing in his own guy, but only if the trade would have also gotten a great deal of value for letting go of Cutler.

2. Yes, as long as there was value coming back BEYOND JUST GETTING CASSEL. The initial trade he was offered, at the combine, he turned down. Later trades he considered. When he countered, wanting more, the deal with KC had already happened and Cassel was a Chief.

To expand on that point, I do NOT think that McDaniels was willing to part with Cutler, getting ONLY Cassel in return. That seems to be the overwhelming feeling among folks that support Cutler in all this, is that Cassel for Cutler straight up was what McD was looking for. I don't think that was the case at all.

I don't have any proof of this, of course. But because of that, I don't frame my arguments as proof. I frame them as speculation, which is exactly what you should do when you post on the situation.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:10 PM
Question 1 - YES


Question 2 - IMPOSSIBLE to answer...but yes i think he would ahve seriously considered it



But that's his job....to listen and think about ways to make the team better...and if Jay thinks its his job to leave Denver now, so be it....I don't understand why Broncos fans feel the need to leave with him....he doesnt care about you, McDaniels does....McDaniels wants whats best for the team...not Jay

OK, so we agree that McD wasn't fully committed to having Cutler as his starter this year, even though he said earlier (when he was newly hired as HC) that he looked forward to working with him.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:12 PM
But does it matter? If your girlfriend's perception is that you would have been willing to dump her for your ex, then trust is still gone and your hands are going to be full trying to get back to where you were before, if that's even possible.

Same goes for Jay/McD... when one party feels that the other betrayed them, then regaining trust isn't going to be an instantaneous, easy matter.


So now we are calling Jay a tempermental girl who feels betrayed....I honestly think we are moving into common ground here Flame...

its probably why I can't understand his view

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:12 PM
OK, so we agree that McD wasn't fully committed to having Cutler as his starter this year, even though he said earlier (when he was newly hired as HC) that he looked forward to working with him.

Fully committed before trades started being offered. Once the trades were on the table, he saw that he could maybe get his guy AND improve the team exponentially, he considered it.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:14 PM
OK, so we agree that McD wasn't fully committed to having Cutler as his starter this year, even though he said earlier (when he was newly hired as HC) that he looked forward to working with him.

McD shows up and says, "I feel happy to be here...can't wait to work with Jay"


TOTALLY TRUE....

Offers come in for Jay...some are enticing...but alas, it doesnt work out because of the hesitancy of McD to give away the guy he wanted to work with (Cutler)

"We were late to the dance"

TOTALLY TRUE


After all the deals fall through and the smoke clears McD says, "Jay is not being traded, he is our QB"

TOTALLY TRUE


where are the lies......

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:14 PM
1. Yes. I think he was interested in bringing in his own guy, but only if the trade would have also gotten a great deal of value for letting go of Cutler.

2. Yes, as long as there was value coming back BEYOND JUST GETTING CASSEL. The initial trade he was offered, at the combine, he turned down. Later trades he considered. When he countered, wanting more, the deal with KC had already happened and Cassel was a Chief.

To expand on that point, I do NOT think that McDaniels was willing to part with Cutler, getting ONLY Cassel in return. That seems to be the overwhelming feeling among folks that support Cutler in all this, is that Cassel for Cutler straight up was what McD was looking for. I don't think that was the case at all.

I don't have any proof of this, of course. But because of that, I don't frame my arguments as proof. I frame them as speculation, which is exactly what you should do when you post on the situation.

The issue is whether or not McD was 100% committed to going into this season with Cutler as his starting QB. He now says he is... after Cassel-to-the-Chiefs was a done deal. But we agree that he would most likely have made the trade.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:16 PM
The issue is whether or not McD was 100% committed to going into this season with Cutler as his starting QB. He now says he is... after Cassel-to-the-Chiefs was a done deal. But we agree that he would most likely have made the trade.

if the deal was right, he definitely would have and I woudl have applauded him for that...


If the team gets better by getting rid of a player why are some people defending the player??? I thought this was the Denver Broncos Community Message Board

Not the Jay Cutler Ego Massage Board

(get it.....mEssage and mAssage....i thought it was clever)

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:17 PM
So now we are calling Jay a tempermental girl who feels betrayed....I honestly think we are moving into common ground here Flame...

its probably why I can't understand his view

It's clear that Jay feels that McD wasn't entirely candid and truthful in their professional relationship dealings... and that he no longer trusts McD.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:18 PM
The issue is whether or not McD was 100% committed to going into this season with Cutler as his starting QB. He now says he is... after Cassel-to-the-Chiefs was a done deal. But we agree that he would most likely have made the trade.

