PDA

View Full Version : Tribune: Bears don't need a quitter like Cutler...


Popps
03-26-2009, 06:30 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-27-morrissey-bears-chicagomar27,0,820080.column

Chicago Bears don't need a quitter like Jay Cutler
Rick Morrissey | In the wake of the news
March 27, 2009
Imagine the uproar in town if Kyle Orton demanded to be traded at the first whisper the Bears were considering sending him to another team.

Your imagination is spot on: Orton would be the subject of a million different violent fantasies, all of them ending in his bloody demise. Being dragged through the streets of Chicago by the team bus would probably lead the voting.

And yet the quarterback whom Bears fans are in a lather about did just that sort of demanding in Denver. Jay Cutler has asked to be traded because he's upset that new Broncos coach Josh McDaniels had the gall to express interest in trading for then-Patriot Matt Cassel.

It would be an inaccurate description to say McDaniels' wandering eye sent Cutler into an emotional tailspin. It was more like a mushroom cloud. How could the Broncos even ponder such a thing after all Cutler had done for the franchise in OK, it was only two seasons as a starter, but how could they ponder such a thing?

It's fairly easy to explain the Broncos' one-time interest in Cassel, though Cutler apparently hasn't grasped it yet: The NFL is a business.

Oh, and Denver is 17-20 with Cutler as a starter.

The central question to any discussion involving the Bears and the possibility of acquiring Cutler is not how much general manager Jerry Angelo would be willing to give up in a trade or how the offensive scheme would have to be tweaked to accommodate all of his considerable talents.

It's this: You're going to entrust the Bears' offense to a guy who, at the first indication of "adversity," basically quits on his team?

Does anything about this situation suggest Cutler is a team player? No, not when he gives in so easily to pride and/or insecurity. It's hard to see how this situation is different than any of the numerous difficult situations that confront a quarterback on any given game day.

How will Cutler react when a teammate drops a pass? How will he react when he feels an official made a bad call? How will he react to public criticism?

Not well, would be the guess here.

There's no disputing he had a great season in 2008, throwing for 4,526 yards, completing 62.3 percent of his passes and tossing 25 touchdowns against 18 interceptions.

But since when does three seasons in the NFL, two as a full-time starter, translate into superstardom and the right to total job security? It doesn't.

What's scary here is Angelo's previous assertion that the Bears need to get the quarterback position "right." Orton must be wondering how he became the problem when he has a set of wide receivers straight out of Comedy Central. But it's not Orton's nature to say that, and if the Bears are smart, they'll take a hard look at character, which is what they say they look at so carefully.

Orton wasn't the problem last year. He had the aforementioned poor receivers. The defense was bad.

But you never heard him complain about his ankle injury, though there's no question it affected his season. You never heard him complain over the last few years that the Bears had dealt him a rotten hand when they crowned Rex Grossman without any quarterback competition.

You didn't hear a peep out of him as the Cutler talk heated up around town. None of that necessarily makes Orton a great quarterback, but I'd much rather have someone in the huddle who doesn't cave in at the first sign of trouble.

It's hard to understand Angelo's preoccupation with the quarterback position now, after all the up-and-down struggles with Grossman. When Orton was healthy last season, he was more than solid. He was good. The only way Angelo's quarterback-concentrating makes sense is if he doesn't want Orton to get any ideas about a fat contract when his old one gets set to expire.

McDaniels now is saying he wants Cutler back, which is the kind of thing you say if, A) you suddenly realize you don't have another quality starting quarterback or, B) you realize that if you give the impression you want Cutler gone, other teams are going to lowball you in trade talks.

In Chicago, this likely is a moot point because it's hard to see the Bears parting with the draft picks it would take maybe a first, second and third over the next few years to get Cutler. Seeing as how the franchise has been quiet in free agency and trading, it's seems obvious they're big on building through the draft.

I'm sure Orton wishes the Bears would declare their complete trust in him. But this is a business, and he apparently understands it. If his past is any indication, he might even be thinking about competition in a way Cutler never would: Bring it on.


This aside, rumors are surfacing in Chicago that they're stepping up their interest in a trade...
http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/huddleup/2009/03/denver-broncos-quarterback-jay-cutler-reportedly-on-bears-radar.html

Dr. Broncenstein
03-26-2009, 06:33 PM
What can they possibly offer in exchange? Orton? Grossman?

Sodak
03-26-2009, 06:35 PM
Someone wake me up after the draft... yawn.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 06:37 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Dagmar
03-26-2009, 06:41 PM
Someone wake me up after the draft... yawn.

^5

Jesterhole
03-26-2009, 06:44 PM
It's this: You're going to entrust the Bears' offense to a guy who, at the first indication of "adversity," basically quits on his team?

Does anything about this situation suggest Cutler is a team player? No, not when he gives in so easily to pride and/or insecurity. It's hard to see how this situation is different than any of the numerous difficult situations that confront a quarterback on any given game day.

How will Cutler react when a teammate drops a pass? How will he react when he feels an official made a bad call? How will he react to public criticism?

Not well, would be the guess here


Haha, you have three years of tape on the kid, he doesn't quit. He said he is going to show up for mini camps. He is pissed off right now, and staying home during the off season, at least for now. How you can take that and then apply it to the field while ignoring all the evidence to the contrary, I don't know. But it is pretty comical.

Northman
03-26-2009, 06:45 PM
It's this: You're going to entrust the Bears' offense to a guy who, at the first indication of "adversity," basically quits on his team?

There is something to be said here but im sure its been said one thousand nine hundred and ninety nine times.

Dagmar
03-26-2009, 06:45 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

So anyone that sides with McDaniels now, is not allowed to enjoy Cutlers success? A couple of weeks ago I believed the situation was irreparable, but now it seems like things may get fixed. I read Popps post's too and don't see him as a Cutler hater, just someone who is tired of all the bull "Mc -insert expletive here-" posts about our new coach.

I hope McDaniels wins a SB with Cutler then we can say you were both right/wrong and you can stop :deadhorse :TJnPopps: ZZZ...

Meck77
03-26-2009, 06:47 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

I can't wait until the day McDaniels wins a Superbowl for us, and Taco plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Same goes for the Gutless drunk!;D

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 06:47 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

And he will! What are you doing, Popps? Scouring the Internet for quotes that agree with your position and then breathlessly starting new threads on it? ;D

I can't see how longtime Broncos fans are so eager to side with this child - this newcomer - who's never been a head coach on any level, much less in a front office position of authority. I'm with Herm Edwards and Merril Hoge - the onus is on the new guy to straighten things out.

At this point I'm just hoping this kid coordinator can make it to his first training camp with our best player still on the roster. THAT'S my measuring stick for him now.

Inkana7
03-26-2009, 06:49 PM
And he will! What are you doing, Popps? Scouring the Internet for quotes that agree with your position and then breathlessly starting new threads on it? ;D

I can't see how longtime Broncos fans are so eager to side with this child - this newcomer - who's never been a head coach on any level, much less in a front office position of authority. I'm with Herm Edwards and Merril Hoge - the onus is on the new guy to straighten things out.

At this point I'm just hoping this kid coordinator can make it to his first training camp with our best player still on the roster. THAT'S my measuring stick for him now.

Champ will be on the team for the foreseeable future.

Northman
03-26-2009, 06:50 PM
And he will! What are you doing, Popps? Scouring the Internet for quotes that agree with your position and then breathlessly starting new threads on it? ;D

I can't see how longtime Broncos fans are so eager to side with this child - this newcomer - who's never been a head coach on any level, much less in a front office position of authority. I'm with Herm Edwards and Merril Hoge - the onus is on the new guy to straighten things out.

At this point I'm just hoping this kid coordinator can make it to his first training camp with our best player still on the roster. THAT'S my measuring stick for him now.

I dont see it as siding at all. I see it as disliking a certain childlike behavior coming from the "leader" of this team. And the fact that the rest of the league has concerns about that only amplifies the situation at hand. Hopefully, Jay can get over his insecurities and McD can have the balls to entrust his gameplan with the Qb of this team so that all of this becomes irrelevant.

CEH
03-26-2009, 06:52 PM
Adversity? Kyle Orton is a true warrior.
Did Cutler miss a game in '07 playing with undiagnosed diabaetes.
Losing 20+ lbs as thes eason wore on for no explained reason is a cake walk

Look no one knows what makes Jay Cutler tick. He's aloof and rarely talks to the media. The only person I've read or heard who has spoken with Cutler on more than 2 occasions is Peter King of SI and he believes Cutler is a good old boy with principles and being lied to early on hit him hard.

You can listen to Peter King's inteview on 1043thefan for those interested
They normally put up all interviews. It was rather informative

Seems like things are simmering down and cooler heads will prevail.
Maybe we can get back to the reason for the season the draft

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 06:53 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

So you are saying you think McD is going to lead this team with Cutler to a Superbowl! Man you have come around from the gutless stance! :kiss: :angel:

Killericon
03-26-2009, 06:55 PM
I dont see it as siding at all. I see it as disliking a certain childlike behavior coming from the "leader" of this team. And the fact that the rest of the league has concerns about that only amplifies the situation at hand. Hopefully, Jay can get over his insecurities and McD can have the balls to entrust his gameplan with the Qb of this team so that all of this becomes irrelevant.

Exactly. I don't have to side with either of them. I like both of them, I have hopes for both of them, and I disapprove of both of their behaviour up until this point(Though, I admit I disapprove of Cutler's attitude more). Liking McDaniels doesn't mean hating Cutler, and vice versa. I want nothing more than for McDaniels and Cutler to get along and win many Lombardis together(Well, I might actually like it more if McDaniels was fired and Shanny was brought back, but that's another story).

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 06:57 PM
So you are saying you think McD is going to lead this team with Cutler to a Superbowl! Man you have come around from the gutless stance! :kiss: :angel:

Touche ... but check this: I'll bet that if Jay survives this whole fiasco and comes in, that he will still be a Bronco after Josh is gone.


That oughtta get some chatter going ....
.

DBroncos4life
03-26-2009, 07:03 PM
Darn I wish these people would stop writing such bad things about Jay don't they know they are hurting Jay's trade value.

rugbythug
03-26-2009, 07:04 PM
Haha, you have three years of tape on the kid, he doesn't quit. He said he is going to show up for mini camps.


Make sure you throw out the Tape of the Patriots Game, And 3 of the 4 Chargers Games. He did quit in those games.

Killericon
03-26-2009, 07:06 PM
Touche ... but check this: I'll bet that if Jay survives this whole fiasco and comes in, that he will still be a Bronco after Josh is gone.


That oughtta get some chatter going ....
.

Josh will be gone? Dude, by the time Josh is ready to retire, we'll have developed some sort of anti-aging medicine. HEAD COACH FOR ETERNITY!

DBroncos4life
03-26-2009, 07:06 PM
It just sucks that the Vikes don't want to swap T. Jackson and the Bears don't want to send us Orton. Crap it looks like we will HAVE to start yet another year with Jay Cutler. **** the media and there reports, they are just stopping us from getting a true franchise QB from another team.

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 07:08 PM
How will Cutler react when a teammate drops a pass? How will he react when he feels an official made a bad call? How will he react to public criticism?

Not well, would be the guess here.

BZZZZZZZZZ! Awww. Sorry, wrong guess!

Thanks for playing ... we have a few parting gifts for you, a Kyle Orton jersey and another 5-win season!
,

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 07:09 PM
Touche ... but check this: I'll bet that if Jay survives this whole fiasco and comes in, that he will still be a Bronco after Josh is gone.


That oughtta get some chatter going ....
.

Not when the owner is ready to ship him out and is in full support of the coach. Cutler will always have a black mark in Bowlens eye until McD gets him to the SB and they win. But he pissed the coach off something fierce.

So while I get your point its lacking argument. Your witness, council. :)

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 07:16 PM
Not when the owner is ready to ship him out and is in full support of the coach. Cutler will always have a black mark in Bowlens eye until McD gets him to the SB and they win. But he pissed the coach off something fierce.

So while I get your point its lacking argument. Your witness, council. :)

Well, in 1991 Bowlen was nearly ready to ship Elway out ... and Reeves was gone, what ... two years later?

You never know.

I'm sticking by this ... if these two make up and Cutler comes back, then he will still be a Bronco after Josh is gone, whenever that is.
.

DBroncos4life
03-26-2009, 07:22 PM
Not when the owner is ready to ship him out and is in full support of the coach. Cutler will always have a black mark in Bowlens eye until McD gets him to the SB and they win. But he pissed the coach off something fierce.

