PDA

View Full Version : The BS Report: Lombardi, McDaniels initiated talks


El Minion
03-17-2009, 07:47 PM
this (http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=3990593) posted here (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2339710&postcount=33) deserves its own thread. Lombardi states that McDaniels tried to go behind NE to get Cassel by initiating a three way with TB/DET without NE knowing. Didn't want to deal directly with NE. Familiarity with Cassel trumped Cutlers obvious talent for wanting this trade.

DrFate
03-17-2009, 07:49 PM
I listened to that earlier - pretty interesting (and pretty funny)

Oh - you quoted me. Well

:)

Thanks

Hamrob
03-17-2009, 08:00 PM
Of course they did. Did anyone actually think that they didn't. McDipSh**t wanted his boy and tried to be bold and go get him.

Amazing....Jay Cutler with a 1.05m cap number for

Matt Cassel with a 14.5m cap number and a 3rd round choice.

What the hell was he thinking. That guy is an absolute idiot!

theAPAOps5
03-17-2009, 08:13 PM
Yet now its come out that Cutlet asked for a trade when Bates was axed. Well he didn't ask for a trade his agent did. But its the same thing.

eddie mac
03-17-2009, 08:22 PM
That's a damn good title and quite appropriate. The BS report.

RunSilentRunDeep
03-17-2009, 08:31 PM
Lombardi isn't making any sense. Sounds like he's just trying to throw Denver under the bus for sending him packing.

El Minion
03-17-2009, 08:35 PM
Lombardi isn't making any sense. Sounds like he's just trying to throw Denver under the bus for sending him packing.

Lombardi was an unpaid adviser under Shanhan, they both agreed to the arrangement so Lombardi could still collect on his contract after being fired by Al Davis and help the Broncos in the process. They did it just to stick it him, IIRC.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:20 PM
Know what? A 25-year-old Pro Bowl QB with a pricetag of $1.5 mil.... vs. an older benchwarmer with a pricetag of $14 mil.....what kind of ******* moron even listens to the offer... much less considers this deal? ???

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:22 PM
No proof. Anyone who buys this is a goddamn idiot (and, yeah, there are plenty of you on the board).

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:24 PM
Know what? A 25-year-old Pro Bowl QB with a pricetag of $1.5 mil.... vs. an older benchwarmer with a pricetag of $14 mil.....what kind of ******* moron even listens to the offer... much less considers this deal? ???

You are being an idiot. It's pretty clear that the deals that were CONSIDERED--NOT agreed to--would have included Cassel PLUS extra goodies. So, anyone who would NOT listen to such an offer is the idiot (i.e. YOU).

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:24 PM
No proof. Anyone who buys this is a goddamn idiot (and, yeah, there are plenty of you on the board).

Is the McD KoolAid tasty?

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:25 PM
Is the McD KoolAid tasty?

Are Cutler's nuts tasty?

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:26 PM
You are being an idiot. It's pretty clear that the deals that were CONSIDERED--NOT agreed to--would have included Cassel PLUS extra goodies. So, anyone who would NOT listen to such an offer is the idiot (i.e. YOU).

Yeah, well then a lot of us Broncos fans are "being idiots"...

SonOfLe-loLang
03-17-2009, 11:26 PM
Know what? A 25-year-old Pro Bowl QB with a pricetag of $1.5 mil.... vs. an older benchwarmer with a pricetag of $14 mil.....what kind of ******* moron even listens to the offer... much less considers this deal? ???

If that rumor of Cassel, 1, 20 was true, youd be a moron not to listen

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:26 PM
Are Cutler's nuts tasty?

Classy, classy post. ::)

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:27 PM
Yeah, well then a lot of us Broncos fans are "being idiots"...

Yep, you are right here. A lot of you don't understand what it means to LISTEN to offers and give them consideration. Yep, that is pretty goddamn stupid.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:28 PM
Classy, classy post. ::)

Oh, and the kool aid bit was classy I guess? Pot meet Kettle.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:29 PM
Yep, you are right here. A lot of you don't understand what it means to LISTEN to offers and give them consideration. Yep, that is pretty goddamn stupid.

Know what? I'm done talking to you about Cutler/McD.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:31 PM
If that rumor of Cassel, 1, 20 was true, youd be a moron not to listen

Exactly. Unfortunately, Blueflame and others are too ignorant to understand this simple fact. There is NOTHING wrong with considering trade offers for ANY player. And don't give me the "they lied" BS...no one has offered any valid proof of such.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:32 PM
Know what? I'm done talking to you about Cutler/McD.

OK. A tacit admission of defeat. I win. P.S. I love your holier than thou crap where you called other people "idiots" in your prior post.

Taco John
03-17-2009, 11:39 PM
Yet now its come out that Cutlet asked for a trade when Bates was axed.



Where did that come out? I haven't seen a credible report on this yet. Peter King mentioned it as a rumor, and that's as far as it's gone. Is there another source on this?

OrangeRising
03-17-2009, 11:40 PM
This saddens me some, and even now, I'm not sure what to believe. I was hearing the deal came to McDaniel, not the other way around. Yes, it had been rumored, but McDaniels denied that, saying he was contacted by, whoever, and considered the deal, but then in the end, turned it down.

Pat Bowlen has to kick his way through the empty scotch bottles and get in the middle of this. People have been saying this, but the urgency now is beyond solution. Either get the kid a new home, or force a settlement of some kind; sign him to a zillion dollar contract and be done with it. Good God, this is ridiculous.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:41 PM
Where did that come out? I haven't seen a credible report on this yet. Peter King mentioned it as a rumor, and that's as far as it's gone. Is there another source on this?

Are you this vigilant about finding proof that McD lied? There is no evidence of such, yet you spread the BS like it's fact. McD's King interview is 100% consistent with what he said initially (in effect): We listened to offers, but nothing came of them and Jay Cutler is our QB.

Taco John
03-17-2009, 11:46 PM
Are you this vigilant about finding proof that McD lied? There is no evidence of such, yet you spread the BS like it's fact. McD's King interview is 100% consistent with what he said initially (in effect): We listened to offers, but nothing came of them and Jay Cutler is our QB.



I think that there is an overwhelming amount of proof that McDaniels wasn't straight with Cutler. And this is why people who have been saying McDaniels didn't lie are angry and trying to re-invent the story to include things such as Jay asking for a trade, or that this is all an act that Jay planned all along.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:48 PM
I think that there is an overwhelming amount of proof that McDaniels wasn't straight with Cutler. And this is why people who have been saying McDaniels didn't lie are angry and trying to re-invent the story to include things such as Jay asking for a trade, or that this is all an act that Jay planned all along.

Give the evidence. McD said at the beginning, we listened to offers. He never said none were considered. I mean, where the hell is your proof? You don't have it. So, yeah, sorry...our position is the one with the evidence behind it...Jay is being a baby because they entertained trade offers. That's the only thing suggested by the credible evidence, sorry.

The only thing to do in order to give your argument legs is to provide the incontrovertible evidence that McD lied, or the only logical conclusion is that it is the Cutler supporters who either being dishonest or are ignorant of the facts.

Taco John
03-17-2009, 11:52 PM
Give the evidence. McD said at the beginning, we listened to offers. He never said none were considered. I mean, where the hell is your proof? You don't have it. So, yeah, sorry...our position is the one with the evidence behind it...Jay is being a baby because they entertained trade offers. That's the only thing suggested by the credible evidence, sorry.



Look, I don't blame you for sticking your head into the sand. I'm tired of arguing it myself. If you haven't come across the overwhelming amount of proof by now, me pointing any of it out isn't going to do anything but waste yours and my time.

Every day this goes on, the worse and worse it gets for the organization. They need to act quick to resolve this issue and not let it drag on to draft day.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:53 PM
OK. A tacit admission of defeat. I win. P.S. I love your holier than thou crap where you called other people "idiots" in your prior post.

****** Not talking to you anymore tonight*********

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:54 PM
Look, I don't blame you for sticking your head into the sand. I'm tired of arguing it myself. If you haven't come across the overwhelming amount of proof by now, me pointing any of it out isn't going to do anything but waste yours and my time.

Every day this goes on, the worse and worse it gets for the organization. They need to act quick to resolve this issue and not let it drag on to draft day.

Translation: I have no legit evidence whatsoever that McD lied, so I am going to lie myself in order to save face.

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:55 PM
****** Not talking to you anymore tonight*********

Too bad you can dish it, but you can't take. Probably because your argument has no legs whatsoever.

Blueflame
03-17-2009, 11:56 PM
Too bad you can dish it, but you can't take. Probably because your argument has no legs whatsoever.

***********

BroncoInferno
03-17-2009, 11:58 PM
***********

LOL OK, fair enough. You can condescend to people and call them idiots, but if they fight back and point out the fact the argument you are making has little evidence to support it, you act as if THEY are the ones being unreasonable. Whatever.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:03 AM
LOL OK, fair enough. You can condescend to people and call them idiots, but if they fight back and point out the fact the argument you are making has little evidence to support it, you act as if THEY are the ones being unreasonable. Whatever.

You might just want to check Posts #9 and #10 of this thread tomorrow...

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:07 AM
You might just want to check Posts #9 and #10 of this thread tomorrow...

Yes, you used the word moron in the post I was responding to in post 10 to describe my position. I probably should have been more mature to engage you in a debasement of dialog, especially when my argument was clearly correct, so I regret the error.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:11 AM
Yes, you called me a moron in the post I was responding to in post 10. I probably should have been more mature to engage you in a debasement of dialog, especially when my argument was clearly correct, so I regret the error.

Wrong. I called McD a "moron".... for wanting to pay a career backup a guaranteed $14 million while he had a $1.5 million (younger) Pro Bowl QB already there in Dove Valley spending his own time doing everything he could possibly do to make the team more successful.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:16 AM
Wrong. I called McD a "moron".... for wanting to pay a career backup a guaranteed $14 million while he had a $1.5 million (younger) Pro Bowl QB already there in Dove Valley spending his own time doing everything he could possibly do to make the team more successful.