Yes, he would have made the trade had the value coming back been significant. And Cassel is now off the market. And Cutler is upset because he thinks he might still be traded. Which is ridiculous, given that Cassel is now off the market and mcDaniels has done everything short of throwing a parade and homecoming dance for Cutler to realize that he's not going to be traded.

Yes, the trade could have happened. It didn't. And now McD is trying to move forward. Cutler won't do it.

Popps
03-17-2009, 01:19 PM
It's clear that Jay feels that McD wasn't entirely candid and truthful in their professional relationship dealings... and that he no longer trusts McD.

:rofl:

Yea, that's why he's demanding a trade.

You are precious.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:19 PM
if the deal was right, he definitely would have and I woudl have applauded him for that...


If the team gets better by getting rid of a player why are some people defending the player??? I thought this was the Denver Broncos Community Message Board

Not the Jay Cutler Ego Massage Board

(get it.....mEssage and mAssage....i thought it was clever)

VJ is just rackin' up rep today.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:21 PM
if the deal was right, he definitely would have and I woudl have applauded him for that...


If the team gets better by getting rid of a player why are some people defending the player??? I thought this was the Denver Broncos Community Message Board

Not the Jay Cutler Ego Massage Board

(get it.....mEssage and mAssage....i thought it was clever)

So... even McD's most-ardent supporters put some caveats into whether or not they would have approved of the trade that we all concur McD would have made. IF the deal was right... if the team would have become "exponentially better".... OK. But those are very big "if's"... and we're not privy to exactly what return McD would have thought was "enough" for Cutler.

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:22 PM
It's clear that Jay feels that McD wasn't entirely candid and truthful in their professional relationship dealings... and that he no longer trusts McD.

well, the ball is in Jay's court basically.....play here and prove your worth the the guy who THOUGHT about trading you....win some games, get rid of the naysayers and earn a new contract

or

cry and moan about trust issues, complain your way to another team and get a new contract....and prove it there, which may be a bit harder because he will be traded to a cellar dwellar...

the choice is his...I know what Elway, McNabb and Eli Manning did

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:23 PM
So... even McD's most-ardent supporters put some caveats into whether or not they would have approved of the trade that we all concur McD would have made. IF the deal was right... if the team would have become "exponentially better".... OK. But those are very big "if's"... and we're not privy to exactly what return McD would have thought was "enough" for Cutler.

We're not privy. your'e right. We're not privy. We have no idea.

But the rumor is that mcD went back to the table with a MONSTER deal that would have brought two first round picks, kept our own first round pick, AND gotten Cassel to Denver, all for Cutler. That's a monster trade. The rumor goes that when he went back with that trade, New England had JUST pulled the trigger, sending Cassel to KC.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:23 PM
:rofl:

Yea, that's why he's demanding a trade.

You are precious.

Still sticking to the word "demand", eh? There's a substantial difference between demanding a trade and officially requesting one.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:24 PM
VJ is just rackin' up rep today.

Hahaha... as if rep matters one iota. Too funny.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:25 PM
Still sticking to the word "demand", eh? There's a substantial difference between demanding a trade and officially requesting one.

Yeah. The difference is one word and zero intent.

Cutler wants out. The only reason he's not "demanding" a trade is because you can't actually "demand" a trade when you're a player.

TO "formally requested" a trade too.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:27 PM
Hahaha... as if rep matters one iota. Too funny.

Did I say it mattered? The guy's right. You're still clinging to "he liiiiiiiiiiied! he liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiied!"

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:27 PM
well, the ball is in Jay's court basically.....play here and prove your worth the the guy who THOUGHT about trading you....win some games, get rid of the naysayers and earn a new contract

or

cry and moan about trust issues, complain your way to another team and get a new contract....and prove it there, which may be a bit harder because he will be traded to a cellar dwellar...

the choice is his...I know what Elway, McNabb and Eli Manning did

OK, so you're saying his pride should be the determining factor here... but that's ignoring another very important facet to any business deal. $$. If he can renegotiate his contract now instead of continuing on with his rookie contract (whether that's in Denver or with another franchise), that's worth literally millions of personal gain for Jay. Face it, his value is far more than what he'd make in Denver in '09. Tell me again how pride should trump that...

vancejohnson82
03-17-2009, 01:28 PM
So... even McD's most-ardent supporters put some caveats into whether or not they would have approved of the trade that we all concur McD would have made. IF the deal was right... if the team would have become "exponentially better".... OK. But those are very big "if's"... and we're not privy to exactly what return McD would have thought was "enough" for Cutler.

The problem is that most of the people in the "Anti-McDaniels" camp havent taken a moment to think about what "equal value" really means...instead, they get themselves all rolled up into a tizzy because his name was mentioned.