So while I get your point its lacking argument. Your witness, council. :)

I'm not a owner of a team but I would like to see my rookie HC win a game in the NFL as a HC before I start thinking he can't be replaced. I'm sure McD has to prove his worth to Bowlen as well and I hope he does but just because he hired him I'm sure Bowlen would rather fix things and win instead of letting his team go down if McD does flop.

deputyorange
03-26-2009, 07:33 PM
I'm so sick and tired of people mentioning Cutler's record of 17-20 and acting like he's a bum because of it. My God, the defense has been a laughing stock, and the running game went through 38 or so RBs last year.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 07:42 PM
The same mentality said Elway would never win a Superbowl. We didn't have message boards back then, but you can tell by his posting that Popps was probably telling his buddies what a loser Elway was and how much he'd like to see him shipped out of town.

spdirty
03-26-2009, 07:42 PM
So anyone that sides with McDaniels now, is not allowed to enjoy Cutlers success?

Nope...thats the rule. Your either anti cutler or anti mcdipshlt.

Northman
03-26-2009, 07:45 PM
Nope...thats the rule. Your either anti cutler or anti mcdipshlt.

Sadly.

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 07:50 PM
Well, in 1991 Bowlen was nearly ready to ship Elway out ... and Reeves was gone, what ... two years later?

You never know.

I'm sticking by this ... if these two make up and Cutler comes back, then he will still be a Bronco after Josh is gone, whenever that is.
.

Nope Cutlers success will always be tied to McD if they win a SB together because of McD's record with QB's already. Me, I think Cutler is Ryan Leaf v2.0. Except he has more ability in his pinkie but he is a legend in his own mind. Dude needs to get off the sauce and prove he is as good as elway.

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 07:51 PM
Nope...thats the rule. Your either anti cutler or anti mcdipshlt.

I think come sunday during the regular season. Those of us who are disgusted by Cutler and those of us who are disgusted by McD will still root for the Orange and Blue. Its the off season there isn't anything else to talk about and this is a very polarizing subject.

wandlc
03-26-2009, 08:05 PM
Nope Cutlers success will always be tied to McD if they win a SB together because of McD's record with QB's already. Me, I think Cutler is Ryan Leaf v2.0. Except he has more ability in his pinkie but he is a legend in his own mind. Dude needs to get off the sauce and prove he is as good as elway.

And you are Armstrong v2.0?

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 08:06 PM
Nope Cutlers success will always be tied to McD if they win a SB together because of McD's record with QB's already. Me, I think Cutler is Ryan Leaf v2.0. Except he has more ability in his pinkie but he is a legend in his own mind. Dude needs to get off the sauce and prove he is as good as elway.

You're so young, my friend. Sit cross-legged on the floor and I'll fill you in: John had a very serious alcohol problem then, very serious. More than a couple times DPD drove him home drunk. And he supposedly acted out hugely at some Caribbean resort with several young QBs and their families including Ken O'Brien ... supposedly it was pretty bad.

And ... Ryan Leaf 2.0? Really?!
.

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 08:07 PM
Nope I am not. But I know the guy likes his liquor and I know he thinks he should be held in the same regards as Manning, Rivers, and Rothlesberger.

He isn't at their level mentally.

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 08:09 PM
You're so young .... my friend, John had a very serious alcohol problem then, very serious. More than a couple times DPD drove him home drunk.

And ... Ryan Leaf 2.0? Really?!
.

Back then Lodo wasn't a place to be after dark. Cutler owns a loft downtown. So DPD doesn't have to do that.

The way he has acted and pouted yes I worry he is Leaf 2.0.

But if I am wrong, and Lord do I hope I am wrong, I will admit it and take my lumps! :thumbs:

Popps
03-26-2009, 08:11 PM
What can they possibly offer in exchange? Orton? Grossman?

:rofl:

They should have to compensate us for taking either of those guys.

I honestly have my doubts that we'll get real QB compensation in a trade. I just don't see many options out there that I think the staff would go after. I suspect IF anything happens, it's a basket of draft picks and we draft a QB, and go with a Simms/Garcia type QB situation for the rebuilding year.

SportinOne
03-26-2009, 08:12 PM
I love how all of these sour grapes articles are starting to leak out now that it appears Cutler is not for sale.

I stopped reading after he said, "If Kyle Orton pulled this...."

It's simple, Kyle Orton is a run of the mill game manager at best. Chicago has a great defense so they can get away with having him as QB. Ask Chicago how good they were when they had a bad defense and a QB like Orton. 17-20 would have felt like a dream, I bet.

Also, I feel that the reason the Vikings "don't want Cutler" is because they are basically giving the job to Rosenfels but don't want to tell T-Jack that.

BroncoBuff
03-26-2009, 08:14 PM
Nope I am not. But I know the guy likes his liquor and I know he thinks he should be held in the same regards as Manning, Rivers, and Rothlesberger.

He isn't at their level mentally.

I so disagree with you there. Yes, he's an ego-inflated baby. But everything on the field - everything - indicates he has the correct approach and temperament to be an excellent quarterback. He is ice-man out there 99% of the time. What are you watching? You don't remember Elway ... he lined up under guard once, and stayed down after a sack against the Raiders in '83 (we wore the white jerseys at home, DAMN YOU REEVES!) when he wasn't even injured, just frustrated. And he treated Steve Deberg and Reeves and other players like crap ... Deberg forgave him years later, but slightly reluctantly. And he made some very ill-advised comments about Marino's gaudy numbers.

(btw, B-Love was correct in another thread today - Steve Deberg was a pretty good quarterback, and an excellent person, trust me. First hamnd experience there.)

Let's have some perspective here. Jay's overall conduct - with the possible exception of the last three weeks - is far superior to John in his foirst three years.
.

SportinOne
03-26-2009, 08:15 PM
Back then Lodo wasn't a place to be after dark. Cutler owns a loft downtown. So DPD doesn't have to do that.

The way he has acted and pouted yes I worry he is Leaf 2.0.

But if I am wrong, and Lord do I hope I am wrong, I will admit it and take my lumps! :thumbs:

Leaf was different in that he just couldn't handle his anger. Cutler is making a stance (right or wrong) against his new coach. He's not ACTUALLY pouting, or freaking out at reporters. At the very least, he's kept his composure, which is more than Leaf could ever do.

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 08:16 PM
Ok I get your guys point on Ryan Leaf. So I will go with George v2.0 :)

Popps
03-26-2009, 08:16 PM
The same mentality said Elway would never win a Superbowl. We didn't have message boards back then, but you can tell by his posting that Popps was probably telling his buddies what a loser Elway was and how much he'd like to see him shipped out of town.

Taco,

I've heard from multiple people here that you weren't a fan until after the SBs. So, I have no idea what business you have questioning the intentions of a 30-year fan.

I was watching Broncos games before you ever thought of it, and you're well-aware I was an Elway guy from the word go. So, as usual... you've got no substance. You resort to the following..

1. Calling people liars with no basis, then changing your tune when you're called to put your money where your mouth is.

2. Changing your argument 180 degrees when the situation fits, then denying your previous stance.

I have no idea what brought about this most recent little outburst. Perhaps the idea that you're realizing that (as usual)... you've called this situation incorrectly from the beginning, refusing to believe that Cutler's actions would have any effect on his perceived value around the league.

Now, multiple stories are coming from multiple places stating the obvious... that his behavior IS indeed affecting his value.

So, of all people to be questioning anyone's fanhood, you're the last... the 97-bandwagon fan who routinely appears to be happier when we're losing and upset when we're winning.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 08:21 PM
I've heard from multiple people here that you weren't a fan until after the SBs. So, I have no idea what business you have questioning the intentions of a 30-year fan.

Yeah, it's been relayed to me that Meck is spreading that lie. He's spread quite a few tall tales about me that have found their way back to me. Yet you don't catch me gossiping about him to others. I don't need to talk about him to anybody else because I don't care what he does. I don't need your or his validation to know how long I've been a Broncos fan. A Broncos pennant hung above my crib. I wouldn't know life without them.

Now come on... Admit it. You were one of the guys who were trying to run Elway out of town back in the day for doing the same things that Cutler is doing now. Admit it.

lex
03-26-2009, 08:21 PM
I love how all of these sour grapes articles are starting to leak out now that it appears Cutler is not for sale.

I stopped reading after he said, "If Kyle Orton pulled this...."

It's simple, Kyle Orton is a run of the mill game manager at best. Chicago has a great defense so they can get away with having him as QB. Ask Chicago how good they were when they had a bad defense and a QB like Orton. 17-20 would have felt like a dream, I bet.

Also, I feel that the reason the Vikings "don't want Cutler" is because they are basically giving the job to Rosenfels but don't want to tell T-Jack that.

I had the same reaction. Any comparisons between Orton and Cutler should be followed by pointing out that Orton is not Cutler. Just so everyone knows, Sid Luckman still holds several passing records for the Bears. FYI, this is picture of Sid Luckman:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v359/lexlucid/200px-Sidluckman.jpg

So, with that in mind it should be obvious why Chicago would be interested in a guy like Cutler.

Rock Chalk
03-26-2009, 08:27 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Whats the problem Taco? You post every single pro-cutler article out there on the net regardless of who it is from.

Scared of a little dissenting opinion on Jesus?

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 08:30 PM
Whats the problem Taco? You post every single pro-cutler article out there on the net regardless of who it is from.

Scared of a little dissenting opinion on Jesus?

But he's not biases, mind you.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 08:31 PM
Whats the problem Taco? You post every single pro-cutler article out there on the net regardless of who it is from.

Scared of a little dissenting opinion on Jesus?


Not scared at all. I think it's great. I've been counting the days until you have to eat your crow. I think it's fantastic that there are so many who are willing to claim a share of it. We're going to need a shovel to feed you guys all the crow. And the best part is, you're going to have to be force fed!

theAPAOps5
03-26-2009, 08:33 PM
Oh there will be a ton of crow coming the I hate anyone but shanahan crew too. Not shovels but front end loader fulls. I mean if we are going to be making outrageous claims lets have both sides!

Rock Chalk
03-26-2009, 08:33 PM
Not scared at all. I think it's great. I've been counting the days until you have to eat your crow. I think it's fantastic that there are so many who are willing to claim a share of it. We're going to need a shovel to feed you guys all the crow. And the best part is, you're going to have to be force fed!

The difference between us Taco, I will actually eat my crow AND I certainly hope I do. Odds are good though I wont.

I wont stand behind my stance until long after everyone has realized they were in error like you did with Griese.

FOUR YEARS after he left.

Tool.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 08:35 PM
The difference between us Taco, I will actually eat my crow.

I wont stand behind my stance until long after everyone has realized they were in error like you did with Griese.

FOUR YEARS after he left.

Tool.



I wasn't wrong about Griese. He would have made a damn fine back-up to Plummer, and the money we would have saved on dead cap money from cutting him would have gone a long ways towards keeping guys like Bertrand Berry and Trevor Pryce around.

It's like six years after he left, and I'm still right about that.

Popps
03-26-2009, 08:53 PM
Yeah, it's been relayed to me that Meck is spreading that lie. He's spread quite a few tall tales about me that have found their way back to me. Yet you don't catch me gossiping about him to others. I don't need to talk about him to anybody else because I don't care what he does. I don't need your or his validation to know how long I've been a Broncos fan. A Broncos pennant hung above my crib. I wouldn't know life without them.

Now come on... Admit it. You were one of the guys who were trying to run Elway out of town back in the day for doing the same things that Cutler is doing now. Admit it.

Look, clown... I know you're embarrassed about your long string of goofy-ass takes around here, but don't take it out on me because someone wrote an article that once again points out some simple truths that you missed.

As for "validation," you're the one that got cute. Check the thread, genius. I didn't bring up your name. You decided to stick your foot in your mouth and call me out by name for no apparent reason.

I didn't question your fandom, you're the dolt that for some reason found it necessary to question mine, a 30 year fan who wasn't even born in Denver.

... and you know better than to question my loyalty to Elway. I defended that guy back in the days when people referred to him as a "choker," because he hadn't won a SB. (Despite carrying teams there.)

Beyond that, why the **** are you bringing a football legend's name up in a conversation about a guy who's never had a winning season and is too busy pouting to attend team functions?

No serious fan would compare Cutler to Elway at this stage. So, you want to question fandom?

Start there.

Popps
03-26-2009, 08:54 PM
The difference between us Taco, I will actually eat my crow AND I certainly hope I do. Odds are good though I wont.

I wont stand behind my stance until long after everyone has realized they were in error like you did with Griese.

FOUR YEARS after he left.

Tool.

Look, man... he's changed his stance so many times on his Griese obsession, there's no telling what he'll come up with, now. But, let's check the archives.... oh wait, never mind....

Rock Chalk
03-26-2009, 08:55 PM
I wasn't wrong about Griese. He would have made a damn fine back-up to Plummer, and the money we would have saved on dead cap money from cutting him would have gone a long ways towards keeping guys like Bertrand Berry and Trevor Pryce around.

It's like six years after he left, and I'm still right about that.

STILL!?!??!!

Hahahahahahahahahahha.

Popps
03-26-2009, 08:56 PM
Whats the problem Taco? You post every single pro-cutler article out there on the net regardless of who it is from.

Scared of a little dissenting opinion on Jesus?