Not how I read the post, but I am willing to take you at your word (unlike you are willing to do McD). The problem I have with your conceit above is that by most credible evidence, the deal that was actually considered was more than just a Cassel for Cutler straight swap, which I would agree would be dumb. The deal that is most plausible was the Detroit rumor that would have sent us Cassel AND the #1 and #20 overall picks in the draft. I'd want McD fired for NOT considering such a rich deal. If it ever is proven that McD wanted an essential Cassel for Cuter trade straight up, I'll agree with you. But that evidence doesn't exist. McDs own words imply that the "serious" offer he referred to in the King article was for more than just Cassel.

Taco John
03-18-2009, 12:18 AM
Translation: I have no legit evidence whatsoever that McD lied, so I am going to lie myself in order to save face.

I'm going to go ahead and let you think you won this one.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:19 AM
I'm going to go ahead and let you think you won this one.

Well, you've provided no evidence to support your position, so I can only conclude that I have won.

Taco John
03-18-2009, 12:21 AM
Have at it man. Enjoy it.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:23 AM
Have at it man. Enjoy it.

Seriously, I'm asking you or anyone to give some evidence that McD lied. His own words do not betray him as some have tried to claim. I guess you choose to believe hearsay from sources that have shaky credibility?

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:26 AM
Not how I read the post, but I am willing to take you at your word (unlike you are willing to do McD). The problem I have with your conceit above is that by most credible evidence, the deal that was actually considered was more than just a Cassel for Cutler straight swap, which I would agree would be dumb. The deal that is most plausible was the Detroit rumor that would have sent us Cassel AND the #1 and #20 overall picks in the draft. I'd want McD fired for NOT considering such a rich deal. If it ever is proven that McD wanted an essential Cassel for Cuter trade straight up, I'll agree with you. But that evidence doesn't exist. McDs own words imply that the "serious" offer he referred to in the King article was for more than just Cassel.

Put up or shut up. Specifics on the trade offer you're basing all of your arguments on.. where's your proof? ???

(blind faith in McD + a metric buttload of BS ain't gonna cut it)

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:39 AM
Put up or shut up. Specifics on the trade offer you're basing all of your arguments on.. where's your proof? ???

(blind faith in McD + a metric buttload of BS ain't gonna cut it)

I don't have to provide the evidence...you, as the claimant, have that burden of proof. Not me. It like religious people who try to tell you that you have to prove that god does NOT exist...well, that impossible. The burden of proof is on the claimant that he DOES exist. Likewise, show me the proof that McD wanted to trade Jay for Cassel straight up. McDs own words indicate that the talks didn't get serious until the pot was sweetened beyond Cassel.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:44 AM
I don't have to provide the evidence...you, as the claimant, have that burden of proof. Not me. It like religious people who try to tell you that you have to prove that god does NOT exist...well, that impossible. The burden of proof is on the claimant that he DOES exist. Likewise, show me the proof that McD wanted to trade Jay for Cassel straight up. McDs own words indicate that the talks didn't get serious until the pot was sweetened beyond Cassel.

This post is nothing but unmitigated bullsh*t.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:47 AM
This post is nothing but unmitigated bullsh*t.

Same as yours, sweety. Haven't seen a shred of proof to support your view point. I don't have to prove mine...YOU'RE the claimant. That is how a debate works...the claimant has to prove their case. The denier of the claim does not have that burden.

summerdenver
03-18-2009, 01:15 AM
Seriously, I'm asking you or anyone to give some evidence that McD lied. His own words do not betray him as some have tried to claim. I guess you choose to believe hearsay from sources that have shaky credibility?

What would constitute as a proof for you? A video recording of Coach in trade talks or statement of JMac admitting that he lied? Where is TJ or anyone going to get it for you.

All some one can do is provide you news clippings of Mort, Clayton, Lombardi, porkchop or some one else. If you don't beleive it good for you.

Personally, JMac tacitly admitted that he tried to trade Cassel in interview to espn and Peter king. Like i said if you read it differently good for you.

Hulamau
03-18-2009, 01:49 AM
this (http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=3990593) posted here (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2339710&postcount=33) deserves its own thread. Lombardi states that McDaniels tried to go behind NE to get Cassel by initiating a three way with TB/DET without NE knowing. Didn't want to deal directly with NE. Familiarity with Cassel trumped Cutlers obvious talent for wanting this trade.

Come on guys M. Lombardi and locally Vic Lombardi and Kreiger ARE Jay Cutler/ Cooks mouthpiece. This is precisely the avenue Cook uses to stir the pot constantly with his disinformation campaigns ... Go ask the Titans and Green Bay!

Bus Cook is very closely tied to the Tampa Newspaper and has contacts via his Tampa association with the Bucs as well.

Cook knows the Broncos hands are tied in this PR battle to create as much turmoil for the team as he can to force the Broncos hand because Denver WANTED to keep Cutler. If they come out guns blazing and lay it all down just as it happened up front, then they risk alienating Cutler even more at a time when they are trying to bring him back into the fold, so Denver lay's low and tries to keep it private. Cook knows this and exploits the Scenario in every way he can as publicly as possible to create as much anger and strife as he can against the organization, without any care at all for the truth.

Cutler/Cook are seeding the press at every turn trying to make McD the Bad guy and don't have any hesitation about slandering the guy!

Its not even ABOUT the Cassel trade, Cutler himself is now only b****ing because he claims his balls weren't stroked right and left him with an unfulfilled feeling.. that is his only fail back position after having to go huddle with Bus after the Saturday meeting to come up with SOMETHING to b**** about enough to press to keep the pressure on for the big contract revision either here or if need be when he forces his way out of town.

I'm SOOO glad that Bowlen is SOOO much smarter than you clowns who want to dump McD now and really turn this team into the laughing stock of the NFL for the next 10 years!

They looked at the option of bringing in Cassel, I can certainly understand why McD would be interested in at least exploring that possibility IF the deal was sweet enough. McD is a guy trying to rebuild the whole team, Cassel knows the system inside and out and has a proven ability to play well within it.

Yes, Jay is the superior athlete and has a stronger arm, but is he .. will he ever be ... any better at winning in THIS system than Cassel??? Who knows, maybe he can, but its a damn fair question and one McD would have been negligent at least not to look at carefully, particularly if some other top draft picks and players to fill other urgent needs here were part of the deal. In the end according to McD, he decided Cassel and the other options offered was not enough to pull the trigger and kept Cutler! This is what he and the Denver FO claims on the record! Where was his big error, other than tactically and diplomatically not calling Cutler immediately when Cassel went to KC?

Tell one one shred of evidence to to contrary.. show me one person involved in any of these trade negotiations that is saying anything else???

According to McD and the Denver FO the deal NEVER got sweet enough for them to EVEN propose it to Bowlen , and if that is true as all indications are it is, then all of these arguments against McD blow away in the wind and those of you still spouting this total conjecture need to get your collective head's out of Cook's/JayBoy's arse as the stale air in there is obviously affecting your judgment!

It's so easy to read between the lines ... just look at Cutler's behavior he's a puppet on a string.

Atwater His Ass
03-18-2009, 02:20 AM
Translation: I have no legit evidence whatsoever that McD lied, so I am going to lie myself in order to save face.

You're still sticking to this line? lol.

lazarus4444
03-18-2009, 02:34 AM
With the way cutler is acting he doesn't fit in with the new team philosophy. The Denver Broncos are going to be a winning organization again and cutlers behavior is not conducive to winning. Sorry.

SlipperyPete
03-18-2009, 02:34 AM
Where did that come out? I haven't seen a credible report on this yet. Peter King mentioned it as a rumor, and that's as far as it's gone. Is there another source on this?

Did you miss the Fox Sports article? By John Czarnecki:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9345936/Cutler's-agent-Cooks-up-another-drama

But give Cook credit. He's been pulling the strings nicely for Cutler. Everyone should know that Cutler has wanted out of Denver ever since Mike Shanahan was fired and quarterback coach Jeremy Bates left for USC shortly afterward.

Before McDaniels and the Broncos pursued a failed trade for Matt Cassel, Cook had already been begging to get his client out. Denver told him no from the beginning. But somehow Cook has been able how hilarious is this? to paint Cutler as some victim in the cruel world of NFL trade talk. At the moment, the Broncos seem to be losing the PR war.

SlipperyPete
03-18-2009, 02:35 AM
Exactly. Unfortunately, Blueflame and others are too ignorant to understand this simple fact. There is NOTHING wrong with considering trade offers for ANY player. And don't give me the "they lied" BS...no one has offered any valid proof of such.

This is probably as close to proof as it'll get.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_11936913

Even if you have no problem with the merits of Cutler-for- Matt Cassel and I do McDaniels' first big boo-boo was not coming clean about it. As recently as Sunday night, he was still claiming "we were contacted multiple times about different scenarios," as if the Broncos were in a purely passive role, just answering the phone.

Earth to Josh: Almost no one believes that. Cutler has information that you approached the Bucs to gauge their interest in a potential three-way deal with the Patriots. The story doesn't make much sense any other way. Why would Tampa Bay approach Denver? What would make Bucs management think the Broncos' Pro Bowl quarterback was available? Why would New England call Tampa Bay to rustle up interest in a three-way deal when the Patriots were clearly happy with the deal they had in place with Kansas City, a deal they ultimately made?

This was the crux of the problem between McDaniels and Cutler. McDaniels was not truthful about his active pursuit of Cassel. By the time he finally admitted to Cutler on Saturday that he wanted Cassel, it was time to turn the page and assure Cutler they could go forward together.