Shoudlnt it be a HUGE compliment to Cutler if the Pats offered a 1st and 3rd round pick and Cassel for Cutler????? Not saying that was the deal, but thats a pretty big package for one guy...I wouldnt have even blinked and taken the deal...McDaniels simply THOUGHT about it...then the opportunity was gone which was probably a load off of his chest because thats a BIG move to make for a franchise you just became a part of

Cutler should have taken it as "Wow, this guy got some really good offers for me and I'm still here..." ----- INstead he's pissed because McDaniels didnt hang up the phone....which would have been a disservice to US the FANS

Thats a ringing endorsement in my book....

broncofan7
03-17-2009, 01:29 PM
THE FO has all the contractual power and they started this mess by letting their actions leak out into the press....if they do a better job of concealing their actions, this news never breaks and Cutler's fragile ego isn't jolted. THe FO started it, it is their fault.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:30 PM
We're not privy. your'e right. We're not privy. We have no idea.

But the rumor is that mcD went back to the table with a MONSTER deal that would have brought two first round picks, kept our own first round pick, AND gotten Cassel to Denver, all for Cutler. That's a monster trade. The rumor goes that when he went back with that trade, New England had JUST pulled the trigger, sending Cassel to KC.

That rumor and $1.50 might get you a cup of coffee.

Bronx33
03-17-2009, 01:32 PM
Who is sitting in nashville refusing to call his own boss?

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:33 PM
Yeah. The difference is one word and zero intent.

Cutler wants out. The only reason he's not "demanding" a trade is because you can't actually "demand" a trade when you're a player.

TO "formally requested" a trade too.

Actually there's quite a bit of difference re: intent. Cutler has already said that if he isn't traded, he'll show up for mandatory team workouts. He's given absolutely no indication that he would even consider holding out or making any other power plays if he's not traded.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:33 PM
That rumor and $1.50 might get you a cup of coffee.

Not at Starbucks.

And what's your argument again? Oh right. McDaniels is a big fat doody head whose pants are on fire. Brilliant.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:35 PM
Did I say it mattered? The guy's right. You're still clinging to "he liiiiiiiiiiied! he liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiied!"

Roughly 35% of the fanbase agrees that he's right.... ;) (65% think McD f*ed up)

Bronx33
03-17-2009, 01:36 PM
Roughly 35% of the fanbase agrees that he's right.... ;) (65% think McD f*ed up)



Keyword......:~ohyah!:

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:37 PM
The problem is that most of the people in the "Anti-McDaniels" camp havent taken a moment to think about what "equal value" really means...instead, they get themselves all rolled up into a tizzy because his name was mentioned.

Shoudlnt it be a HUGE compliment to Cutler if the Pats offered a 1st and 3rd round pick and Cassel for Cutler????? Not saying that was the deal, but thats a pretty big package for one guy...I wouldnt have even blinked and taken the deal...McDaniels simply THOUGHT about it...then the opportunity was gone which was probably a load off of his chest because thats a BIG move to make for a franchise you just became a part of

Cutler should have taken it as "Wow, this guy got some really good offers for me and I'm still here..." ----- INstead he's pissed because McDaniels didnt hang up the phone....which would have been a disservice to US the FANS

Thats a ringing endorsement in my book....

Again, that's a very big "if" and I'd have to respectfully request the (unavailable) proof that the offer was that substantial... ;D

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:38 PM
Roughly 35% of the fanbase agrees that he's right.... ;) (65% think McD f*ed up)

Where'd you get that dandy little piece of information. The entire fanbase was polled?????????? Aw man, I was left out again!

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:41 PM
THE FO has all the contractual power and they started this mess by letting their actions leak out into the press....if they do a better job of concealing their actions, this news never breaks and Cutler's fragile ego isn't jolted. THe FO started it, it is their fault.

More than that... this was big news and too many entities knew about it. They should have known it wasn't going to remain a secret. If they had met with Jay and leveled with him man-to-man, chances are very good that the whole thing would have been a minor blip on the radar.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:43 PM
Not at Starbucks.

And what's your argument again? Oh right. McDaniels is a big fat doody head whose pants are on fire. Brilliant.

No, not at Starbucks. At McDonalds.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:44 PM
Keyword......:~ohyah!:

Can one argue with the resulting sh*tstorm? We wouldn't be heatedly debating this if McD had handled the situation better. ;D

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:47 PM
Can one argue with the resulting sh*tstorm? We wouldn't be heatedly debating this if McD had handled the situation better. ;D

We probably wouldn't be debating it if Cutler had handled this privately, directly, and discreetly with McDaniels, instead of through the media. We wouldn't be discussing this if Cutler hadn't put his house on the market. We wouldn't be debating if Cutler hadn't "formally requested" a trade. We wouldn't be discussing this if Cutler could act like an adult instead of a petulant child.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:47 PM
Where'd you get that dandy little piece of information. The entire fanbase was polled?????????? Aw man, I was left out again!