Hey, at least this wasn't sent to the Butt yet like my Gutless Cutler joke-thread.

Meck77
03-26-2009, 08:58 PM
Lie? It's called an opinion. Must have struck a nerve...lol

The way I see it any long time fan would have found his way to a Bronco game before 2005 is all.

What I care about is the Broncos winning.....Not being "right".

You can dig your seahawk hat back out once Gutless destroys the team!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh no! Shanny is gone! It's the end of the world! Hilarious!

This site has truly become "Taco's Takes". Thousands of Broncos fans on the site. Everybody's opinion has the same weight around here. Just another opinion. Some just go out of there way harder than others for some reason.

Rock Chalk
03-26-2009, 08:58 PM
For what its worth, Cutlers reaction and alcoholism does qualify him for a Gutless drunk thread.

Dr. Broncenstein
03-26-2009, 09:01 PM
:rofl:

They should have to compensate us for taking either of those guys.

I honestly have my doubts that we'll get real QB compensation in a trade. I just don't see many options out there that I think the staff would go after. I suspect IF anything happens, it's a basket of draft picks and we draft a QB, and go with a Simms/Garcia type QB situation for the rebuilding year.

This is why Cutler won't be traded. There will be no time for McDaniles to "rebuild" should he move Cutler. If any trade happens, an established quarterback who can win now has to be part of the conpensation... plus multiple draft picks. If McDaniels trades Cutler and has anything short of immediate and sustained postseason success... he is a goner. IMO the Browns are the only team who can realistically make a move for Cutler... and it would have to be rediculously weighted in our favor to make that happen.

Dagmar
03-26-2009, 09:02 PM
Are you guys...

Taco, can't you admit that Cutler has not acted as professionally as he could have? That he has been a bit childish?

Popps, can't you admit that Josh is a rookie head coach who could have handled this situation better?


Why does everything have to be so ****ing black and white to you guys?

Rock Chalk
03-26-2009, 09:05 PM
Are you guys...

Taco, can't you admit that Cutler has not acted as professionally as he could have? That he has been a bit childish?

Popps, can't you admit that Josh is a rookie head coach who could have handled this situation better?


Why does everything have to be so ****ing black and white to you guys?

Dude, its America. EVERYTHING is black and white. Dont you get it yet? We dont wear plaid skirts here :)

Popps
03-26-2009, 09:27 PM
Are you guys...

Taco, can't you admit that Cutler has not acted as professionally as he could have? That he has been a bit childish?

Popps, can't you admit that Josh is a rookie head coach who could have handled this situation better?


Why does everything have to be so ****ing black and white to you guys?

The thing is, I'm open to suggestions as to how he could have handled it better. But, I just don't see what was in his control? The rumor was leaked. If he could have stopped THAT somehow, yes... he should have done so. But, once the cat was out of the bag, he made it clear to Cutler that he wasn't trading him and wanted him as the starter.

Honestly, if you have a scenario, I'm open to criticizing McDaniels on his handling of the situation. But, given Cutler's extreme overreaction to the news, and subsequent media-pouting... I'm just not sure what other choice he had that would have allowed him to keep the respect of his team. (Cowering to a whining player is not something ANY coach does.)

Did he make a mistake in the negotiations somewhere? Sure, perhaps. But, I've just yet to see a definitive PROVEN timeline that showed where he made said mistake, and what the alternative would have been.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 09:33 PM
Lie? It's called an opinion. Must have struck a nerve...lol

The way I see it any long time fan would have found his way to a Bronco game before 2005 is all.

What I care about is the Broncos winning.....Not being "right".

You can dig your seahawk hat out if the Broncos have a couple tough seasons. Ha!


Struck a nerve? Sneaking around telling people that I wasn't a Broncos fan until after they won the Superbowls after the blood, sweat and tears I went through with this team? Ha ha! Why would that strike a nerve? Everybody loves to hear that sort of thing get back to them.

And that's not all I've heard either. I've heard the stuff you say about me man. You talk to a lot of people thinking that if you open up to them, they'll buy into it. Some of them probably do. Not all of them though. Some people want to come to the source to find out if it's true. But it's no skin off my back. Say what you want about me. After all these years of knowing that stuff, I leave the door open for you out of a misguided sense of respect. Why, I don't know.

And for the record, my first Broncos game wasn't in 2005. It was in 1996 with my Dad at the Old Mile High Stadium, when Elam tied the record. It was one of the most memorable days of my life.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 09:34 PM
Are you guys...

Taco, can't you admit that Cutler has not acted as professionally as he could have? That he has been a bit childish?

What do you mean I can't admit it? Go back through my posts. I've been saying that the whole time. He could have acted a ton more professionally.

Atlas
03-26-2009, 09:56 PM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Superbowl? What did McFailure get fired?

Popps
03-26-2009, 10:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Superbowl? What did McFailure get fired?

Taco...


One of the many differences between us is that I don't root for my team to fail to prove a point. Your open complaining during the successful years we had with Plummer at QB was pretty telling. Didn't matter how we won, you had something to complain about. I wonder what you would have complained about if we won two more games in 05? I'm sure you would have found something. It wasn't Griese, so you would have found some dark lining in a Broncos Superbowl.

I rooted my ass for for Griese. I'm rooting my ass off for Cutler if he comes back.

I didn't think Griese was a starting NFL QB. (Turns out, he's not.) I think Cutler has a long way to go towards being a team-leader and a championship QB. (Turns out, that's also looking like a decent call right about now.)

So, your efforts to put some sort of "us against them" divide here is typical of your style. You're not really intuitive enough to see that someone can take issue with a player's behavior or style, and still root for them.

To you, it's.... "duhhhrrrr... if Jay win Superbowl, then Popps stupid cause Popps hate Jay."

I don't hate Jay. I don't like him as a person, but I believe he's capable of winning a SB and definitely hope he does, as long as it's in Denver.

Taco John
03-26-2009, 11:04 PM
One of the many differences between us is that I don't root for my team to fail to prove a point.


That's not a difference between us. When you start a post with a fallacy, the rest of your post is pretty much irrelevant.

Blart
03-27-2009, 03:22 AM
My first game was 1992 home game vs Chiefs. I was 12 and loving it, I couldn't believe I was actually seeing all my favorite players in front of me, even though they were losing. Until the 4th quarter that is, when Elway threw a TD to Mark and then another TD to Vance, Broncos win 20 to 19.

BroncoInSkinland
03-27-2009, 05:46 AM
This aside, rumors are surfacing in Chicago that they're stepping up their interest in a trade...
http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/huddleup/2009/03/denver-broncos-quarterback-jay-cutler-reportedly-on-bears-radar.html

When your cited sources end saying that despite the other issues trades are still being considered, it kinda shoots a hole in your Jay Cutler sucks theory. While you have been giving lip service to the "he hurt his trade value" line, three or four new posts a day on the subject lead me to believe you are as inexplicably interested in shopping our pro-bowl QB as much as that lieing, inexperienced, coffee fetching Patriot who unfortunately is our head coach. Reading between the lines I see a reporter with an op-ed who doesn't know a damn thing, and a Chicago front office trying to keep the drool off thier chin from the prospect, at least in front of the media.

Other thoughts -

I read Popps post's too and don't see him as a Cutler hater, just someone who is tired of all the bull "Mc -insert expletive here-" posts about our new coach.

25-30 new Popps threads ago on the subject I would have agreed with you. Now, with the drunk Cutler thread (which I don't think should have been moved), and all the others, well it feels like Popps may be reaching a bit to prove a point. This is a normal tactic for him, I am used to it.

I'm so sick and tired of people mentioning Cutler's record of 17-20 and acting like he's a bum because of it. My God, the defense has been a laughing stock, and the running game went through 38 or so RBs last year.

Lets suspend the 100 post rule for this guy. Couldn't be worse than "Cutler is a gutless drunk" could it?

The same mentality said Elway would never win a Superbowl. We didn't have message boards back then, but you can tell by his posting that Popps was probably telling his buddies what a loser Elway was and how much he'd like to see him shipped out of town.

Hey Taco, for once you are right, you don't need to resort to unproveable arguments about something that happened before this board existed. Stick to Cutler and stay away from Elway. I figured I would help you out, I know you aren't used to being on the right side of an arguement.

I think come sunday during the regular season. Those of us who are disgusted by Cutler and those of us who are disgusted by McD will still root for the Orange and Blue. Its the off season there isn't anything else to talk about and this is a very polarizing subject.

Theres a lot of stupidity going on right now, but anyone that doubts this statement is truely a moron. Somehow I don't think anyone surfing a Broncos blog at the end of March is gonna be wearing Silver and Black in September. So can we all just stop with the you aren't a true fan shots?

1. Calling people liars with no basis, then changing your tune when you're called to put your money where your mouth is.

2. Changing your argument 180 degrees when the situation fits, then denying your previous stance.

1. Heard it before, on every single other thread, we get it.

2. See above.

But he's not biases, mind you.

He never claimed to not be biased Apa. He may run the forum (and thanks again for that BTW TJ) but that doesn't mean he isn't entitled to an opinion.

But, let's check the archives.... oh wait, never mind....

3. See above X2 (and this hackneyed complaint has been going on since before I joined the board). So records were deleted five years ago, or however long its been, move on already.

Lie? It's called an opinion. Must have struck a nerve...lol

The way I see it any long time fan would have found his way to a Bronco game before 2005 is all.

What I care about is the Broncos winning.....Not being "right".

You can dig your seahawk hat back out once Gutless destroys the team!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh no! Shanny is gone! It's the end of the world! Hilarious!

This site has truly become "Taco's Takes". Thousands of Broncos fans on the site. Everybody's opinion has the same weight around here. Just another opinion. Some just go out of there way harder than others for some reason.

Wow personal opinion on private drama. Lets see if I can summon up the will to care about this. Oh there it is, Popps drunk Cutler thread aside, TJ has not stopped a single person from stating thier opinion. Incidentally thats why I was so against moving Cutler is drunk to the Butt. It was a useless, biased, and unsubstantiated thread, but moving it removed TJ from the moral high ground here.

The thing is, I'm open to suggestions as to how he could have handled it better. But, I just don't see what was in his control? The rumor was leaked. If he could have stopped THAT somehow, yes... he should have done so. But, once the cat was out of the bag, he made it clear to Cutler that he wasn't trading him and wanted him as the starter.

Honestly, if you have a scenario, I'm open to criticizing McDaniels on his handling of the situation. But, given Cutler's extreme overreaction to the news, and subsequent media-pouting... I'm just not sure what other choice he had that would have allowed him to keep the respect of his team. (Cowering to a whining player is not something ANY coach does.)

Did he make a mistake in the negotiations somewhere? Sure, perhaps. But, I've just yet to see a definitive PROVEN timeline that showed where he made said mistake, and what the alternative would have been.

He could have ignore the prospect of trading our Pro-bowl Quarterback for a one year wonder career back-up. Failing in that, he could have told Jay on day one BEFORE the press leaked the story that he had been approached about Cassle, and that either he didn't consider it, or that he did consider it but only because he was comfortable with Cassle and wanted to utilize his knowledge of the offensive scheme. If he is going to make big boy moves like considering trading a pro-bowl quarterback, the least he could do is be honest and forthright about it, at least with the players. Lack of judgement, inability to evaluate talent at the QB position, dishonesty, inablity to conclude a deal he wanted, and horrible PR skills. Great first impression for the new coach. He is gonna hafta work his ass off to establish trust now, with the players, and with the fan base, at least this member of the fan base.

Hopefully, Jay can get over his insecurities and McD can have the balls to entrust his gameplan with the Qb of this team so that all of this becomes irrelevant.

If this were post #2 on every McJay gate thread, followed by promptly locking the thread, we would accomplish just as much as we are currently, and save ourselves a lot of wasted time. Northman gets the rep.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 06:28 AM
What can they possibly offer in exchange? Orton? Grossman?

Hester would get my interest.

Beantown Bronco
03-27-2009, 06:32 AM
Dude, its America. EVERYTHING is black and white. Dont you get it yet? We dont wear plaid skirts here :)

Apparently, you've never met DomCasual.

Tombstone RJ
03-27-2009, 08:22 AM
Stupid article by a Chicago reporter who is in bed with Orton. Again, the Bears have not had a great QB since the last ice age. They don't know what a great QB is. They have one SB win and two SB appearances in the last 40+ years. Wow, good for them. Fact is, they have their stars on defense and they are happy with that.

lex
03-27-2009, 08:33 AM
Stupid article by a Chicago reporter who is in bed with Orton. Again, the Bears have not had a great QB since the last ice age. They don't know what a great QB is. They have one SB win and two SB appearances in the last 40+ years. Wow, good for them. Fact is, they have their stars on defense and they are happy with that.