Assuming the two stories I posted combine for an accurate representation of the facts, you have Cutler wanting out when Shanahan/Bates were fired, the Broncos ultimately finding a way to make it happen via the Cassel trade, and then Cutler/Cook -- since news of Jay asking out hadn't been made public -- took advantage of the way McDaniels misplayed the situation in order to paint Jay as the injured party.

WABronco
03-18-2009, 02:42 AM
Know what? A 25-year-old Pro Bowl QB with a pricetag of $1.5 mil.... vs. an older benchwarmer with a pricetag of $14 mil.....what kind of ******* moron even listens to the offer... much less considers this deal? ???

Consider that the pricetags of each player most likely aren't long term. Cassel's current deal is a one year franchise tender. Cutler's most likely going to be making a fair chunk of money after (most likely before though) his rookie contract is up. And, with how much cap space we have or had at the time, I doubt Cassel's one year tender would be terribly prohibitive. Also-maybe someone in the know could help me-but would signing Cassel to a long term deal after he was franchised erase his 14 million figure? Or is it an extension off his one year tender?

Oh and Cassel's not even a full year older than Cutler.

About the Pro Bowl thing...in my opinion Cutler didn't even deserve to go, and it's not as if the Pro Bowl is an accurate measure of worth anyways.

But the bigger point...why is it so farfetched that a new coach would want to put his finger prints on the roster? Granted, it's not everday where a young talent like Cutler is involved in trade talks. But maybe McDaniels sees some inherent flaw that won't mesh with his offense? Maybe in his past evaluations leading up to the draft, he and his buddies in New England didn't like Cutler's make-up? Maybe he felt it wise to look into a scenario where he would end up with a steady quarterback (aka "his guy") that would significantly ease the transition, plus other assets (ie draft picks to fill in other holes)? What's so bat**** crazy about that? Regardless of whether he initiated or listened, what's so OMG INSANE about that?

We see this all the time too: New Coach X is not tied to Player X (Whisenhunt with Leinart most recent example). It's the Denver Broncos, not the Denver Cutler's, and McDaniels is now the head man of the Denver Broncos. Now, obviously, if we had been a 12-4 team last year and Cutler was a bonafied elite player (which I dont think you can say now, "young talent" is more accurate in my opinion), there's no way McDaniels would attempt to overhaul that type of team. But that's not what we are now or were last year (or the last 3 years), and if we were McDaniels wouldn't be here.

I don't think you can blame someone for choosing sides in this. In the end, this all might become irrelevant, but right now? Whatevs, it's a forum for discussion. Anyways, you (and this entire wall of text is not directed solely at you BF) are clearly enthralled with Cutler. Me, not so much. Well, partially anyways. He's obviously got talent. For me, though, the whole Rivers-Cutler fallout (where the "fallout" all seemed to be coming from one guy...) just made me wonder where his head is at. In the lead-up before the biggest game of the season, the one that decides who stays and who goes, he's giving interviews to Andrea Kremer where he's talking about how he had his feelings hurt and he's not sure if he can ever forgive Rivers for disrespecting him? Obviously paraphrasing there (not all that far off however from what I can remember), but I distinctly remember seeing this interview during that game, well before it got out of hand by the way, and my jaw just dropping at how much b****itude was coming out of my TV. I'd love it if someone could dig that up. Anyways, not to let too much personal bias get in there...lol. I also happen to find McDaniels to be an impressive coach. He seems to have a personality, but also comes off as being very focused and concise. Plus he's got all sorts of background experience (experience coaching on the defensive side, front office experience, then obviously OC'ing amazingly effective and efficeint offenses for 3 years). And he's learned under one of the greats. Granted, the Belichick tree hasn't exactly produced golden winners, but Eric Mangini and company have the personality and appeal of a 2 day old McDonald's cheeseburger, in my opinion.

To conclude my wall of text, I dont think it's reached the point where we say, "ok, we're obviously going in a new direction," but it's getting there. I was comfortable with McDaniels before this and I'm still relatively comfortable with McDaniels now.

/end rant but aren't you glad I didn't make another thread but even if I did at least I didn't include the phrase Mc****bird and or use colored text to describe someone as being feminine.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-18-2009, 07:31 AM
Classy, classy post. ::)

I love that you go right to the 'classy' remark. If you want classy, go to the theatre. Nobody on this board is here to be 'classy.'

Also, responding with "does the McD kool aid taste nice" brings nothing to the discussion, and isn't really 'classy' in any sense of the word. But you just keep on keepin' on. :thumbsup:

Beantown Bronco
03-18-2009, 08:41 AM
Seriously, I'm asking you or anyone to give some evidence that McD lied. His own words do not betray him as some have tried to claim. I guess you choose to believe hearsay from sources that have shaky credibility?

More proof that your position is wrong:

We are not trying to trade Jay Cutler. We will not trade Jay Cutler. He's a Pro Bowl Quarterback. You can ask Josh McDaniels, and he'll tell you the same thing.
Broncos GM Brian Xanders responds to the Jay Cutler trade rumors

"Josh and Jay will sit down and meet next week when Jay gets back from Nashville. And then Smyth, who said he was speaking on behalf of owner Pat Bowlen and McDaniels, made the following point of emphasis: "The Denver Broncos are not trading, Jay Cutler. Period."
http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/3/3/779528/broncos-will-not-trade-jay

"We don't want to trade Jay. We never did. He's our quarterback," McDaniels told the newspaper.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/sports/18825213/detail.html

All of that seems pretty inconsistent with this:

McDaniels admitted that the team got involved in trade discussions for Cassel, who instead was dealt to the Kansas City Chiefs. However, he said any perception Cutler felt that the team could still trade him was misleading.
"That's what we have communicated ever since the deal with Cassel didn't happen," McDaniels said. "Other teams have called but we're not interested in getting draft picks for Jay.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

So, if they "never" wanted to trade Jay, why did they get involved in trade discussions?
One of those two statements HAS to be a lie, by definition.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 09:13 AM
I love that you go right to the 'classy' remark. If you want classy, go to the theatre. Nobody on this board is here to be 'classy.'

Also, responding with "does the McD kool aid taste nice" brings nothing to the discussion, and isn't really 'classy' in any sense of the word. But you just keep on keepin' on. :thumbsup:

Look, BI's very first post in this thread called Broncofans in general who don't agree with his position "idiots"... he followed that up by calling me specifically an idiot. And there's a difference between asking if KoolAid is tasty and asking a female if a man's nuts are tasty... a huge difference.

As I said yesterday, if one's debate position can be argued, it's not necessary to stoop to personal insults, cursing, or crude sexual innuendo. The minute the conversation goes there, the person who did has lost the argument from my viewpoint.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 09:25 AM
More proof that your position is wrong:

We are not trying to trade Jay Cutler. We will not trade Jay Cutler. He's a Pro Bowl Quarterback. You can ask Josh McDaniels, and he'll tell you the same thing.
Broncos GM Brian Xanders responds to the Jay Cutler trade rumors

"Josh and Jay will sit down and meet next week when Jay gets back from Nashville. And then Smyth, who said he was speaking on behalf of owner Pat Bowlen and McDaniels, made the following point of emphasis: "The Denver Broncos are not trading, Jay Cutler. Period."
http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/3/3/779528/broncos-will-not-trade-jay

"We don't want to trade Jay. We never did. He's our quarterback," McDaniels told the newspaper.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/sports/18825213/detail.html

All of that seems pretty inconsistent with this:

McDaniels admitted that the team got involved in trade discussions for Cassel, who instead was dealt to the Kansas City Chiefs. However, he said any perception Cutler felt that the team could still trade him was misleading.
"That's what we have communicated ever since the deal with Cassel didn't happen," McDaniels said. "Other teams have called but we're not interested in getting draft picks for Jay.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

So, if they "never" wanted to trade Jay, why did they get involved in trade discussions?
One of those two statements HAS to be a lie, by definition.

Wrong. I put this on the other thread, but here it is again:

Let's say someone makes you an offer for your beloved BMW. It's a hell of an offer, above market value, so you give it some thought. Does that consideration mean you "want" to sell your car. Of course not. You got a hell of an offer and decided to think it over.

colonelbeef
03-18-2009, 09:42 AM
Of course they did. Did anyone actually think that they didn't. McDipSh**t wanted his boy and tried to be bold and go get him.

Amazing....Jay Cutler with a 1.05m cap number for

Matt Cassel with a 14.5m cap number and a 3rd round choice.

What the hell was he thinking. That guy is an absolute idiot!

shh, the McDaniels fanboy sheep are sleeping, lets not wake them

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 09:49 AM
shh, the McDaniels fanboy sheep are sleeping, lets not wake them

I'll let you in on a little secret: no one knows for sure what offer it was that the Broncos' brass were considering. The rumored Detroit deal was quite a substantial offer that would have netted Cassel AND the #1 overall pick AND the #20 overall pick. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the brass had decided to pull the trigger on a trade, whatever the proposals may have been. But, nevermind, go back to sleep, Jay fanboy.

Circle Orange
03-18-2009, 09:55 AM
I prefer to keep a cool head about this situation. There's chicanery on both sides, and everyone is trying to play the fans and media. And the media runs out with every piece of nothing information to fan the flames.

Too much flash, too little substance. And waaay too much hype. You'd think this was some blockbuster deal of the century.

bronco militia
03-18-2009, 10:29 AM
<a href='http://img212.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cutler.png'><img src='http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/1480/cutler.png' border='0' alt='Image Hosted by ImageShack.us'/></a><br/>

UberBroncoMan
03-18-2009, 10:56 AM
Give the evidence. McD said at the beginning, we listened to offers. He never said none were considered. I mean, where the hell is your proof?

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KiIP_KDQmXs&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KiIP_KDQmXs&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

The "I'm not a crook" vid was broken or I would have posted that one too.