I've checked out results of myriad polls all across the 'net and that appears to be the consensus. OSKIE posted that opinion is actually even more heavily in favor of Jay in the Denver area.

Did you respond to any of the polls here on the Mane? (I'm betting you did)

JJJ
03-17-2009, 01:48 PM
All of us Bolt fans know what really is going on here. As we were settling into getting comfortable with our window closing and watching your offense take it to a new level while you fixed your defense you all came up with this little Jay Cutler ruse to give us hope we only need to worry about KC next year.

Nice try, I ain't buying it.

Somehow this will all end up water under the bridge. Jay will report to camp and have a stellar year.

How do I know this? You are the Denver Broncos, one of the luckiest franchises in existence (see Eddie H.) and you are not the Oakland Raiders, who is the only one crap like this happens to.

Bronx33
03-17-2009, 01:49 PM
Can one argue with the resulting sh*tstorm? We wouldn't be heatedly debating this if McD had handled the situation better. ;D


Nope it's a bonafide shytstorm for sure but it's still all drivin on ( media BS) and heresay reports so like i said everybody is just thinking.

SportinOne
03-17-2009, 01:51 PM
It's not one or the other. It's just not. Everyone has acted unprofessionally at one point or another. However, it is extremely clear to me that if McDaniels wanted Cutler to be his quarterback that things wouldn't have gotten this far. So how can you really blame Cutler for feeling angry? HOWEVER, it IS Cutler's fault that he has allowed Bus Cook to orchestrate a lot of this. He needs to fire that guy if he has any chance of salvaging his name, as well as remaining a Bronco.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-17-2009, 01:52 PM
I've checked out results of myriad polls all across the 'net and that appears to be the consensus. OSKIE posted that opinion is actually even more heavily in favor of Jay in the Denver area.

Did you respond to any of the polls here on the Mane? (I'm betting you did)

Oh, so it's highly scientific then?

Every Bronco fan I know personally (which includes the season ticket holders in the row in front of, back of, and in my row) has said they think Jay needs to prove that he has hair on his peaches and show up to be a part of the team he's contractually obligated to play for. Somehow, I don't think they are a part of your scientific study.

But whatever you need to tell yourself.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:52 PM
We probably wouldn't be debating it if Cutler had handled this privately, directly, and discreetly with McDaniels, instead of through the media. We wouldn't be discussing this if Cutler hadn't put his house on the market. We wouldn't be debating if Cutler hadn't "formally requested" a trade. We wouldn't be discussing this if Cutler could act like an adult instead of a petulant child.

Well, except that because McD didn't talk to Cutler at all (which is what an experienced, savvy HC would have done), Cutler was blindsided by the news and reacted the way many, many human beings might have. Cutler's house being for sale is a non-issue... it's not like it was the only place he has to stay in Denver.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 01:55 PM
Nope it's a bonafide shytstorm for sure but it's still all drivin on ( media BS) and heresay reports so like i said everybody is just thinking.

Still, most internet polls I've seen have been pretty consistently showing that 65% of those who respond place more blame on McD/the front office for the fiasco than on Jay.

SportinOne
03-17-2009, 01:56 PM
All of us Bolt fans know what really is going on here. As we were settling into getting comfortable with our window closing and watching your offense take it to a new level while you fixed your defense you all came up with this little Jay Cutler ruse to give us hope we only need to worry about KC next year.

Nice try, I ain't buying it.

Somehow this will all end up water under the bridge. Jay will report to camp and have a stellar year.

How do I know this? You are the Denver Broncos, one of the luckiest franchises in existence (see Eddie H.) and you are not the Oakland Raiders, who is the only one crap like this happens to.

You weren't the only one. This offense was primed to be a top 5 unit for at least, AT LEAST, the next 5 years. All McDaniels had to do was come in and fix the defense and special teams. IT IS CLEAR TO ME NOW that McDaniels cared very little about this franchise upon arrival, and IT IS ALL ABOUT HIM. He just wants to make his mark on the NFL, and he wants to be in control. He doesn't want to win unless he wins HIS way. As a perfectionist and somewhat of a control freak when it comes to the things i put my name on, i understand this. But what McD needs to understand is that there was a team here in 2008. It didn't need to be BLOWN UP, only upgraded. It's looking like we might fall back to square one pretty soon here..