No, theres no "they". Im sure if they got Cutler many here would be thrilled. There are a lot of people who want the Bears FO to make the move to bring in someone like this. There are many who remember losing so many times to the Packers because they had Favre and the Bears had someone like Cade McNown. But then you also have guys like this writer who dont know any better because theyve never known what its like to have a stud at QB. And so they create this values system as a coping mechanism that requires them to say, Cutler is a diva.

You can kind of see where the anti diva sentiment comes from when you look at this quote:

Coach Mike Ditka started the week off by telling the press that "In life, there are teams called Smith, and teams called "Grabowski"....We're Grabowskis!" The term became a rallying cry for the Bears, who were proud of their blue-collar image in a blue-collar city.

http://www.bearshistory.com/seasons/1985chicagobears.aspx

Smiling Assassin27
03-27-2009, 08:36 AM
Bears fans would roll in their own feces for 'the player'.

Beantown Bronco
03-27-2009, 08:39 AM
I love the way Cutler quit in the Cleveland game.

lex
03-27-2009, 08:43 AM
I love the way Cutler quit in the Cleveland game.

...or the Buffalo game in 2006...or the San Diego game.

Tombstone RJ
03-27-2009, 08:43 AM
No, theres no "they". Im sure if they got Cutler many here would be thrilled. There are a lot of people who want the Bears FO to make the move to bring in someone like this. There are many who remember losing so many times to the Packers because they had Favre and the Bears had someone like Cade McNown. But then you also have guys like this writer who dont know any better because theyve never known what its like to have a stud at QB. And so they create this values system as a coping mechanism that requires them to say, Cutler is a diva.

You can kind of see where the anti diva sentiment comes from when you look at this quote:



http://www.bearshistory.com/seasons/1985chicagobears.aspx

I have much respect for the blue collar mentality of teams like the Bears, Packers, Steelers and Browns. Denver used to be a blue collar town too, and the Broncos understood that when they had Mile High Stadium. So, to say the Bears don't want a diva a QB is understood.

I'm betting the diva image would be forgiven by alot of Bears fans if they had an all-pro QB who took the team to the post season.

Circle Orange
03-27-2009, 08:44 AM
Chicago is a joke of a franchise when it comes to developing quarterbacks. They want to blame the drafts, but honestly, their obsession with DEFENSE WINNING CHAMPIONSHIPS trumps all common sense. Meanwhile, the NFL moves on while they 'pop up' every twenty years or so. Chi town has the most negative, bush league, name calling excuses for sportswriters you ever heard of. And unprofessional beyond belief. They actually call the players names in articles. If Cutler were there we'd be reading references about his looks as much as his performance on the field.

Trifling Chicago. Enjoy your pain.

lex
03-27-2009, 08:52 AM
I have much respect for the blue collar mentality of teams like the Bears, Packers, Steelers and Browns. Denver used to be a blue collar town too, and the Broncos understood that when they had Mile High Stadium. So, to say the Bears don't want a diva a QB is understood.

I'm betting the diva image would be forgiven by alot of Bears fans if they had an all-pro QB who took the team to the post season.

Its probably worth pointing out that many seem ok with the fact that Brian Urlacher has shown signs of being a diva by holding out...and this was even when he wasnt playing on his rookie contract mind you. Maybe the writer should be calling for the Bears to ship Urlacher out of town? He doesnt because Urlacher is one of theirs and apparently its more ok when Brian Urlacher does it even though he's shown signs of breaking down. Actually, though, I think a lot of fans acknowledge that the business part of it is a two way street and arent overly bitter towards players for treating it like a business when they go for more money. But then you have the holdovers from the Ditka era that hold to the fatheaded, old-school way of thinking.

lex
03-27-2009, 08:56 AM
Chicago is a joke of a franchise when it comes to developing quarterbacks. They want to blame the drafts, but honestly, their obsession with DEFENSE WINNING CHAMPIONSHIPS trumps all common sense. Meanwhile, the NFL moves on while they 'pop up' every twenty years or so. Chi town has the most negative, bush league, name calling excuses for sportswriters you ever heard of. And unprofessional beyond belief. They actually call the players names in articles. If Cutler were there we'd be reading references about his looks as much as his performance on the field.

Trifling Chicago. Enjoy your pain.

I think their preference to defense and running the ball has largely been dictated by the fact that it gets brutally cold here. And the thinking is, why build your team around something thats going to be neutralized by the weather late in the season. Its probably flawed thinking but not completely. Teams that were built like the Giants and Bears have won their share of championships.

Popps
03-27-2009, 09:10 AM
When your cited sources end saying that despite the other issues trades are still being considered, it kinda shoots a hole in your Jay Cutler sucks theory. .

Heres the thing, Skin-man. I never said anything close to "Cutler sucks." That's certainly not "my theory."

You seem smarter then that, but... maybe not.



He could have ignore the prospect of trading our Pro-bowl Quarterback for a one year wonder career back-up. .

Nope.

It's his job to consider any way to make this team better. Cutler didn't deserve the Pro Bowl this year, anyway, so let's be a little more rational when we throw that around.

No one is beyond trading. No player on THIS CURRENT team is so great that you slam down the phone when an offer comes in. You have NO IDEA what the offer entailed, so your theory is build on a faulty foundation. You also have no idea how Cassel's career will pan out. None.

Your opinion does not constitute fact, and hence it doesn't mandate how a coach should or shouldn't behave. Since this came out, a wealth of information is available for you that should tell you not everyone believes Cutler is a sure thing. It should be obvious at this point, people have questions about him, so McDaniels considering options is normal coaching protocol.

Again, your opinion is not the issue here.

Archer81
03-27-2009, 09:12 AM
Now Cutler is a quitter? Hes throwing a fit, but hes never quit on the team or been a negative working with the team. Good thing reporters in Chicago are so attuned to every day in the life of the Broncos quarterback...


:Broncos:

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 09:15 AM
The story of Taco John and Popps (WARNING: contains NSFW Language):

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UfUv5t71_Xo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UfUv5t71_Xo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Circle Orange
03-27-2009, 09:17 AM
I think their preference to defense and running the ball has largely been dictated by the fact that it gets brutally cold here. And the thinking is, why build your team around something thats going to be neutralized by the weather late in the season. Its probably flawed thinking but not completely. Teams that were built like the Giants and Bears have won their share of championships.

It's true, but other cold weather francishes have had more overall success with a balance of offense and good defense. The bears are perpetually lost in history because they value their image more than the qb position. You can't be successful acting like the quarterback is a hinderance more than an asset. Most teams exaggerate the qb. The bears are the other extreme. One of the biggest myths out there is that you can't throw in weather. the biggest thing is wind, you can throw in rain and snow.

Popps
03-27-2009, 09:25 AM
The story of Taco John and Popps (WARNING: contains NSFW Language):

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UfUv5t71_Xo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UfUv5t71_Xo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Mr. Show kicks ass.

Tombstone RJ
03-27-2009, 09:29 AM
It's true, but other cold weather francishes have had more overall success with a balance of offense and good defense. The bears are perpetually lost in history because they value their image more than the qb position. You can't be successful acting like the quarterback is a hinderance more than an asset. Most teams exaggerate the qb. The bears are the other extreme. One of the biggest myths out there is that you can't throw in weather. the biggest thing is wind, you can throw in rain and snow.

QFT

It gets damn cold in Green Bay but Favre still threw the ball. That being said, I do like the old school mentality of the Bears, it's a nice cool breeze compared to teams like the Cowboys who have prima donnas all over the place. But, you are correct in that when the old school mentality holds the team back because they are afraid to pursue a great talent like Cutler because he's a perceived diva, well, that's just stupid.

Rigs11
03-27-2009, 09:38 AM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...

Wait.. What? You mean when the defense wins a superbowl. I mean that's all we ever hear from you jay cheerleaders is that he is 17-20 because of the defense.

lex
03-27-2009, 09:48 AM
It's true, but other cold weather francishes have had more overall success with a balance of offense and good defense. The bears are perpetually lost in history because they value their image more than the qb position. You can't be successful acting like the quarterback is a hinderance more than an asset. Most teams exaggerate the qb. The bears are the other extreme. One of the biggest myths out there is that you can't throw in weather. the biggest thing is wind, you can throw in rain and snow.

Actually, wind often a factor in Chicago. But, like I said, its flawed thinking. Having a QB, in particular one with a strong arm, helps in such conditions. Its one of the reasons Pennington has done better in Miami than he had done in NY. Its a huge advantage to have an elite QB, especially in the current sissified NFL. But its also equally advantageous to have a stellar defense. The Bears are among the teams who have had success with the latter. Im not saying they shouldnt focus on a QB, especially when one, like Cutler, might be available.

BroncoInSkinland
03-27-2009, 09:53 AM
It's his job to consider any way to make this team better. Cutler didn't deserve the Pro Bowl this year, anyway, so let's be a little more rational when we throw that around.

No one is beyond trading. No player on THIS CURRENT team is so great that you slam down the phone when an offer comes in. You have NO IDEA what the offer entailed, so your theory is build on a faulty foundation. You also have no idea how Cassel's career will pan out. None.

Your opinion does not constitute fact, and hence it doesn't mandate how a coach should or shouldn't behave. Since this came out, a wealth of information is available for you that should tell you not everyone believes Cutler is a sure thing. It should be obvious at this point, people have questions about him, so McDaniels considering options is normal coaching protocol.

Again, your opinion is not the issue here.


I bolded your opinion on the matter, I happen to believe he did deserve the Pro-Bowl this year. At the time the Pro-bowl decision was made, Jay was having a phenomenal year, in spite of a very weak defense. Of course you know how crucial a competent defense is, I seem to rember you arguing for something like that not too long ago. Since we are discussing opinions what is your opinion on whether McDaniels lied to Jay about trying to trade him? Was there no lie? Was the late to the dance quote misrepresented? I ask because if McDaniels lied, it would seem to me that this mess started at his doorstep, and that lying is somewhat of a hinderance to trust in any relationship.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't wait until the day Cutler wins a Superbowl for us, and Popps plays it off like he was riding shotgun all along...



I can't wait until the day McDaniels wins a Superbowl for us and you will pretend you were riding shotgun all along.

Unlike the McD haters like yourself, our position is well reasoned and backed by facts. We're willing to give Jay support as long as he acts like an adult, which thus far he hasn't been.

clint7
03-27-2009, 10:24 AM
And for the record, my first Broncos game wasn't in 2005. It was in 1996 with my Dad at the Old Mile High Stadium, when Elam tied the record. It was one of the most memorable days of my life.

Not to get in the middle of this or anything, but if that game you went to was the game Elam tied the record for the longest field goal, it could not have been 1996 (before SB victory). That game was in 1998 the season after their first SB victory. It was against Jacksonville, October. 25, 1998.

Beantown Bronco
03-27-2009, 10:28 AM
Not to get in the middle of this or anything, but if that game you went to was the game Elam tied the record for the longest field goal, it could not have been 1996 (before SB victory). That game was in 1998 the season after their first SB victory. It was against Jacksonville, October. 25, 1998.

Who are you to question when one of the most memorable days of his life occurred? Hilarious!

lex
03-27-2009, 10:31 AM
I can't wait until the day McDaniels wins a Superbowl for us and you will pretend you were riding shotgun all along.

Unlike the McD haters like yourself, our position is well reasoned and backed by facts. We're willing to give Jay support as long as he acts like an adult, which thus far he hasn't been.

No, your opinion is only backed by self-serving proclamations made by the FO, namely Josh McDaniels. Nothing you refer to as fact has been established as such. Anything that was said by the FO, must be scrutinized and weighed against an incentive to lie. This has been in play for much of what you have commonly referred to as fact.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 10:47 AM
No, your opinion is only backed by self-serving proclamations made by the FO, namely Josh McDaniels. Nothing you refer to as fact has been established as such. Anything that was said by the FO, must be scrutinized and weighed against an incentive to lie. This has been in play for much of what you have commonly referred to as fact.

And the exact same is true of the Cutlerites, yet their stance is based entirely on Cutler's feeling that "He really knows what went on". Why aren't you scrutinizing what Cutler says in his self-serving proclamations.

McDaniels is the coach for the foreseeable future, and as such the leader of this team. Rooting against him is directly rooting against the Broncos, something a true fan would never do.

Rooting for Cutler to get on board with the direction of the franchise is rooting for the Broncos as well. Blindly supporting the player over the franchise makes no sense to me.

Whether Cutler is on this team will have zero impact on how fervently I pull for the Broncos.

Beantown Bronco
03-27-2009, 11:00 AM
And the exact same is true of the Cutlerites, yet their stance is based entirely on Cutler's feeling that "He really knows what went on". Why aren't you scrutinizing what Cutler says in his self-serving proclamations.

For some, I'm sure it probably comes down to Jay's word vs. Josh's word. Jay has been here longer, has bled and sweat for this team, and has earned some deal of trust perhaps. McDaniels is the new kid on the block and perhaps has to earn some folks trust before they simply hand it over....especially given where he comes from. I'm guessing if he came from any other organization NOT known for lying and cheating, things might be different to an extent.