The point is if you believe anything at face value, you're an idiot. The evidence has been overwhelming that "McD" lied. The proof is that "McD" admitted he wanted to get Cassel and wasn't sorry for trying to get him to Jay Cutler. The proof is that he admitted he tried to trade for Cassel at the Saturday meeting, since it was clear that the Cutler camp knew the truth and to keep lying was fruitless.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 10:59 AM
The evidence has been overwhelming that "McD" lied. The proof is that "McD" admitted he wanted to get Cassel and wasn't sorry for trying to get him to Jay Cutler.

McD admitted that? Where? You got a quote from him?

The proof is that he admitted he tried to trade for Cassel at the Saturday meeting, since it was clear that the Cutler camp knew the truth and to keep lying was fruitless.

You believe that just because Jay says so, huh? A biased source does not constitute proof, buddy.

barryr
03-18-2009, 11:01 AM
Lombari has had different stories in all of this. Anyone can put their thumb in the air and come up with a new angle every other day.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 11:01 AM
The "I'm not a crook" vid was broken or I would have posted that one too.

The point is if you believe anything at face value, you're an idiot. The evidence has been overwhelming that "McD" lied. The proof is that "McD" admitted he wanted to get Cassel and wasn't sorry for trying to get him to Jay Cutler. The proof is that he admitted he tried to trade for Cassel at the Saturday meeting, since it was clear that the Cutler camp knew the truth and to keep lying was fruitless.

Exactly... if he "wanted Cassel"... then the assertion that he "never wanted to trade Cutler" cannot possibly be true because the team can only have one starting QB.

When a man says one thing and his actions are the polar opposite to his words, then one has to conclude that he lied, whether you have him on video admitting that he lied or not.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:07 AM
Exactly... if he "wanted Cassel"... then the assertion that he "never wanted to trade Cutler" cannot possibly be true because the team can only have one starting QB.

When a man says one thing and his actions are the polar opposite to his words, then one has to conclude that he lied, whether you have him on video admitting that he lied or not.

Problem is he's never said he "wanted Cassel"...at least not publicly. So far, no has shown that McD's public statements are in any way inconsistent. Everything else is just hearsay at this point.

UberBroncoMan
03-18-2009, 11:11 AM
Problem is he's never said he "wanted Cassel"...at least not publicly. So far, no has shown that McD's public statements are in any way inconsistent. Everything else is just hearsay at this point.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

We weren't in there but about 20 minutes, [McDaniels] did most of the talking and as far as I'm concerned, he made it clear he wants his own guy. He admitted he wanted Matt Cassel because he said he has raised him up from the ground as a quarterback. He said he wasn't sorry about it. He made it clear that he could still entertain trading me because, as he put it, he'll do whatever he feels is in the best interest of the organization.

What about evidence and truth can't you process?

If Jay was strait up lying here it would have been attacked by the Broncos FO, which it wasn't since it was true. Cutler camp said they KNEW the Cassel trade was initiated and attempted by "McD" from the get-go, and it was finally admitted at the Saturday meeting. Keep denying the truth all you want.

jonny1
03-18-2009, 11:11 AM
My two cents, and then I am done with this until something actually happens:

First, let me say, there have been nothing but unsubstantiated rumors that Jay wanted to be traded after Shanahan was fired, all he said was that he thought it was not the right thing to do (gee, loyalty to a coach . . . hmmm?)

But aside from that, here's what I think. It has been widely stated on here that Bus Cook has a lot of ties in Tampa.

So I think someone that Cook knows and trusts close to the Bucs contacts him and says, "Hey, the Broncos are interested in getting Cassel and moving Cutler, would we be able to work something out long term if he comes here?"

Then, the Broncos come out with their corporate stance, "We didn't initiate any trade talks, we only listened, Jay is our QB." To the Cutler camp, they know (if they believe the source inside the Bucs camp) that the Broncos are lying. And since then, in every conversation they have had with the Cutler camp, they have stuck to that corporate stance, so every time, Jay comes away knowing they've lied to him (a large corporation sticking to a falsehood, I think it has been done before . . . ).

Now, to be fair, the initial source could be a creation of Bus Cook, but, this is the only thing that makes sense to me. The Cutler camp believes the Broncos started the trade talk, and since they won't admit it, then they can't believe them.

I doubt we'll ever know the full story, it is just sad to see this happening to our favorite team.

Flame away.

UberBroncoMan
03-18-2009, 11:17 AM
You believe that just because Jay says so, huh? A biased source does not constitute proof, buddy.

The best part about what you just said here about it not being true because Jay is a biased source is that you place all your faith and trust in what "McD" says.

What you can't grasp is that he is also in fact a biased source as well.

"McD" has not denied the accusations Jay has made nor talked in detail about what happened in the meeting aside from bringing Xanders a long and saying no voices were raised.

Hypocrisy everyone! Isn't it amazing ROFL!

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:22 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

We weren't in there but about 20 minutes, [McDaniels] did most of the talking and as far as I'm concerned, he made it clear he wants his own guy. He admitted he wanted Matt Cassel because he said he has raised him up from the ground as a quarterback. He said he wasn't sorry about it. He made it clear that he could still entertain trading me because, as he put it, he'll do whatever he feels is in the best interest of the organization.

What about evidence and truth can't you process?

If Jay was strait up lying here it would have been attacked by the Broncos FO, which it wasn't since it was true. Cutler camp said they KNEW the Cassel trade was initiated and attempted by "McD" from the get-go, and it was finally admitted at the Saturday meeting. Keep denying the truth all you want.

Jay is a biased source on this issue, obviously. Also, it's pretty clear there were decidedly different interpretations of went on in that meeting. Jay may not be lying, but he may be twisting words or misinterpreting their meaning. This quote is not sufficient evidence, sorry.

As far as the team not attacking Jay, they still have expressed a desire to work the issue out, so a back and forth of he said she said in the press is probably not the best way to go about it.

rugbythug
03-18-2009, 11:22 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3983805

We weren't in there but about 20 minutes, [McDaniels] did most of the talking and as far as I'm concerned, he made it clear he wants his own guy. He admitted he wanted Matt Cassel because he said he has raised him up from the ground as a quarterback. He said he wasn't sorry about it. He made it clear that he could still entertain trading me because, as he put it, he'll do whatever he feels is in the best interest of the organization.

What about evidence and truth can't you process?

If Jay was strait up lying here it would have been attacked by the Broncos FO, which it wasn't since it was true. Cutler camp said they KNEW the Cassel trade was initiated and attempted by "McD" from the get-go, and it was finally admitted at the Saturday meeting. Keep denying the truth all you want.

The Real Proof that the trade was not initiated by the Broncos is pretty easy to come by.

Jay Cutler is a Denver Bronco.

If McDaniels initiated the trade he would have gotten it done. But if you noticed the Numerous contracts finalized on the same day he was a bit busy.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:25 AM
The best part about what you just said here about it not being true because Jay is a biased source is that you place all your faith and trust in what "McD" says.

What you can't grasp is that he is also in fact a biased source as well.

"McD" has not denied the accusations Jay has made nor talked in detail about what happened in the meeting aside from bringing Xanders a long and saying no voices were raised.

Hypocrisy everyone! Isn't it amazing ROFL!

Jay is the one making accusations. He's the one who has to defend those accusations, in my view. My view point is "he who accuses must prove." That may not be your standard, and that's fine, but it is mine. There's no hypocrisy here. Maybe Jay has that proof, but he has not presented to the public.

UberBroncoMan
03-18-2009, 11:26 AM
Jay is the one making accusations. He's the one who has to defend those accusations, in my view. My view point is "he who accuses must prove." That may not be your standard, and that's fine, but it is mine. There's no hypocrisy here. Maybe Jay has that proof, but he has not presented to the public.

Say whatever you want to convince yourself you're not a hypocrite "in your point of view."

LOL

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:29 AM
Say whatever you want to convince yourself you're not a hypocrite "in your point of view."

LOL

I'm sorry if you don't have the mental capacity to comprehend my pretty simple standard. Jay is the one tossing around accusations. He has to back those accusations up. Pretty simple. Sorry if it is a concept beyond your grasp.

UberBroncoMan
03-18-2009, 11:34 AM
I'm sorry if you don't have the mental capacity to comprehend my pretty simple standard. Jay is the one tossing around accusations. He has to back those accusations up. Pretty simple. Sorry if it is a concept beyond your grasp.

Oh I comprehend your hypocritical viewpoints. Which is why I'm calling you a hypocrite. You place all your faith in the words of a 3 month new HC. While I on the other hand look at all points of view and am aware that both sides are at fault, while recognizing that "McD" did in fact start the trade talks. Attack my intelligence all you want on this forum, but it doesn't really account for anything in my real life where I use it for great profits. At this point you've become a typical brainless tape recorder, repeating the same stereotypical and again hypocritical "point of view." Me entertaining this anymore with you will no doubt lead you towards being more upset and coming up with more repetition and adding in ever increasing insults that have nothing to do with the facts at hand. I'll leave you be to talk in the mirror as you keep convincing yourself that "McD" has done nothing.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:40 AM
Oh I comprehend your hypocritical viewpoints. Which is why I'm calling you a hypocrite. You place all your faith in the words of a 3 month new HC. While I on the other hand look at all points of view and am aware that both sides are at fault, while recognizing that "McD" did in fact start the trade talks. Attack my intelligence all you want on this forum, but it doesn't really account for anything in my real life where I use it for great profits. At this point you've become a typical brainless tape recorder, repeating the same stereotypical and again hypocritical "point of view." Me entertaining this anymore with you will no doubt lead you towards being more upset and coming up with more repetition and adding in ever increasing insults that have nothing to do with the facts at hand. I'll leave you be to talk in the mirror as you keep convincing yourself that "McD" has done nothing.