Blindly supporting the player over the franchise makes no sense to me.

Whether Cutler is on this team will have zero impact on how fervently I pull for the Broncos.

Replace player with coach and Cutler with McDaniels and you have the other side of the argument. You don't have to agree with it of course. Just trying to point out how people might be getting there.

lex
03-27-2009, 11:01 AM
And the exact same is true of the Cutlerites, yet their stance is based entirely on Cutler's feeling that "He really knows what went on". Why aren't you scrutinizing what Cutler says in his self-serving proclamations.

McDaniels is the coach for the foreseeable future, and as such the leader of this team. Rooting against him is directly rooting against the Broncos, something a true fan would never do.

Rooting for Cutler to get on board with the direction of the franchise is rooting for the Broncos as well. Blindly supporting the player over the franchise makes no sense to me.

Whether Cutler is on this team will have zero impact on how fervently I pull for the Broncos.

Thats not true. Its based on various reports that refute the claims of the FO, including, in some cases, their own words. But regardless, I was responding to his claim to fact and was making no such claims myself. This detail makes your reply irrelevent and pointless.

Popps
03-27-2009, 11:02 AM
I bolded your opinion on the matter, I happen to believe he did deserve the Pro-Bowl this year.

He threw 7 more TDs than INTs for the season, had a losing record and was outplayed twice by the guy who should have made it in instead of him.

Now, that doesn't mean "he sucks," it's just an observation that I think people throw out this Pro Bowl line like he's a perennial attendee. He made it in this year, he had a fine year... but that's about the extent of it.

Since we are discussing opinions what is your opinion on whether McDaniels lied to Jay about trying to trade him? Was there no lie? Was the late to the dance quote misrepresented? I ask because if McDaniels lied, it would seem to me that this mess started at his doorstep, and that lying is somewhat of a hinderance to trust in any relationship.

What does "lie" to him mean? Do you mean... did he flat out swear on a bible that no discussions were ever had? I've NEVER heard McDaniels say that, ever. He's recognized the discussions from the get-go.

You people are getting so caught up in this "lying" nonsense. It's not Jay's ****ing business. He's a chess piece. He's an employee. He's not a friggin' owner, GM, scout or personnel director. Jay's nose shouldn't be in the ****ing business until a deal is done.

So, no... I don't think anyone flat out "lied" to him. I think Jay is a very immature guy who's never had anyone in life tell him "no." (That's just a guess.) I think he believes he runs the Broncos and should be consulted by Bowlen for his opinion at every turn.

Even if someone did "lie" to him, he's a ****ing grown-up. Things change in the work-place. Things change in life. How old is this guy?

What's your point, anyway? That Jay is allowed to be a full-time douche-bag and pout in his room because he doesn't like one of the cards life dealt him?

**** 'em. He can **** right off, or come be a Bronco... and I'll root my ass off for him. But, I'm tired of this crybaby, "feelings," "someone lied to someone," trivial, 3rd grade bull****.

barryr
03-27-2009, 11:05 AM
He threw 7 more TDs than INTs for the season, had a losing record and was outplayed twice by the guy who should have made it in instead of him.

Now, that doesn't mean "he sucks," it's just an observation that I think people throw out this Pro Bowl line like he's a perennial attendee. He made it in this year, he had a fine year... but that's about the extent of it.



What does "lie" to him mean? Do you mean... did he flat out swear on a bible that no discussions were ever had? I've NEVER heard McDaniels say that, ever. He's recognized the discussions from the get-go.

You people are getting so caught up in this "lying" nonsense. It's not Jay's ****ing business. He's a chess piece. He's an employee. He's not a friggin' owner, GM, scout or personnel director. Jay's nose shouldn't be in the ****ing business until a deal is done.

So, no... I don't think anyone flat out "lied" to him. I think Jay is a very immature guy who's never had anyone in life tell him "no." (That's just a guess.) I think he believes he runs the Broncos and should be consulted by Bowlen for his opinion at every turn.

Even if someone did "lie" to him, he's a ****ing grown-up. Things change in the work-place. Things change in life. How old is this guy?

What's your point, anyway? That Jay is allowed to be a full-time douche-bag and pout in his room because he doesn't like one of the cards life dealt him?

**** 'em. He can **** right off, or come be a Bronco... and I'll root my ass off for him. But, I'm tired of this crybaby, "feelings," "someone lied to someone," trivial, 3rd grade bull****.

Exactly. No proof McDaniels lied about anything to anyone and certainly didn't lie to the fans.

Atlas
03-27-2009, 12:12 PM
Make sure you throw out the Tape of the Patriots Game, And 3 of the 4 Chargers Games. He did quit in those games.


You mean the patriot game where the Pats scored more than 40 points, and the Charger game where they scored over 50 points?!?!

There were players more at fault for those loses than Jay Cutler. I would say Cutler didn't give up, the defense gave up.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 12:14 PM
Thats not true. Its based on various reports that refute the claims of the FO

The only direct quotes on the issue back what the front office has been saying. Belichek's interview pretty much confirmed McD's version of events.

including, in some cases, their own words.

Wrong. The direct quotes from the front office have been consistent.

But regardless, I was responding to his claim to fact and was making no such claims myself. This detail makes your reply irrelevent and pointless.

If Belichek is telling the truth (and there really is not anything for him to gain by lying here), then the front office version of things has been essentially confirmed as accurate. That means there were no lies told, and Cutler is wrong.

Atlas
03-27-2009, 12:17 PM
And for the record, my first Broncos game wasn't in 2005. It was in 1996 with my Dad at the Old Mile High Stadium, when Elam tied the record. It was one of the most memorable days of my life.

Most memorable game in your life but you don't remember that it was in 1998 not 1996?

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 12:17 PM
I can't wait until the day McDaniels wins a Superbowl for us and you will pretend you were riding shotgun all along.

.


Well...he would be riding shotgun if he did it with his predecessor's superstars.

When McDaniels wins us a Super Bowl without Cutler, Clady, Marshall, Scheffler, Harris, Royal and Kuper, he'll be entitled to a great deal of respect.
If he wins it on the backs of those guys, why wouldn't be riding shotgun? He wasn't responsible for drafting them and they all proved they were studs before he got here so he can't say they became players under his tutelage.

He'll be entitled to respect when he earns it.......on his OWN record.

WABronco
03-27-2009, 12:28 PM
And the progression begins...

Popps
03-27-2009, 12:30 PM
Most memorable game in your life but you don't remember that it was in 1998 not 1996?

:rofl:

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 12:30 PM
Well...he would be riding shotgun if he did it with his predecessor's superstars.

When McDaniels wins us a Super Bowl without Cutler, Clady, Marshall, Scheffler, Harris, Royal and Kuper, he'll be entitled to a great deal of respect.
If he wins it on the backs of those guys, why wouldn't be riding shotgun? He wasn't responsible for drafting them and they all proved they were studs before he got here so he can't say they became players under his tutelage.

He'll be entitled to respect when he earns it.......on his OWN record.

Ummm - the same thing could be said about Shanahan "inheriting" John Elway and other key players from the Broncos Super Bowl years. In fact, many anti-Shanahan people claim that Shanahan simply rode Elway's back to a Super Bowl (not that I agree with them).

This post pretty much encapsulates the fact that some people will never, ever, ever give Josh McDaniels a chance. He's inheriting a Defense and Special Teams that are in total disarray. If he fixes them enough to win a Super Bowl while maintaining a powerful offense, he deserves all the credit in the world. Shanahan had a long time to fix the problems with the defense and never got it done. Yes, he's left McDaniels with a talented core on offense. However, that's only 1/3 of the team, which is why Shanahan is now out of a job.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 12:31 PM
Well...he would be riding shotgun if he did it with his predecessor's superstars.

When McDaniels wins us a Super Bowl without Cutler, Clady, Marshall, Scheffler, Harris, Royal and Kuper, he'll be entitled to a great deal of respect.
If he wins it on the backs of those guys, why wouldn't be riding shotgun? He wasn't responsible for drafting them and they all proved they were studs before he got here so he can't say they became players under his tutelage.

He'll be entitled to respect when he earns it.......on his OWN record.

That is ridiculous. I guess he'll get no credit if he fixes the train-wreck defense? Special teams? And that cast of "studs" you mentioned were part of an offense that was 16th in scoring and 8th worse in turnovers. So, yeah, he gets credit if he improves those mediocre results. Man, your statement is just beyond stupid, dude. You have just dug your heels in here. Playing your logic, I guess Shanny gets no credit for his SB wins since Elway, Sharpe, and Zimmerman were "studs" when he came on board.

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 12:33 PM
Ummm - the same thing could be said about Shanahan "inheriting" John Elway and other key players from the Broncos Super Bowl years. In fact, many anti-Shanahan people claim that Shanahan simply rode Elway's back to a Super Bowl (not that I agree with them).
.

Except that Shanahan had a big hand in developing Elway when he was the QB coach and OC in Denver prior to that.

Bad analogy.

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 12:34 PM
That is ridiculous. I guess he'll get no credit if he fixes the train-wreck defense? Special teams? And that cast of "studs" you mentioned were part of an offense that was 16th in scoring and 8th worse in turnovers. So, yeah, he gets credit if he improves those mediocre results. Man, your statement is just beyond stupid, dude. You have just dug your heels in here. Playing your logic, I guess Shanny gets no credit for his SB wins since Elway, Sharpe, and Zimmerman were "studs" when he came on board.

If we win the SB on the basis of a kickass defense than certainly McDaniels would deserve an overwhelming share of the credit. If its powered primarily by the offense, then he wouldn't.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 12:38 PM
If we win the SB on the basis of a kickass defense than certainly McDaniels would deserve an overwhelming share of the credit. If its powered primarily by the offense, then he wouldn't.

The problem with your logic is the fallacious position that we somehow have a "kick-ass" offense. 16th in scoring is literally middle of the pack--i.e. mediocre. 8th worse in turnovers is nothing to hang your hat on either. How could you not give him credit if he improves those results? It's beyond ridiculous.

epicSocialism4tw
03-27-2009, 12:42 PM
The problem with your logic is the fallacious position that we somehow have a "kick-ass" offense. 16th in scoring is literally middle of the pack--i.e. mediocre. 8th worse in turnovers is nothing to hang your hat on either. How could you not give him credit if he improves those results? It's beyond ridiculous.

Leave it to this clown to miss the forest for the trees.

The offense was assembled by Shanahan. All of the key players (and there are many) were drafted or signed by Shanahan...including Clady, Cutler, Marshall, Royal, Kuper, Harris, Hamilton, Wiegmann, Graham, Scheffler, and Peyton Hillis. That's quite a volume of extremely talented players, most of which are youngsters.

The tendancy for excellent young players is for them to develop into excellent veterans. Excellent veterans win games. This offense was primed by Shanahan to become a dominant force. What you saw last season was only the beginning.

Popps
03-27-2009, 12:42 PM
If we win the SB on the basis of a kickass defense than certainly McDaniels would deserve an overwhelming share of the credit. If its powered primarily by the offense, then he wouldn't.

****in' nonsense.

Shanahan's offense was middle of the league in scoring last year. So, if we we win a SB, it'll likely be because of improved performance on both sides of the ball.

If McDaniels wins a SB with the Denver Broncos, it'll be because of what HE did, not what anyone else did. We have a few nice players on offense. Most teams in the league can say that. It makes you average. That's why we were..... well... .average the last three seasons.

Let's not pretend Mike Shanahan left some kind of championship caliber team to McDaniels. He left him a wreck on defense and a middle of the road offense.

Popps
03-27-2009, 12:43 PM
The problem with your logic is the fallacious position that we somehow have a "kick-ass" offense. 16th in scoring is literally middle of the pack--i.e. mediocre. 8th worse in turnovers is nothing to hang your hat on either. How could you not give him credit if he improves those results? It's beyond ridiculous.

Cutler threw for a lot of yards, primarily because we couldn't run the ball early in the season and played from behind quite often.

Big deal. Do people think that's how you win a championship?

epicSocialism4tw
03-27-2009, 12:44 PM
Also...what would give the Bears the right to pass over Cutler? Did they acquire some sort of talent at QB that I missed?

Those fans would fall all over themselves after the first week of watching him play rather than reacting to drama on ESPN.

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 12:45 PM
The problem with your logic is the fallacious position that we somehow have a "kick-ass" offense. 16th in scoring is literally middle of the pack--i.e. mediocre. 8th worse in turnovers is nothing to hang your hat on either. How could you not give him credit if he improves those results? It's beyond ridiculous.

The turnovers were a problem as was the red zone offense, but the individuals are still studs. The offense is still No. 2 overall. It didn't translate to points quite as well as we wanted, but keep in mind that on the goalline, one needs an effective RB and we went through backs like Bob goes through blowup dolls. He has been given an amazing array of pieces to work with (on offense). That goes to apportionment of credit (if the offense is the driving force behind the championship). We don't just go with who is in charge at the time and that's it. That's a very intellectually lazy approach.

If he wins it with substantially his guys, he's entitled to great props. But that's probably not going to be the case. You are asking me to give Dennis Erickson credit for the 1989 national title when all the players were Jimmy Johnson's and I'm not going to do that.

epicSocialism4tw
03-27-2009, 12:45 PM
Cutler threw for a lot of yards, primarily because we couldn't run the ball early in the season and played from behind quite often.

Big deal. Do people think that's how you win a championship?

That's only part of the story.

This offense was built to spread the defense with the passing game, and Shanahan made player acquisitions accordingly.

BroncoBuff
03-27-2009, 12:47 PM
The thing is, I'm open to suggestions as to how he could have handled it better. But, I just don't see what was in his control?

Man you are hard-headed. You "just don't see" what he could have done? You're "open to suggestions"? After everything that's been said and posted to the millionth degree, and still you "just don't see"?! Really?!

You just don't wanna see, cauise it's very, VERY simple. For the umpteenth time: Josh should have called Jay and kept him in the loop that his name was being bandied all over the league in trade talks. Herm Edwards said it was a "rookie mistake" for Josh not to get out ahead of the thing and communicate with Jay. Especially since Jay had just been spening time at the facility working with Josh and learning the offense.

Yes, Jay's being a baby, with a huge ego ... but he heard it on the street, and not from his coach. He has a right to be SOMEWHAT upset/hurt, though he has taken it too far now.

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 12:52 PM
The tendancy for excellent young players is for them to develop into excellent veterans. Excellent veterans win games. This offense was primed by Shanahan to become a dominant force. What you saw last season was only the beginning.

Correct. Those particular players were ALREADY studs. But, now, somehow the suggestion will be made that without McDaniels, none of them would have developed at all past that. Their development into excellent veterans (which could propel the team to great heights) is well within the natural flow of development for those players.

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 12:55 PM
So, you guys basically believe that Shanahan was undoubtedly on a road to a Super Bowl victory with this team? Basically, you could turn the team over to a trained ape, and the Broncos would win a Super Bowl in a year or two. That there's no real work to be done... That Shanahan did not have to "coach well" in order to win it. He didn't have to do a helluva job fixing the defense, etc. Basically, we're on auto-pilot to a Super Bown win?

That makes no sense. Winning a Super Bowl is really, really hard. I suppose I could see what you were saying if we were talking about simply making the playoffs. I think the core is there to make the playoffs in couple years with just an average defense. But getting the team over the hump to a Super Bowl win? I'm sorry, but that takes leadership, great defense, great offense... An all around great team. We don't have that right now, and are a long ways away from that. If we win a Super Bowl, it would absolutely be a testament to Josh McDaniels.

epicSocialism4tw
03-27-2009, 12:58 PM
Correct. Those particular players were ALREADY studs. But, now, somehow the suggestion will be made that without McDaniels, none of them would have developed at all past that. Their development into excellent veterans (which could propel the team to great heights) is well within the natural flow of development for those players.

Clady and Cutler are already outstanding players...all pros. Particularly Clady who may be the top LT in the game.
Ryan Harris is also already a top 5 RT.

Marshall is a top-5 player when healthy (and off of suspension).

Royal is the type of explosive WR that ends up with a solid career...and already carries a leadership personality to boot.

Kuper had an excellent year.

Hillis showed promise.

Even players like Polumbus and Liechensteiger found ways to get on the field.

This team is absolutely STACKED with offensive talent, and McD made a huge mistake in upsetting the chemistry that was already incubating there. All this McDoofus had to do was to show up and water the already thriving sapling coming up from the ground while finding some way to address the defense.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 01:05 PM
Correct. Those particular players were ALREADY studs. But, now, somehow the suggestion will be made that without McDaniels, none of them would have developed at all past that. Their development into excellent veterans (which could propel the team to great heights) is well within the natural flow of development for those players.

Little problem with your Miami comparison. Johnson left Miami of his own accord, leaving behind a team that was ALREADY a national championship contender. Shanahan is leaving behind an 8-8 squad with an absolute mess of a defense and ST. And the offense may have a lot of talent, but they have NOT played up to their talent level yet. McDaniels offensive system and coaching will have a lot to do (positive or negative) with how that talent develops. You may not give him credit if he wins a SB, but you will be in a circle of inanity with only a few other hardliners. People with a more reasoned view will quite correctly give him his due credit (if he's successful).

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 01:05 PM
So, you guys basically believe that Shanahan was undoubtedly on a road to a Super Bowl victory with this team? .

No, the proposition being advanced is not that extreme, but leave it to you to set up a straw man to knock down. What is being advanced is this: Shanahan worked hard to amass an impressive array of big time talent on offense. As McSkillet noted, some of these guys are already Pro Bowl talents and at least one of them is an All Pro talent. None of these guys have scratched the surface. It is well within the natural flow and progression of their careers to become much greater and that natural flow and progression would help to take the team to higher heights. It strains even the outer boundaries of credulity to suggest that they would somehow become stalled in their development under Shanahan but not McDaniels, when Shanahan's credentials on offense far exceed McDaniels. Thier expected progression into even better players (players capable of propelling a team into the SB) is not dependent on McDaniels, and as such, if these particular players are the main engine behind an eventual SB run, McDaniels does not deserve the lion's share of the credit.

This is kind of like the Penguins. When we got Crosby and Malkin, the first year they were together, they only went to the first round and got humiliated there (not a whole lot different than the Broncos of this year). You are looking at a snapshot in time, the initial seasons of these super talents. But their natural progression helped take the team to great heights and it was almost solely due to their natural progression.

WABronco
03-27-2009, 01:05 PM
Damn, do these guys even need a coach?

cousinal11
03-27-2009, 01:16 PM
"The only direct quotes on the issue back what the front office has been saying. Belichek's interview pretty much confirmed McD's version of events."



That's funny.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 01:18 PM
"The only direct quotes on the issue back what the front office has been saying. Belichek's interview pretty much confirmed McD's version of events."



That's funny.

Funny or not, it's the truth.

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 01:31 PM
No, the proposition being advanced is not that extreme, but leave it to you to set up a straw man to knock down. What is being advanced is this: Shanahan worked hard to amass an impressive array of big time talent on offense. As McSkillet noted, some of these guys are already Pro Bowl talents and at least one of them is an All Pro talent. None of these guys have scratched the surface. It is well within the natural flow and progression of their careers to become much greater and that natural flow and progression would help to take the team to higher heights. It strains even the outer boundaries of credulity to suggest that they would somehow become stalled in their development under Shanahan but not McDaniels, when Shanahan's credentials on offense far exceed McDaniels. Thier expected progression into even better players (players capable of propelling a team into the SB) is not dependent on McDaniels, and as such, if these particular players are the main engine behind an eventual SB run, McDaniels does not deserve the lion's share of the credit.

Sorry, man... Every team has Pro Bowl talents. Almost every team has All Pros. Not every team wins the Super Bowl.

Furthermore, you are basically saying that only talent matters, not coaching. So, if a team possesses a clear GM/Coach delineation where the GM acquires talent, and the coach coaches the talent, does the coach share no responsibility for success if the GM has done a good job acquiring talent? No - there are numerous examples of teams with great talent not winning Super Bowls. It happens all the time. And, as a reminder, we are talking about 1/3 of a team here. The Broncos are a total disaster on defense and special teams.

Your point is so extreme... That McDaniels would deserve no credit for a Super Bowl victory. It's crazy. Once again - I could understand your point if you were talking about making the playoffs or something. I believe Shanahan would have had this team in the playoffs soon. However, we are talking about winning the Super Bowl.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:31 PM
So, you guys basically believe that Shanahan was undoubtedly on a road to a Super Bowl victory with this team? Basically, you could turn the team over to a trained ape, and the Broncos would win a Super Bowl in a year or two. That there's no real work to be done... That Shanahan did not have to "coach well" in order to win it. He didn't have to do a helluva job fixing the defense, etc. Basically, we're on auto-pilot to a Super Bown win?

That makes no sense. Winning a Super Bowl is really, really hard. I suppose I could see what you were saying if we were talking about simply making the playoffs. I think the core is there to make the playoffs in couple years with just an average defense. But getting the team over the hump to a Super Bowl win? I'm sorry, but that takes leadership, great defense, great offense... An all around great team. We don't have that right now, and are a long ways away from that. If we win a Super Bowl, it would absolutely be a testament to Josh McDaniels.

Youre totally dismissing the amazingly high hit rate of the Goodmans on their draft picks and unsigned FAs. Whoever is coaching this team is benefitting from their handiwerk. Its too bad we sent them packing.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:33 PM
Funny or not, it's the truth.

And when has Belichick ever lied? This was the same interview he did just so he could deny tampering with Peppers. Just look at his injury report to see how truthful he is. LOL.

cousinal11
03-27-2009, 01:35 PM
Funny or not, it's the truth.


The truth according to McDaniels and Belicheat.



Not trying to argue with you, though. It's your right to believe what you want.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:36 PM
Sorry, man... Every team has Pro Bowl talents. Almost every team has All Pros. Not every team wins the Super Bowl.

Furthermore, you are basically saying that only talent matters, not coaching. So, if a team possesses a clear GM/Coach delineation where the GM acquires talent, and the coach coaches the talent, does the coach share no responsibility for success if the GM has done a good job acquiring talent? No - there are numerous examples of teams with great talent not winning Super Bowls. It happens all the time. And, as a reminder, we are talking about 1/3 of a team here. The Broncos are a total disaster on defense and special teams.

Your point is so extreme... That McDaniels would deserve no credit for a Super Bowl victory. It's crazy. Once again - I could understand your point if you were talking about making the playoffs or something. I believe Shanahan would have had this team in the playoffs soon. However, we are talking about winning the Super Bowl.

McDaniels is an offense guy. Whatever improvements on defense, will be largely attributed to Nolan.

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 01:41 PM
McDaniels is an offense guy. Whatever improvements on defense, will be largely attributed to Nolan.

McDaniels hired Nolan. Out of all the DCs available, he picked Mike Nolan. If Nolan is successful, he was given the opportunity by Josh McDaniels. Just like Shanahan hitched his wagon to Bob friggin Slowick (which, in my opinion, is why he needed to go). The head coach ultimately has the responsibility for the team.

I'm not saying Nolan wouldn't deserve a ton of credit for a defensive turnaround. However, the head coach who hired the coach, and built a successful staff shares in that credit, as well.

outdoor_miner
03-27-2009, 01:45 PM
Youre totally dismissing the amazingly high hit rate of the Goodmans on their draft picks and unsigned FAs. Whoever is coaching this team is benefitting from their handiwerk. Its too bad we sent them packing.

I'm not dismissing anything! I agree that the Goodmans did a great job acquiring offensive talent (their ability on defense is still in question). My whole point is that success is shared by the entire organization. If the Broncos won a Superbowl, McDaniels would deserve a ton of credit. The Goodman's and Shanahan would also deserve some credit, as they built a nice base on offense. However, there is a lot more to winning a Super Bowl than possessing some nice talent on offense.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:47 PM
McDaniels hired Nolan. Out of all the DCs available, he picked Mike Nolan. If Nolan is successful, he was given the opportunity by Josh McDaniels. Just like Shanahan hitched his wagon to Bob friggin Slowick (which, in my opinion, is why he needed to go). The head coach ultimately has the responsibility for the team.

I'm not saying Nolan wouldn't deserve a ton of credit for a defensive turnaround. However, the head coach who hired the coach, and built a successful staff shares in that credit, as well.

A lot of people would point out that not having Slowik in and of itself is an upgrade. And whether its Capers or Nolan or whoever. They would get the credit for upgrading the defense. We didnt need McDaniels to improve the defense. There were several options and all of them would have been improvements.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:51 PM
I'm not dismissing anything! I agree that the Goodmans did a great job acquiring offensive talent (their ability on defense is still in question). My whole point is that success is shared by the entire organization. If the Broncos won a Superbowl, McDaniels would deserve a ton of credit. The Goodman's and Shanahan would also deserve some credit, as they built a nice base on offense. However, there is a lot more to winning a Super Bowl than possessing some nice talent on offense.

Not really. They acquired Larsen and Woodyard. I realize Woodyard was a FA but its silly to think that he wasnt on their radar. Dumervile was another mid round find of theirs. A lot of people get caught up in scrutinizing the Moss pick but its also commonly said that he fit a Bates' scheme.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 01:51 PM
And when has Belichick ever lied? This was the same interview he did just so he could deny tampering with Peppers. Just look at his injury report to see how truthful he is. LOL.

And just what would Belichek have to gain by lying on this issue?

SoCalBronco
03-27-2009, 01:54 PM
And just what would Belichek have to gain by lying on this issue?