There is nothing hypocritical about my standard. Jay is making accusations, he has to back them up. If McDaniels starts accusing Cutler of lying, I will hold him to the same burden of proof. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this. Actually, I think you probably do understand, you've just dug your heals into an argument you don't have the firepower to win ("firepower" meaning any kind of substantial proof). If it is ever verified from a reliable source that McD was dishonest about something regarding this issue, I have no problem offering a mea culpa. But that evidence has yet to be presented (and, no, Cutler's biased interpretation of a meeting is not proof of anything).

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 11:41 AM
I'm sorry if you don't have the mental capacity to comprehend my pretty simple standard. Jay is the one tossing around accusations. He has to back those accusations up. Pretty simple. Sorry if it is a concept beyond your grasp.

Perhaps I missed it, but it appears to me that McD hasn't denied Jay's claim that he wanted Cassel. If one guy makes a statement... and the other guy doesn't say "no, that's not what happened".... then one can pretty safely conclude that it did happen just as the first guy said it did.

Beantown Bronco
03-18-2009, 11:42 AM
The Real Proof that the trade was not initiated by the Broncos is pretty easy to come by.

Jay Cutler is a Denver Bronco.

If McDaniels initiated the trade he would have gotten it done. But if you noticed the Numerous contracts finalized on the same day he was a bit busy.

If he initiated it, he would've gotten it done? Why? It takes two to tango.

You are ignoring the report that a deal was on the table and the Pats actively rejected it.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:44 AM
Perhaps I missed it, but it appears to me that McD hasn't denied Jay's claim that he wanted Cassel. If one guy makes a statement... and the other guy doesn't say "no, that's not what happened".... then one can pretty safely conclude that it did happen just as the first guy said it did.

Not necessarily. The front office has expressed a clear desire to work this issue out. With that in mind, it would probably be a poor idea to get into a he said/she said war with in the press.

TonyR
03-18-2009, 11:48 AM
Come on guys...

Cutler/Cook are seeding the press at every turn trying to make McD the Bad guy and don't have any hesitation about slandering the guy!...

Its not even ABOUT the Cassel trade, Cutler himself is now only b****ing because he claims his balls weren't stroked right and left him with an unfulfilled feeling.. that is his only fail back position after having to go huddle with Bus after the Saturday meeting to come up with SOMETHING to b**** about enough to press to keep the pressure on for the big contract revision either here or if need be when he forces his way out of town.
It's so easy to read between the lines ... just look at Cutler's behavior he's a puppet on a string.

Funny. Hula's post is BY FAR the best, most substantial post in this whole thread and yet it has been completely ignored in the ensuing half wit pizzing contest. Do yourselves a favor and read it, post #45, and then move on!

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 11:49 AM
I, mean seriously Blueflame...do you honestly think that McDaniels said to Jay in that meeting (a meeting designed to smooth things over), in effect, "Yeah, I admit it Jay, I preferred Cassel over you. I'd also rather have my own guy here. But I can't have my own guy, so it looks like we're stuck together. Pals?" Then, after saying something like that, he goes out in the press and expresses shock that Cutler didn't think the meeting went well? C'mon now. I just don't buy it. I'm not saying Cutler is lying, but I think he probably took something McD said and got the meaning twisted up.

barryr
03-18-2009, 11:57 AM
I, mean seriously Blueflame...do you honestly think that McDaniels said to Jay in that meeting (a meeting designed to smooth things over), in effect, "Yeah, I admit it Jay, I preferred Cassel over you. I'd also rather have my own guy here. But I can't have my own guy, so it looks like we're stuck together. Pals?" Then, after saying something like that, he goes out in the press and expresses shock that Cutler didn't think the meeting went well? C'mon now. I just don't buy it. I'm not saying Cutler is lying, but I think he probably took something McD said and got the meaning twisted up.

Agreed. It just doesn't make sense and most times if something doesn't make sense, it just isn't true. But even so, Cutler wanted him to admit they looked to get Cassell and trade him and according to his story, McDaniels did and now Cutler's upset about that even though he supposedly wanted to hear it. The sense here is missing.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:01 PM
I, mean seriously Blueflame...do you honestly think that McDaniels said to Jay in that meeting (a meeting designed to smooth things over), in effect, "Yeah, I admit it Jay, I preferred Cassel over you. I'd also rather have my own guy here. But I can't have my own guy, so it looks like we're stuck together. Pals?" Then, after saying something like that, he goes out in the press and expresses shock that Cutler didn't think the meeting went well? C'mon now. I just don't buy it. I'm not saying Cutler is lying, but I think he probably took something McD said and got the meaning twisted up.

What I don't buy is the idea that McD didn't want Cassel...of course he does and everyone knows it. Reports are that he's still trying to get Cassel via a 3-way trade with Washington and KC. Sometimes things are obvious and don't have to be spoken to be understood. To believe that Cutler didn't have this correct (or is lying), one would have to first accept the notion that McD truly does not want Cassel. Look at what McD is doing; not at what he says.

TonyR
03-18-2009, 12:01 PM
The sense here is missing.

Yes, I've been saying this all along. The McD bashers are so hung up on "the lie" but even if he did lie it really doesn't even matter. The lying, assuming it exists, is not the issue.

lostknight
03-18-2009, 12:09 PM
Yes, I've been saying this all along. The McD bashers are so hung up on "the lie" but even if he did lie it really doesn't even matter. The lying, assuming it exists, is not the issue.

It absolutely is. McDaniel's lie gave birth to the whole Jay is a crybaby meme in the national press. McDaniels basically **** on Jay to cover his attempt to trade. If McDaniels had come out said: "They were offering us two first plus cassel" Jay might have thrown a fit, but that's like saying "Dude. You rock. We suck. We have to trade you to get help" rather then saying "I'm the broncos. I get to lie when I want to to protect my ass in the press, and you have to play along."

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:10 PM
Agreed. It just doesn't make sense and most times if something doesn't make sense, it just isn't true. But even so, Cutler wanted him to admit they looked to get Cassell and trade him and according to his story, McDaniels did and now Cutler's upset about that even though he supposedly wanted to hear it. The sense here is missing.

Where sense is missing is... supposedly Cutler requested to be traded right after Shanahan was fired. OK, if that were true (I don't believe it is) then wouldn't he have been glad; not angry... that McD "entertained" trade offers? (Logic says he would have wanted them to). Also, if he wanted to be traded, then wouldn't he have been off relaxing on a beach or skiing or doing just about anything else besides going into the office and trying to get acquainted with a staff he had no intention of working with and familiarize himself with an offensive system he wouldn't be running?

No... his actions say that Jay had every intention of staying in Denver and working with McD. Until McD tried to trade him for Cassel.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:13 PM
What I don't buy is the idea that McD didn't want Cassel...of course he does and everyone knows it. Reports are that he's still trying to get Cassel via a 3-way trade with Washington and KC. Sometimes things are obvious and don't have to be spoken to be understood. To believe that Cutler didn't have this correct (or is lying), one would have to first accept the notion that McD truly does not want Cassel. Look at what McD is doing; not at what he says.

What exactly is he doing? Because of vague reports that there may be discussions involving Cassel going on means that those reports are gospel truth? C'mon now. Plus, even if those reports are true, the game has changed. Jay has demanded a trade. So, it may very well be that he's exploring options that might net him Cassel. So what? That doesn't mean that his version of prior events are untrue. The first part of your post says all that needs to be said. You've made your mind up about what happened even though it's based on conclusions drawn from hearsay. That's fine, but it is what it is.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:16 PM
Where sense is missing is... supposedly Cutler requested to be traded right after Shanahan was fired. OK, if that were true (I don't believe it is) then wouldn't he have been glad; not angry... that McD "entertained" trade offers? (Logic says he would have wanted them to). Also, if he wanted to be traded, then wouldn't he have been off relaxing on a beach or skiing or doing just about anything else besides going into the office and trying to get acquainted with a staff he had no intention of working with and familiarize himself with an offensive system he wouldn't be running?

No... his actions say that Jay had every intention of staying in Denver and working with McD. Until McD tried to trade him for Cassel.

Your descriptions of his "actions" are pure speculation. It is not at all clear at this point what his "actions" were. McD has his version, and no one has been able to discredit it thus far.

lostknight
03-18-2009, 12:16 PM
I don't doubt, by the way, that Cook wanted Jay out of Denver the second Mike Shanahan left. My suspicion, and what's been reported is that Jay went and asked what his role is. McDaniels buttered him up to keep him hapy while he ousted the Goodmans. Once that was done. McDaniels made the play for Cassel and botched it. Jay would have been far far better off if he had been out looking for a team back at the start of free agency, now is stuck in a position where his coach screwed him, lied to the press, and then tried to tell Jay that it was alright now.

Fool me once? Played right into Bus Cook's hand.

Let's remember that Bus Cook works for Jay, not the other way around. Bus is there to protect Jay's interest. The Bronco's effort at getting rid of Bus Cook from the meetings is so they can do things that might not be in Jay's interest. McDaniels got all hot behind the collar because Bus Cook talked to Xanders instead of him.

Given that Xander's is supposidly the GM, that just reveals how much McDaniels needs to control every aspect of the game. We didn't just fire the winningist coach in the NFL to replace him with someone with just as much power, and far far smaller clue from what we can see today.

Jay's actions are consistent with him trying to make it work for the team (but being skeptical), to getting hot-headed and walking away. McDaniels are consistent with being a power-freak. Xanders is consistent with being inept at his job.

The freaks deserve each other.

TonyR
03-18-2009, 12:17 PM
It absolutely is.

While understanding where you're coming from I completely disagree. Truth or lie I think the results are identical. If McD did lie he did it to try to salvage the relationship. The damage was done by the trade talks themselves, not the lying about them (to the extent there really was lying).