Probably in the beginning he was kind of laughing over how he was able to help **** a rival up.....but I think by now he probably feels bad for Josh and feels he's rubbed his nose in the dirt enough.

lex
03-27-2009, 01:54 PM
And just what would Belichek have to gain by lying on this issue?

There was a concern out there that Belichick gave Cassel away to Pioli...because remember it was also Vrabel. This is frowned upon because teams are supposed to be distinctly seperate entities and clear of under-the-table, backroom deals. The complaint was that the deal sending to KC was not above board.


http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_football_nfl/2009/03/whats-up-with-bill-belichick-the-nfls-darth-sidious-giving-away-qb-matt-cassel-for-essentially-a-six.html

Read the first couple of posts.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 01:58 PM
Probably in the beginning he was kind of laughing over how he was able to help **** a rival up.....but I think by now he probably feels bad for Josh and feels he's rubbed his nose in the dirt enough.

Actually, I think the purpose of the article was to clear up the notion that Belichek turned down a better deal than what he got from KC. He seemed irritated at that notion. I think it had little to do with McDaniels.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 02:02 PM
There was a concern out there that Belichick gave Cassel away to Pioli...because remember it was also Vrabel. This is frowned upon because teams are supposed to be distinctly seperate entities and clear of under-the-table, backroom deals. The complaint was that the deal sending to KC was not above board.


http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_football_nfl/2009/03/whats-up-with-bill-belichick-the-nfls-darth-sidious-giving-away-qb-matt-cassel-for-essentially-a-six.html

Read the first couple of posts.

Eh. The main speculation was that he turned down better deals because of the money (would rather pay 2nd round money than 1st was the argument). In the interview, the "back-door-dealing" thing was never even brought up. Belichek seemed annoyed that folks were saying that for some reason he turned down better offers. Seriously, do you really think Belichek is the sort of guy who would undersell an asset (in this case Cassel) to help out an old friend? Just out of the kindness of his heart?

lex
03-27-2009, 02:08 PM
Eh. The main speculation was that he turned down better deals because of the money (would rather pay 2nd round money than 1st was the argument). In the interview, the "back-door-dealing" thing was never even brought up. Belichek seemed annoyed that folks were saying that for some reason he turned down better offers. Seriously, do you really think Belichek is the sort of guy who would undersell an asset (in this case Cassel) to help out an old friend? Just out of the kindness of his heart?


Did you even read the link? "Out of the kindness of his heart" is not the only thought in play. Ive heard a few reasons for the possible collusion. But in any event, you asked about why Belichick would lie about this and I just gave you a possible reason.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 02:20 PM
Did you even read the link? "Out of the kindness of his heart" is not the only thought in play. Ive heard a few reasons for the possible collusion. But in any event, you asked about why Belichick would lie about this and I just gave you a possible reason.

If Belichek lied, there are obviously people out there who would know about it--namely the teams in question. I mean, if there was a solid offer involving Tampa on the table, then there are of course members of that organization who could say, "Hey, we had an offer on the table so we could get Cutler that was better than the KC offer--Bill's lying." No one is saying that even as an anonymous source. It also wouldn't likely help him in future trade negotiations. I mean, if Tampa starts spreading the word that Bill doesn't deal in good faith, that doesn't help him. This one doesn't pass the sniff test.

rastaman
03-27-2009, 02:34 PM
When the dust all settles, Cutler will be a starting QB in this league longer than McDaniels will be a HC in this league. ;)

lex
03-27-2009, 02:35 PM
If Belichek lied, there are obviously people out there who would know about it--namely the teams in question. I mean, if there was a solid offer involving Tampa on the table, then there are of course members of that organization who could say, "Hey, we had an offer on the table so we could get Cutler that was better than the KC offer--Bill's lying." No one is saying that even as an anonymous source. It also wouldn't likely help him in future trade negotiations. I mean, if Tampa starts spreading the word that Bill doesn't deal in good faith, that doesn't help him. This one doesn't pass the sniff test.

You dont know that. This is unbelievable coming from someone who claims to be able to identify what is "fact".

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 02:59 PM
For some, I'm sure it probably comes down to Jay's word vs. Josh's word. Jay has been here longer, has bled and sweat for this team, and has earned some deal of trust perhaps. McDaniels is the new kid on the block and perhaps has to earn some folks trust before they simply hand it over....especially given where he comes from. I'm guessing if he came from any other organization NOT known for lying and cheating, things might be different to an extent.There are things that corroborate Josh's story, but nothing to back up Jay feeling like he "Really knows what went on". Belichik and Bowlen have both taken stances that back up what McDaniels has maintained all along. It's still all talk, but it's more than anything on the Cutler side.



Replace player with coach and Cutler with McDaniels and you have the other side of the argument. You don't have to agree with it of course. Just trying to point out how people might be getting there.But you have to take into account that McDaniels will ABSOLUTELY be the coach this year. So, if you're against McDaniels, you're against the Broncos for at least a season, and very likely at least a few seasons.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 03:01 PM
You dont know that. This is unbelievable coming from someone who claims to be able to identify what is "fact".

Lex-Give one shred of evidence to support Cutler's stance that McDaniels was shopping him. One.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 03:35 PM
You dont know that.

Huh? So, a team like Tampa could have had a solid offer on the table without knowing about it? If there was a solid offer from a team other than KC, which Belichek says he didn't have, obviously someone in that other organization would know about it. That's pretty obvious.

This is unbelievable coming from someone who claims to be able to identify what is "fact".

I am playing out the scenario you set up. You are right--your scenario is not a fact but rampant speculation. All the verifiable evidence sides up with what the front office has been saying.

lex
03-27-2009, 03:53 PM
Huh? So, a team like Tampa could have had a solid offer on the table without knowing about it? If there was a solid offer from a team other than KC, which Belichek says he didn't have, obviously someone in that other organization would know about it. That's pretty obvious.

I am playing out the scenario you set up. You are right--your scenario is not a fact but rampant speculation. All the verifiable evidence sides up with what the front office has been saying.

How is that?

lex
03-27-2009, 03:55 PM
Lex-Give one shred of evidence to support Cutler's stance that McDaniels was shopping him. One.
Im going to say the same thing to you. Offer a piece of evidence thats not coming from a self-serving statement by an involved party.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 04:58 PM
Im going to say the same thing to you. Offer a piece of evidence thats not coming from a self-serving statement by an involved party.
Ah, adding your own self-serving qualifications. Its FACT that there are two sources outside of McDaniels who support what he's said and maintained.

It is FACT that there are zero sources outside of Cutler himself who support what he's said.

You can qualify the sources all you want but it doesn't change the fact that the actual evidence leans greatly towards the FOs version of things.

lex
03-27-2009, 05:02 PM
Ah, adding your own self-serving qualifications. Its FACT that there are two sources outside of McDaniels who support what he's said and maintained.

It is FACT that there are zero sources outside of Cutler himself who support what he's said.

You can qualify the sources all you want but it doesn't change the fact that the actual evidence leans greatly towards the FOs version of things.

What evidence?

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 05:11 PM
What evidence?

Wow- I guess I can't skip any steps with you, huh? That a Cutler trade never crossed Bowlen's desk, and that the Pats weren't offered anything better than the deal they got.

If McDaniels was shopping Cutler, it would have gone to Bowlen before going to other teams. Not so if McDaniels was merely fielding calls.

If Cutler was being shopped the Pats would have gotten far more than third round value for Cassel.

I also notice that you have offered absolutely nothing.

lex
03-27-2009, 05:20 PM
Wow- I guess I can't skip any steps with you, huh? That a Cutler trade never crossed Bowlen's desk, and that the Pats weren't offered anything better than the deal they got.

Based on what?

If McDaniels was shopping Cutler, it would have gone to Bowlen before going to other teams. Not so if McDaniels was merely fielding calls.

That means nothing. The fact that it crosses Bowlens desk on the back end of doing a deal doesnt mean he wasnt shopping Cutler on the front end.

If Cutler was being shopped the Pats would have gotten far more than third round value for Cassel.

On what are you basing this third round value?

I also notice that you have offered absolutely nothing.[/QUOTE]

It remains that way for you as well.

Ive been cobbling it together by the FOs own inconsistencies combined with various reports that refute the FOs self-serving story.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 06:02 PM
Based on what? This question makes no sense.



[qutoe]That means nothing. The fact that it crosses Bowlens desk on the back end of doing a deal doesnt mean he wasnt shopping Cutler on the front end. [/quote]It means nothing to you, but then again nothing does.



On what are you basing this third round value?The Pats got a 2nd rounder for Cassel AND Vrabel. Thus, Cassel can't equal a 2nd rounder.


It remains that way for you as well. No it doesn't. Just because you haven't accepted it doesn't mean I haven't offered it. I don't expect you to accept anything logical.

You on the other hand haven't even offered a single thing.

Ive been cobbling it together by the FOs own inconsistencies combined with various reports that refute the FOs self-serving story.

You've been cobbling it together based entirely on your own agenda, regardless of what is actually out there.

lex
03-27-2009, 06:06 PM
This question makes no sense.



[qutoe]That means nothing. The fact that it crosses Bowlens desk on the back end of doing a deal doesnt mean he wasnt shopping Cutler on the front end. It means nothing to you, but then again nothing does.



The Pats got a 2nd rounder for Cassel AND Vrabel. Thus, Cassel can't equal a 2nd rounder.


No it doesn't. Just because you haven't accepted it doesn't mean I haven't offered it. I don't expect you to accept anything logical.

You on the other hand haven't even offered a single thing.



You've been cobbling it together based entirely on your own agenda, regardless of what is actually out there.[/QUOTE]

The only thing youve offered is the same crap thats coming from those who have reason to make self-serving claims. Sorry. Thats just not going to work.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 06:09 PM
The only thing youve offered is the same crap thats coming from those who have reason to make self-serving claims. Sorry. Thats just not going to work.You've offered NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!

lex
03-27-2009, 06:13 PM
The only thing youve offered is the same crap thats coming from those who have reason to make self-serving claims. Sorry. Thats just not going to work.You've offered NOTHING!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]


Wow, dude. Learn how to quote.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 06:50 PM
Wow, dude. Learn how to quote.

Still nothing?

Atlas
03-27-2009, 07:01 PM
****in' nonsense.

Shanahan's offense was middle of the league in scoring last year. So, if we we win a SB, it'll likely be because of improved performance on both sides of the ball.

If McDaniels wins a SB with the Denver Broncos, it'll be because of what HE did, not what anyone else did. We have a few nice players on offense. Most teams in the league can say that. It makes you average. That's why we were..... well... .average the last three seasons.

Let's not pretend Mike Shanahan left some kind of championship caliber team to McDaniels. He left him a wreck on defense and a middle of the road offense.


I'll agree with that. With the damage McFailure has done to the offense. WHATEVER success or FAILURE he has is ALL HIS DOING!! NO ONE ELSES!!

BTW, Shanny's offesnse was in the top 5 in the NFL in yardage and middle of the road in scoring. They were average in scoring because it was a very young offense and red-zone scoring is one of the last things a dominate offense learns. If Shanny would have stayed this year Denver would have been a dominate offense.

Also going through 7 RBs doesn't help your red-zone scoring either.

Either way if Shanny was still in Denver we would be talking about how Denver is going to overtake S.D. Now we'll be lucky to stay ahead of the Raiders.
This season has 6-10 written all over it.

Atlas
03-27-2009, 07:09 PM
If he wins it with substantially his guys, he's entitled to great props. But that's probably not going to be the case. You are asking me to give Dennis Erickson credit for the 1989 national title when all the players were Jimmy Johnson's and I'm not going to do that.

Dude this guy ain't winning **** in the NFL. 3 years and out. Hopefully 2 years.

Dagmar
03-27-2009, 07:11 PM
Dude this guy ain't winning **** in the NFL. 3 years and out. Hopefully 2 years.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/09/thestupiditburns.jpg

Popps
03-27-2009, 07:28 PM
I'll agree with that. With the damage McFailure has done to the offense. .

Talk to me after 6 games, or better yet... a full season. Then, we'll look at "damage."

Cutler locking himself in his room and listening to Fallout Boy doesn't count as damage.

The team hasn't taken a snap together. Maybe we can actually have some legitimate evidence at hand before we deem something "damaged."

Atlas
03-27-2009, 07:35 PM
Talk to me after 6 games, or better yet... a full season. Then, we'll look at "damage."

Cutler locking himself in his room and listening to Fallout Boy doesn't count as damage.

The team hasn't taken a snap together. Maybe we can actually have some legitimate evidence at hand before we deem something "damaged."

That sounds fair, but if I did that I wouldn't have anything to gripe about. The offense was loaded with young, explosive talent when he took over. We'll see how well they do this year.

DBroncos4life
03-27-2009, 08:59 PM
The Bears have nothing to offer this article is like me telling the world that I'm just not into Jessica Alba knowing full damn well that I would never have a chance to land her anyways.

BroncoInSkinland
03-28-2009, 04:45 AM
What does "lie" to him mean?