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:22 PM
What exactly is he doing? Because of vague reports that there may be discussions involving Cassel going on means that those reports are gospel truth? C'mon now. Plus, even if those reports are true, the game has changed. Jay has demanded a trade. So, it may very well be that he's exploring options that might net him Cassel. So what? That doesn't mean that his version of prior events are untrue. The first part of your post says all that needs to be said. You've made your mind up about what happened even though it's based on conclusions drawn from hearsay. That's fine, but it is what it is.

You believe that McD does not want "his boy"? (Cassel)

worm
03-18-2009, 12:22 PM
The damage was done by the trade talks themselves, not the lying about them (to the extent there really was lying).

This is a crazy assertion and one that flys in the face of direct quotes from Cutler immediately after the news first broke.

DrFate
03-18-2009, 12:27 PM
Where sense is missing is... supposedly Cutler requested to be traded right after Shanahan was fired. OK, if that were true (I don't believe it is) then wouldn't he have been glad; not angry... that McD "entertained" trade offers? (Logic says he would have wanted them to).
No... his actions say that Jay had every intention of staying in Denver and working with McD. Until McD tried to trade him for Cassel.

You know - this is an excellent observation that I haven't seen before on this forum. Well thought out.

Kaylore
03-18-2009, 12:27 PM
This is a crazy assertion
No it's not. Do you think things would be any different if McDaniels called Culter and said "Hey I'm going to try and trade you for Cassel. If not, no sweat, right?"

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:28 PM
You believe that McD does not want "his boy"? (Cassel)

It depends on what you mean by "want." If you mean do you I think he wants Cassel over Cutler straight up, then no, I'm not convinced of that. That could be the case, but McD certainly has not said so publicly (and I have a hard time believing he actually told Jay that in the meeting). If you mean do I think he'd be happy to swap Cutler for Cassel AND some other goodies (the rumored Detroit deal, for instance, which would have included the #1 and #20 overall draft picks along with Cassel), then, sure, I think he'd take Cassel in that scenario.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:31 PM
Your descriptions of his "actions" are pure speculation. It is not at all clear at this point what his "actions" were. McD has his version, and no one has been able to discredit it thus far.

Wait a minute... are you saying that Jay didn't go in to the office on his own time to familiarize himself with McD's offensive scheme and get to know the new coaching staff? And are you saying that he was really happy; not angry when he was informed that the team had "entertained trade offers"?

Please expound further on McD's "un-discredited" version... with emphasis on where it differs from Jay's version.

DrFate
03-18-2009, 12:31 PM
No it's not. Do you think things would be any different if McDaniels called Culter and said "Hey I'm going to try and trade you for Cassel. If not, no sweat, right?"

As a fan, I've questioned the judgement of the guy who replaces Cutler with Cassel. If we ignore the (alleged) lies and the (alleged) pouting. I can't imagine the owner hired this guy if his move #1 was to replace Cutler with Cassel. Even if this saga never happens, I think McDaniels is an idiot on this alone.

lostknight
03-18-2009, 12:32 PM
While understanding where you're coming from I completely disagree. Truth or lie I think the results are identical. If McD did lie he did it to try to salvage the relationship. The damage was done by the trade talks themselves, not the lying about them (to the extent there really was lying).

There is no if. McDaniels speaks in the third person as "the organization" Brian Xanders said "no plans to trade cutler, we didn't call, we didn't consider." Williams and many many others dispute that. McDaniels in the ESPN piece explicitly said that they were in fact putting together a trade, which failed because "we were late to the ball."

That's a huge failing as GM, in a role that McDaniels never should have been doing in the first place. He was driving the deal, rather then consulting on it.

Second, Jay's actions are completely consistent with "a) Being out of the loop, b) Being a hot head, c) Being lied too, d) Giving the Broncos a shot to fix thing and e) being disappointed" all while Bus Cook rightly takes advantage of the huge gaming hole the Broncos have just blasted in their foot.

With offseason GM moves like this, I can't wait for the draft.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:34 PM
It depends on what you mean by "want." If you mean do you I think he wants Cassel over Cutler straight up, then no, I'm not convinced of that. That could be the case, but McD certainly has not said so publicly (and I have a hard time believing he actually told Jay that in the meeting). If you mean do I think he'd be happy to swap Cutler for Cassel AND some other goodies (the rumored Detroit deal, for instance, which would have included the #1 and #20 overall draft picks along with Cassel), then, sure, I think he'd take Cassel in that scenario.

It was a simple, straight-up question. Do you think McD would rather go into the season with Cassel... or Cutler... as his starting QB? Because there can only be one choice; not both. If the answer is "Cassel"... then it cannot possibly be true that he "never wanted to trade Jay"...

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:36 PM
As a fan, I've questioned the judgement of the guy who replaces Cutler with Cassel. If we ignore the (alleged) lies and the (alleged) pouting. I can't imagine the owner hired this guy if his move #1 was to replace Cutler with Cassel. Even if this saga never happens, I think McDaniels is an idiot on this alone.

I agree, 100%.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:37 PM
Wait a minute... are you saying that Jay didn't go in to the office on his own time to familiarize himself with McD's offensive scheme and get to know the new coaching staff? And are you saying that he was really happy; not angry when he was informed that the team had "entertained trade offers"?

Please expound further on McD's "un-discredited" version... with emphasis on where it differs from Jay's version.

McD's version is pretty simple. They received some proposals that they entertained. The only worthwhile offer was made the day FA started, but they put consideration of that deal on the back burner while they completed six FA agent deals (this would imply to me that the proposal was not something they considered a top priority). In the meantime, New England closed their deal with Kansas City before consideration of the proposal could go any further, so the whole thing was moot.

So, if this is how it all went down, what is wrong with that? How does it paint the prior meetings with Jay to discuss the offense in a sinister light? At the time, it's unlikely McD had any idea that a serious trade proposal was on the horizon. I guess I'm not seeing your point?

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:41 PM
It was a simple, straight-up question. Do you think McD would rather go into the season with Cassel... or Cutler... as his starting QB? Because there can only be one choice; not both. If the answer is "Cassel"... then it cannot possibly be true that he "never wanted to trade Jay"...

Ok, then my answer is "no"...I don't believe McD wanted Cassel over Cutler in a straight up scenario.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:43 PM
As a fan, I've questioned the judgement of the guy who replaces Cutler with Cassel. If we ignore the (alleged) lies and the (alleged) pouting. I can't imagine the owner hired this guy if his move #1 was to replace Cutler with Cassel. Even if this saga never happens, I think McDaniels is an idiot on this alone.

But what if the scenario was to replace Cutler with Cassel while at the same time obtaining the #1 and #20 overall picks in the draft, picks that could then be used to acquire top level talent to help accelerate the rebuilding process? Does it sound more reasonable now? I think it does, personally. You at least have to consider it.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:45 PM
McD's version is pretty simple. They received some proposals that they entertained. The only worthwhile offer was made the day FA started, but they put consideration of that deal on the back burner while they completed six FA agent deals (this would imply to me that the proposal was not something they considered a top priority). In the meantime, New England closed their deal with Kansas City before consideration of the proposal could go any further, so the whole thing was moot.

So, if this is how it all went down, what is wrong with that? How does it paint the prior meetings with Jay to discuss the offense in a sinister light? At the time, it's unlikely McD had any idea that a serious trade proposal was on the horizon. I guess I'm not seeing your point?

So you believe that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers... out of the clear blue sky... just called up McDaniels and asked "hey, what would it take for us to acquire the best player on your team?" Did they also contact the Steelers to inquire about Roethlisberger? Or the Saints to ask for Brees? Or the Chargers to see if they were interested in trading Rivers? Something had to have given them the idea that maybe McD might be receptive to an offer....

Northman
03-18-2009, 12:48 PM
I dont care who initiated the talks. Thats old news and now Jay needs to move on from it. There are greater tragedies in the world.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 12:49 PM
So you believe that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers... out of the clear blue sky... just called up McDaniels and asked "hey, what would it take for us to acquire the best player on your team?" Did they also contact the Steelers to inquire about Roethlisberger? Or the Saints to ask for Brees? Or the Chargers to see if they were interested in trading Rivers? Something had to have given them the idea that maybe McD might be receptive to an offer....

Your examples of Brees and Roethlisberger don't take into account the uniqueness of this situation. It's perfectly plausible that, knowing McD's very recent history with Cassel coupled with Cassel's availability, Tampa Bay decided to float something out there to see if there would be any interest. I'm not sure why that's such a hard scenario to swallow?

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 12:52 PM
Your examples of Brees and Roethlisberger don't take into account the uniqueness of this situation. It's perfectly plausible that, knowing McD's very recent history with Cassel coupled with Cassel's availability, Tampa Bay decided to float something out there to see if there would be any interest. I'm not sure why that's such a hard scenario to swallow?

Far more plausible is the theory that perhaps McD called them....

DrFate
03-18-2009, 12:52 PM
But what if the scenario was to replace Cutler with Cassel while at the same time obtaining the #1 and #20 overall picks in the draft, picks that could then be used to acquire top level talent to help accelerate the rebuilding process? Does it sound more reasonable now? I think it does, personally. You at least have to consider it.

Based on the hit-or-miss nature of the draft, the enormous $$ that would have to be given, and the difficulty of finding a top flight QB - I'd pass.

I'm not saying it is unreasonable. I'm just saying that finding a QB is HARD. Having the chance to draft a guy is NOT the same as having a guy who has proven he can play.

What you are asking is: is the team better with Cassel, Raji/Curry ($30+MIL guaranteed), and whoever they take at #20 (probably a corner or another DLine) than Cutler.

You have to turn the clock back 12 months. Glenn Dorsey was a 'can't miss, game changing defensive tackle'. He flopped. Gholston was a workout wonder and was going to be the new face of the Jets defense. He flopped. The draft is risky, by it's very nature. Some fans get all draft pick giddy, like giving up proven young players in exchange for picks is a great thing.

So you give $30+MIL guaranteed to Curry or Raji, which is a roll of the dice. You give Cassel money like he got from KC (would he take less?) And you draft a corner or dline or whatever at #20. Does that put you in a better situation than keeping Cutler? I'm not sold on Cassel AT ALL. He didn't start in college, he was on the verge of being cut in the preseason last year (you can read the reports). He went into a good situation and made the most of it. Good for him. That doesn't mean I'd want to turn my franchise over to him. Not when I have a productive offense already.

DrFate
03-18-2009, 12:58 PM
So you believe that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers... out of the clear blue sky... just called up McDaniels and asked "hey, what would it take for us to acquire the best player on your team?" Did they also contact the Steelers to inquire about Roethlisberger? Or the Saints to ask for Brees? Or the Chargers to see if they were interested in trading Rivers? Something had to have given them the idea that maybe McD might be receptive to an offer....

And that's what I have never believed about this entire thing. I can't imagine that anyone (short of a prank) calls the Saints GM and says 'We are working a three team deal where you give us Brees and you get a backup. Get a pen' He'd laugh his ass off and hang up the phone. Unless Costanza is putting Bonds and Griffey in the same outfield, I simply don't believe that happens.

The rumors came out during the combine. There was no response from Dove Valley for a good long time (and Cutler claims he couldn't get an answer to his calls). Then the Broncos spokespeople come out with a story of 'they called us'. For anyone who believes that, I encourage them to look up the word 'credulity' and learn to use it in a sentence.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:00 PM
Based on the hit-or-miss nature of the draft, the enormous $$ that would have to be given, and the difficulty of finding a top flight QB - I'd pass.

I'm not saying it is unreasonable. I'm just saying that finding a QB is HARD. Having the chance to draft a guy is NOT the same as having a guy who has proven he can play.

What you are asking is: is the team better with Cassel, Raji/Curry ($30+MIL guaranteed), and whoever they take at #20 (probably a corner or another DLine) than Cutler.

You have to turn the clock back 12 months. Glenn Dorsey was a 'can't miss, game changing defensive tackle'. And he flopped. Gholston was a workout wonder and was going to be the new face of the Jets defense. He flopped. The draft is risky, by it's very nature.

So you give $30+MIL guaranteed to Curry or Raji, which is a roll of the dice. You give Cassel money like he got from KC (would he take less?) And you draft a corner or dline or whatever at #20. Does that put you in a better situation than keeping Cutler? I'm not sold on Cassel AT ALL. He didn't start in college, he was on the verge of being cut in the preseason last year (you can read the reports). He went into a good situation and made the most of it. Good for him. That doesn't mean I'd want to turn my franchise over to him. Not when I have a productive offense already.

Oh, I don't necessarily disagree with what your saying. But your previous post called into question McD's brain power for preferring Cassel to Cutler. My only point is that the scenario may have been a bit different. You admit that the scenario I outlined would at the very least warrant consideration.

Drek
03-18-2009, 01:01 PM
Far more plausible is the theory that perhaps McD called them....

So what McDaniels said actually happened, what Adam Shefter said actually happened, and what multiple other respected journalists said actually happened is far less plausible than what Jay Cutler believes happened and what ESPN (currently in negotiations with Bus Cook client Brett Favre to become an NFL analyst) say happened?

And ESPN's reporters don't even unanimously agree that Cutler was shopped by the Broncos, FYI.

Your definition of "far more plausible" is highly suspect as far as I can see.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:02 PM
And that's what I have never believed about this entire thing. I can't imagine that anyone (short of a prank) calls the Saints GM and says 'We are working a three team deal where you give us Brees and you get a backup. Get a pen' He'd laugh his ass off and hang up the phone. Unless Costanza is putting Bonds and Griffey in the same outfield, I simply don't believe that happens.

The rumors came out during the combine. There was no response from Dove Valley for a good long time (and Cutler claims he couldn't get an answer to his calls). Then the Broncos spokespeople come out with a story of 'they called us'. For anyone who believes that, I encourage them to look up the word 'credulity' and learn to use it in a sentence.

Right... and yesterday, Shannon Sharpe said that just doesn't happen (teams just randomly calling other teams to inquire about their star players). He flat-out said that the Broncos (McD) were lying about it.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:04 PM
Far more plausible is the theory that perhaps McD called them....

I don't agree. I simply don't see what is hard to fathom. An OC takes over a new club. It just so happens the QB he built up is available. A team says, 'hey, why don't we float something out there to see if they'll move Cutler?' That is quite a plausible scenario, and probably what happened. In fact, pretty much every source agrees that this is what happened, even if some sources claim that McD began actively shopping Cutler afterwards.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:05 PM
Right... and yesterday, Shannon Sharpe said that just doesn't happen (teams just randomly calling other teams to inquire about their star players). He flat-out said that the Broncos (McD) were lying about it.

Sharpe was speculating. He doesn't have any sources on this and didn't even claim to. His opinion is just that...an opinion.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:08 PM
So what McDaniels said actually happened, what Adam Shefter said actually happened, and what multiple other respected journalists said actually happened is far less plausible than what Jay Cutler believes happened and what ESPN (currently in negotiations with Bus Cook client Brett Favre to become an NFL analyst) say happened?

And ESPN's reporters don't even unanimously agree that Cutler was shopped by the Broncos, FYI.

Your definition of "far more plausible" is highly suspect as far as I can see.

I find it more believable that the Broncos did something to let other teams know that calls inquiring about Cutler would not be summarily rejected than to believe that more than one team just suddenly started calling to ask about a player they had no reason to think was available...

DrFate
03-18-2009, 01:08 PM
Oh, I don't necessarily disagree with what your saying. But your previous post called into question McD's brain power for preferring Cassel to Cutler. My only point is that the scenario may have been a bit different. You admit that the scenario I outlined would at the very least warrant consideration.

Good - we are close. :) Maybe there CAN be peace in the Middle East.:thumbs:

I think you'd have to get a lot in return for a proven starter (be it Brees or Rivers or one of the recent Super Bowl guys, or whoever).

If McDaniels said 'we can make the team better by moving our most valuable asset, getting good 'value' in Cassel (not that I agree with it), and improving the defense', then great - he's trying. But, as certain other posters ignore, that isn't Cutler's beef.

Cutler's beef is that he feels he was lied to. If McDaniels said 'Jay, you are the most valuable asset we have. We wanted to see if we could improve the team by moving you and getting a ton in return' then I don't think we would be where we are today. Players get traded, big names get traded.

But the story that he just 'answered the phone' simply doesn't ring true to me, and never has. Which means that, taken in total, McDaniels initiated the moves and then lied to Cutler. When Cutler griped about it, McDaniels said 'be a man' or 'anyone can be traded' or some 'I'm a bigger man than you' nonsense.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:12 PM
I don't agree. I simply don't see what is hard to fathom. An OC takes over a new club. It just so happens the QB he built up is available. A team says, 'hey, why don't we float something out there to see if they'll move Cutler?' That is quite a plausible scenario, and probably what happened. In fact, pretty much every source agrees that this is what happened, even if some sources claim that McD began actively shopping Cutler afterwards.

You can believe that if you want to. I don't. And I think the unproven claim that Jay "asked to be traded immediately after Shanahan was fired" is out there to make the front office look better if the lie (we just answered the phone; that's all) is found out. It's "Plan B" ("we were just doing what Jay asked us to")

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:14 PM
Sharpe was speculating. He doesn't have any sources on this and didn't even claim to. His opinion is just that...an opinion.

Sharpe knows a lot more about how an NFL front office works than I do. I think he's probably spot on.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:14 PM
You can believe that if you want to. I don't.

OK, you don't believe what pretty much every source from Adam Schefter to Chris Mortenson to Peter King has reported. Fair enough.

And I think the unproven claim that Jay "asked to be traded immediately after Shanahan was fired" is out there to make the front office look better if the lie (we just answered the phone; that's all) is found out.

That's purely your unfounded speculation.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:15 PM
Sharpe knows a lot more about how an NFL front office works than I do. I think he's probably spot on.

Think it if you want. Pretty much every source--even those that paint Cutler's view point in a more favorable light--agree that Denver was initially approached about a deal.

outdoor_miner
03-18-2009, 01:19 PM
I don't agree. I simply don't see what is hard to fathom. An OC takes over a new club. It just so happens the QB he built up is available. A team says, 'hey, why don't we float something out there to see if they'll move Cutler?' That is quite a plausible scenario, and probably what happened. In fact, pretty much every source agrees that this is what happened, even if some sources claim that McD began actively shopping Cutler afterwards.

Don't forget that Jay had made it well known that he was pissed about Shanahan being fired, and pissed about Bates not being retained. Combine all that, and why is it unrealistic that teams would call to see if they could capitalize on the situation? It's not some tremendous stretch of logic.

DrFate
03-18-2009, 01:20 PM
OK, you don't believe what pretty much every source from Adam Schefter to Chris Mortenson to Peter King has reported. Fair enough.

Schefter said 'the Broncos told me'...

EVERYONE either has it 2nd hand or is speculating. I posted yesterday where John Clayton said the agent had nothing to do with this and it was McDaniels fault, and I got hit repeatedly by Maners telling me he was an idiot.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:21 PM
OK, you don't believe what pretty much every source from Adam Schefter to Chris Mortenson to Peter King has reported. Fair enough.

"We just answered the phone" has seemed "fishy" to me right from the beginning.

That's purely your unfounded speculation.

I never even hinted that it was anything else... :P

(btw, that makes it no different than the vast majority of posts on this topic)

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:24 PM
Think it if you want. Pretty much every source--even those that paint Cutler's view point in a more favorable light--agree that Denver was initially approached about a deal.

Not exactly... pretty much every source takes McD's word at face value and repeats what he said (that all he did was answer the phone).

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:25 PM
Don't forget that Jay had made it well known that he was pissed about Shanahan being fired, and pissed about Bates not being retained. Combine all that, and why is it unrealistic that teams would call to see if they could capitalize on the situation? It's not some tremendous stretch of logic.

Again, he wouldn't have gone into the office and wasted his time getting acquainted with the new coaching staff and learning McD's offensive system if he had asked to be traded. That dog just won't hunt.

Archer81
03-18-2009, 01:26 PM
So much drama and nonsense over a trade that didnt happen.


:Broncos:

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:30 PM
Not exactly... pretty much every source takes McD's word at face value and repeats what he said (that all he did was answer the phone).

If it were untrue, don't you think at least one of these guys would have a source with Tampa Bay telling them it's a lie?

outdoor_miner
03-18-2009, 01:32 PM
Again, he wouldn't have gone into the office and wasted his time getting acquainted with the new coaching staff and learning McD's offensive system if he had asked to be traded. That dog just won't hunt.

I'm not even talking about asking to be traded. I'm just saying it was well known at the time that:

a. Jay was extremely unhappy about losing Shanahan and Bates
b. The new coach of the Denver Broncos had great success with Matt Cassel the previous year

All I'm trying to say is that for the above 2 reasons, it makes logical sense why other teams would call McDaniels and the Broncos to check on Jay Cutler's availability. It is not some crazy scenario like Drew Brees or Phillip Rivers. Do I know that that's what happened? No. But neither do any of us. To me, it's just as likely as McDaniels shopping Jay around.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:32 PM
Again, he wouldn't have gone into the office and wasted his time getting acquainted with the new coaching staff and learning McD's offensive system if he had asked to be traded. That dog just won't hunt.

Perhaps not the "trade demand" part, but certainly it was well known that Jay was none too happy with Shanny's and Bate's dismissals. That, coupled with Cassel's availability, doesn't make it a stretch at all to think someone would float the idea out there.

rugbythug
03-18-2009, 01:33 PM
If it were untrue, don't you think at least one of these guys would have a source with Tampa Bay telling them it's a lie?

The Original Tampa Quote said they called Denver.

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 01:35 PM
The Original Tampa Quote said they called Denver.

Well, there you go. I didn't even remember that. Maybe someone could hunt the quote down. If true, it confirms that they initiated things.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:38 PM
If it were untrue, don't you think at least one of these guys would have a source with Tampa Bay telling them it's a lie?

All I know is that Jay (he or his agent just might have that kind of a source) seems quite convinced that Denver initiated the discussion and that McD is lying.

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 01:41 PM
I'm not even talking about asking to be traded. I'm just saying it was well known at the time that:

a. Jay was extremely unhappy about losing Shanahan and Bates
b. The new coach of the Denver Broncos had great success with Matt Cassel the previous year

All I'm trying to say is that for the above 2 reasons, it makes logical sense why other teams would call McDaniels and the Broncos to check on Jay Cutler's availability. It is not some crazy scenario like Drew Brees or Phillip Rivers. Do I know that that's what happened? No. But neither do any of us. To me, it's just as likely as McDaniels shopping Jay around.

What is clear is that even though Jay may not have been totally happy about Shanahan and Bates being gone, his actions indicated a willingness to make the best of the situation and go on with the new front office. Before the failed trade talks, he had gone well out of his way to do the best he could possibly do for the team and McD/Xanders.

Drek
03-18-2009, 01:51 PM
I find it more believable that the Broncos did something to let other teams know that calls inquiring about Cutler would not be summarily rejected than to believe that more than one team just suddenly started calling to ask about a player they had no reason to think was available...

Maybe, but I think its far more likely Bus Cook started all this by passing word of Cutler's availability on to Tampa or whomever else called first that Cutler could be gettable.

With the direct intent of having Cutler go ape **** if it didn't lead to a trade.

Every source that is well hooked into the Broncos says they didn't start it, so someone had to. You don't believe these teams would just throw an offer out there to feel the Broncos out, so they got the idea from somewhere. Maybe the agent for a player who had already asked for a trade (now two sources claim this) wasn't above a little under the table tipping of cards to other FOs?

That sounds a hell of a lot more plausible than the Broncos actively shopping Cutler and then proceeding to fool everyone, even a guy who looks to have friends in the ownership group (Shefter).

Blueflame
03-18-2009, 02:27 PM
Maybe, but I think its far more likely Bus Cook started all this by passing word of Cutler's availability on to Tampa or whomever else called first that Cutler could be gettable.

With the direct intent of having Cutler go ape **** if it didn't lead to a trade.

Every source that is well hooked into the Broncos says they didn't start it, so someone had to. You don't believe these teams would just throw an offer out there to feel the Broncos out, so they got the idea from somewhere. Maybe the agent for a player who had already asked for a trade (now two sources claim this) wasn't above a little under the table tipping of cards to other FOs?

That sounds a hell of a lot more plausible than the Broncos actively shopping Cutler and then proceeding to fool everyone, even a guy who looks to have friends in the ownership group (Shefter).

Maybe. However, one other factor that was clear from the start is that Jay seemed genuinely surprised (blindsided) by the news that trade discussions had taken place. If his agent was involved in getting the ball rolling on that, one would expect that Cutler would have been in the loop. And if that were the case, it would follow that he'd be happy that they'd at least considered making a trade instead of infuriated. And again, would he have wasted all that time hanging out in the office if he had known there was any possibility of being traded? I can't see any possible motivation to do that... unless he fully believed he'd be staying in Denver.

oubronco
03-18-2009, 02:45 PM
This saddens me some, and even now, I'm not sure what to believe. I was hearing the deal came to McDaniel, not the other way around. Yes, it had been rumored, but McDaniels denied that, saying he was contacted by, whoever, and considered the deal, but then in the end, turned it down.

Pat Bowlen has to kick his way through the empty scotch bottles and get in the middle of this. People have been saying this, but the urgency now is beyond solution. Either get the kid a new home, or force a settlement of some kind; sign him to a zillion dollar contract and be done with it. Good God, this is ridiculous.

McD has been lying from the start hence why I don't blame Cutler for not believing a damn thing he says and wanting out

Broncos4tw
03-18-2009, 02:50 PM
This whole affair gives me no confidence in our new coach, whatsoever.

WHY would he entertain any offers at all? He should have said "No, not interested," and hung up the phone. If you actually believe that someone called him. Some of us are not that naive, it's pretty clear that he initiated and went for this deal.

We have the #2 offense in the NFL. We have a pro bowl QB who threw for over 4k yards. We had the second to WORST defense in the NFL. Why in the world would you even remotely possibly consider any trade that removes your biggest asset, when you have much more pressing matters to deal with?

Goodies? What goodies?! Were those goodies with 13 million dollars? I highly doubt that, even if there was more to the deal.

Cutler is a BMW, Cassel a Lexus, and our defense an old version VW Bug. So what does he do? Tries to trade in the luxury car for another. Just absolutely moronic. There was no reason to even begin to entertain that trade.

You do not try to trade away your franchise QB because he doesn't quite 'fit' into your system. Are you the QB coach or not? If he doesn't play the way you want him to, teach him to play within your guidelines!

It's fairly obvious to anyone not kissing McD's ass for whatever reason (he hasn't done a thing for our team yet), that he wanted to be in a comfort zone, turning us into the Denver Patriots, so he wouldn't be over his head on his coaching debut. Trading a long snapper for absolutely no reason at all sort of solidifies this idea.

Maybe he can offer a trade, giving all the Denver Broncos to the Patriots for all their players, then he'll be happy.

oubronco
03-18-2009, 02:55 PM
Hell they just said on Jim Rome that McD is still trying to trade for Cassell what a dipshyt

BroncoInferno
03-18-2009, 03:12 PM
Hell they just said on Jim Rome that McD is still trying to trade for Cassell what a dipshyt

That's because Cutler told McD to trade him, dumbass.

DrFate
03-18-2009, 03:49 PM
Hell they just said on Jim Rome that McD is still trying to trade for Cassell what a dipshyt

Makes you wonder if McSparky is mentally unbalanced...

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
03-18-2009, 04:57 PM
does anyone think al davis put a hex on the broncos that damn crypt keeper has cursed us

rugbythug
03-18-2009, 07:47 PM
http://blogs.tampabay.com/bucs/page/3/

Don't dismiss Matt Cassel trade rumor

If you abide the notion that the appearance of smoke indicates a fire, then Matt Cassel will be in a Bucs uniform before you know it.
Still, we weren't initially inclined to share the mushrooming rumor that the New England QB is the subject of ongoing trade talks between the Bucs and Patriots because it could be traced only to a little-known blog in New England.
However, since then, I received a call from an agent who also heard the talk from someone in another team's front office. That gave me reason to pause. I can recall on Feb. 10 blogging here about persistent talk in NFL circles of DT Albert Haynesworth being someone the Bucs were planning to pursue (http://blogs.tampabay.com/bucs/2009/02/its-no-secret-t.html). As you know by now, Tampa Bay went down to the wire with him Friday morning before being outbid by the Redskins.
Like the Haynesworth buzz, this rumor also makes sense. The Bucs have WR Antonio Bryant and now TE Kellen Winslow in place. Adding a seemingly dynamic quarterback like Matt Cassel would certainly give the Tampa Bay offense a chance to be potent.
But it won't be easy to land Cassel, who was designated the Patriots' franchise player. Landing such a player as a free agent requires a team to compensate his club with a pair of first-round picks. But we understand the Patriots are willing to make a deal for something in the neighborhood of one first- and one fourth-round pick.
It's been an interesting past 48 hours. We're not predicting anything here given the absence of factual information. But as we wrap things up for the night, we can't help but wonder whether things are about to get a lot more intriguing around here.