Lie, it means to not tell the truth. Like saying we weren't looking to trade Cutler after talks with tampa bay and NE about that exact subject.

It's not Jay's ****ing business.

Funny, I see it very much as Jay's business. If which team he plays for isn't Jays business then what is?

What's your point, anyway?

My point is if I found out that my boss was looking for a replacement for me, I would start sending resumes immediately, and that I completely understand Jays reaction to a situation Josh created.


Jay's ****ing business
****ing business
****ing grown-up.
**** 'em.
**** right off
3rd grade bull****.

Theres a lot of anger there man, a lot of anger. Sorry I touched a nerve. It's become apparent to me that despite your assurances of listening to suggestions as to what Josh could have done and being open minded that once again you have your mind made up and aren't really listening. I wish it were different, and I hope I am wrong about him, but nothing McDaniels has done has instilled any faith in me what-so-ever. I'll be around to eat my crow if the Broncos do better than the 8-8 from last season, heck I'll even drop the bar and make it 6-10. If we make the playoffs it'll be the best tasting crow I ever had. Until then we will just have to agree to disagree, good luck and try to keep that blood pressure down, McDaniels is already killing the team, it doesn't mean you have to let him kill you too.

Cito Pelon
03-28-2009, 07:29 AM
. . . . . .McDaniels is already killing the team. . . . . .

Please.

Popps
03-28-2009, 09:55 AM
Lie, it means to not tell the truth. Like saying we weren't looking to trade Cutler after talks with tampa bay and NE about that exact subject.

I understand what the definition is.

You're just using it incorrectly. It doesn't apply here.



Funny, I see it very much as Jay's business. If which team he plays for isn't Jays business then what is?.

It's his business if he's ACTUALLY traded. It's NOT his business if the team considers a move... or if Pat Bowlen decides to have Chinese food for lunch.

I realize Jay would like to have a say in Pat's lunch choices, but like these other issues... those aren't Jay's concerns.


My point is if I found out that my boss was looking for a replacement for me, I would start sending resumes immediately, and that I completely understand Jays reaction to a situation Josh created..

Huh?

You think Jay was going to standing in line at a soup kitchen?

Sorry, boss. Jay's situation (being moved to another team to pay him millions of dollars) is just a wee bit different than the reality some unemployed Americans face.

Maybe think through your analogies better next time.



Theres a lot of anger there man, a lot of anger. Sorry I touched a nerve. .

Anger? You're a funny boy. Sorry, I won't use a curse word again in the future. I'd hate to scare you.

Again, for a guy who's hit this board purveying himself as some sort of intellectual floating above the crowd, you're not the most insightful guy around.





It's become apparent to me that despite your assurances of listening to suggestions as to what Josh could have done and being open minded that once again you have your mind made up and aren't really listening. .

I'm all ears, dude. I've heard nothing reasonable out of you.

So far I've heard the same "Jay should be in on all franchise decisions" nonsense from people who've apparently had no experience in the business world, and I've heard you comparing a spoiled millionaire to real hard working Americans.

So, the problem isn't me listening... the problem is that you're shoveling out the same poop other people have. You're just attempting to do it from a stance of being intellectually superior.

You can dress up goofy arguments all you want. They remain goofy.

Popps
03-28-2009, 10:02 AM
That sounds fair, but if I did that I wouldn't have anything to gripe about..

:~ohyah!:

Fair enough.

The offense was loaded with young, explosive talent when he took over. We'll see how well they do this year.

Well, if Brandon avoids suspension, it still will be. Jay is still our QB, and even if we make a swap... don't write off this offense. Again, this guy had a top offense with Matt Cassel. He knows what he's doing.

Turn that frown upside down!

barryr
03-28-2009, 02:17 PM
I'll agree with that. With the damage McFailure has done to the offense. WHATEVER success or FAILURE he has is ALL HIS DOING!! NO ONE ELSES!!

BTW, Shanny's offesnse was in the top 5 in the NFL in yardage and middle of the road in scoring. They were average in scoring because it was a very young offense and red-zone scoring is one of the last things a dominate offense learns. If Shanny would have stayed this year Denver would have been a dominate offense.

Also going through 7 RBs doesn't help your red-zone scoring either.

Either way if Shanny was still in Denver we would be talking about how Denver is going to overtake S.D. Now we'll be lucky to stay ahead of the Raiders.
This season has 6-10 written all over it.

No more like we'd be talking why Shanahan still has a boob for a DC and is talking of improving the defense which would be on year 4 of still waiting for this to happen.

Popps
03-29-2009, 12:34 AM
You just don't wanna see, cauise it's very, VERY simple. For the umpteenth time: Josh should have called Jay and kept him in the loop .

And for the umptheenth time, you have no idea of the true time-line of these events. So, you have no clue if there was even time to baby Cutler properly.
If this happened quickly, the thought process was likely not to raise any red flags if it wasn't necessary. But, it leaked. So, by then... it was likely too late.

You're building your entire thesis of hating McDaniels on imaginary scenarios which you cannot remotely prove.

Popps
03-29-2009, 12:39 AM
... and by the way, Buff, Herm Edwards?

Really?

I'm not a big fan of attacking the messenger, but why don't you just quote Bob next time. Honestly, here's a coach so awful he can't keep a job... and a guy so mentally vacant that he couldn't (and I mean literally) accurately recall the events of an overtime game against us just moments after the game was over. He talked about plays that never existed.

I don't just think he's a bad coach, I think the guy's either bi-polar or just painfully slow.

Herm Edwards?

That's when you're reaching, man.

DBroncos4life
04-02-2009, 06:59 PM
LOL at this article.

broncosteven
04-02-2009, 07:36 PM
BTW I subscribe to the Chicago Trib, it gets dropped on my driveway Wednesday through Sunday.

80% of the articles have been "Angelo needs to go out and get Cutler" this is the only writer taking the crybaby angle. Others have said that his talent out weighs any "crying" he has done.

This is a good move for Da Bears and could be good for us if they stay away from drafting a QB this year and address the Dline early and often.

summerdenver
04-02-2009, 09:30 PM
IIRC, Bears have Chris Williams and Earl Bennet on their team and I a sure they probably talked to them before makign this trade.

joe9999
04-03-2009, 07:50 AM
After reading this thread, it is obvious that a lot of people must be shocked by the trade.

BroncoBuff
04-03-2009, 04:07 PM
You're building your entire thesis of hating McDaniels on imaginary scenarios which you cannot remotely prove.
MY thesis? You're the only one who doesn't believe it.

Rohirrim
04-03-2009, 04:10 PM
MY thesis? You're the only one who doesn't believe it.

Sorry. Me neither. Jay should have blown this off from the get-go or called up McD directly and stated his case. It's clear now that Jay wanted out. He got what he wanted. To the team he wanted to go to. Like Bowlen said, if you don't want to play for the Broncos, you won't be here. Anyway, who cares about the Bears? We have an exciting draft to look forward to. ;D

BroncoBuff
04-03-2009, 04:16 PM
... and by the way, Buff, Herm Edwards?

Really?

That's when you're reaching, man.

Far FAR more than just Herm Edwards, Popps ...

Mike Klis, Woody Paige, Trent Dilfer, Mike Lombardi, Mark Schlereth, John Clayton, the Minnesota papers (Vikings coaches nixed "the proposed trade"), the Tampa papers, Steve Wilbon, Jay Mariotti, the Seattle papers, the Detroit paper, Mike Ditka, on and on and on and on and on ...

They ALL state two irrefutable truths: 1) Josh tried to trade Jay, and 2) He kept that info from Jay. The Herm Edwards quote was merely the most succinct: "Josh made a rookie mistake." Bing-o bang-o, that's that.



Horrible, horrible trade .... we will be regretting this for a decade-plus.

BroncoBuff
04-03-2009, 04:35 PM
Sorry. Me neither. Jay should have blown this off from the get-go or called up McD directly and stated his case. It's clear now that Jay wanted out. He got what he wanted. To the team he wanted to go to. Like Bowlen said, if you don't want to play for the Broncos, you won't be here. Anyway, who cares about the Bears? We have an exciting draft to look forward to. ;D

You're not arguing the same thing as we are, Roh. What I said and what Popps disagreed with was: Josh shoulkd have kept Jay in the lopp when he tried to trade him. If you disagree with that, you are way out on a limb at this point. I gave the list above ... in fact, the easy way is this: point me to somebody, ANYBODY, who thinks Josh did not try to trade Jay.

Yesterday's Mike Lombradi article should've closed the door on the last remaining stragglers from that ship.


Roh, read this ... you know this kind of argument is specious and avoidant:
You're building your entire thesis on imaginary scenarios which you cannot remotely prove.

When any party attacks your argument because "you can't prove it, " that is desperation. None of us can prove anything, but that does not invalidate our opinions. If opinions were invalid without "proof" as Popps suggest, then definition of "opinion" would be subsumed into the definition of "fact." That's why he's specious and that's why he's wrong. ;D

You'd think Popps would be happy now. He got his wish, Jay is gone.

outdoor_miner
04-03-2009, 04:49 PM
Far [B][SIZE="4"]Mike Klis, Woody Paige, Trent Dilfer, Mike Lombardi, Mark Schlereth, John Clayton, the Minnesota papers (Vikings coaches nixed "the proposed trade"), the Tampa papers, Steve Wilbon, Jay Mariotti, the Seattle papers, the Detroit paper, Mike Ditka, on and on and on and on and on ...

Perhaps I'm dumb, but I just don't see that when I read articles. Granted, I never watch any of the tv shows (NFLN or Sportscenter), so I may be missing it. But whenever I read about this situation in the papers or on-line, it's always a offhand comment about "the trade scenario" or some short-hand comment about the proposed deal. And the Denver papers (Klis in particular I think) now pretty much always mentions the caveat that the Broncos are adamant that they didn't actively try to trade Cutler. I even read Lombardi's article from yesterday, and don't see where he says anything specific...

Popps
04-03-2009, 04:51 PM
You're not arguing the same thing as we are, Roh. What I said and what Popps disagreed with was: Josh shoulkd have kept Jay in the lopp when he tried to trade him..

First of all, that's not Josh's job.

Secondly, he claims he did.

Third, get the **** over it, Jay.

Fourth... perhaps Josh thought it best that Jay WASN'T kept in the loop in case a trade DIDN'T go through.

YWhen any party attacks your argument because "you can't prove it, " that is desperation. None of us can prove anything, but that does not invalidate our opinions. If opinions were invalid without "proof" as Popps suggest, then definition of "opinion" would be subsumed into the definition of "fact." That's why he's specious and that's why he's wrong. ;D

You'd think Popps would be happy now. He got his wish, Jay is gone.


Buff, I said from the beginning I hoped we would work this out with Jay. But, as time went on... it was clear he wanted no part of the Broncos. So, I wouldn't say I'm "happy," but the club did the best thing for the interest of the club, and it's time to move on.

jhat01
04-03-2009, 05:14 PM
McDaniels said he had a conversation with them the morning of the "trade talks." Jay didn't dispute that..he even made the comment on NFLTA that maybe he shouldn't have shut down communications right away when asked if he would have done something differently. Jay wanted out from the start..it's obvious. He squirmed when asked about his trade demands after Bates was jettisoned as well.

Doggcow
04-17-2009, 04:24 PM
This article is awesome. I hope they put one in Cutler's locker so he starts crying again before the season opener.

lex
04-17-2009, 04:27 PM
This article is awesome. I hope they put one in Cutler's locker so he starts crying again before the season opener.

Yeah, the guy who wrote this article has already said he prefers Cutler over Orton and when he was on a local talk show the other 3 were giving him a hard time about being the only one who was negative about the trade. But he actually kind of backed off of the tone conveyed in the article.

Doggcow
04-17-2009, 04:30 PM
He has to bitch out now, Chicago just traded their next decade for Cutler, if he's anything less than stellar, they're ****ed.

Drek
04-17-2009, 05:15 PM
Far FAR more than just Herm Edwards, Popps ...

Mike Klis, Woody Paige, Trent Dilfer, Mike Lombardi, Mark Schlereth, John Clayton, the Minnesota papers (Vikings coaches nixed "the proposed trade"), the Tampa papers, Steve Wilbon, Jay Mariotti, the Seattle papers, the Detroit paper, Mike Ditka, on and on and on and on and on ...

They ALL state two irrefutable truths: 1) Josh tried to trade Jay, and 2) He kept that info from Jay. The Herm Edwards quote was merely the most succinct: "Josh made a rookie mistake." Bing-o bang-o, that's that.



Horrible, horrible trade .... we will be regretting this for a decade-plus.
Where's the source then Buff?

I don't much care about this drama anymore, we're a better team now for it, and will be in '09. But you keep trying to sell "irrefutable truths" that have absolutely ZERO veracity. Not a single source other than Jay Cutler's mind has been given to prove #1, and without it there isn't any reason to give a damn about #2.

Where is the smoking gun? If there was one don't you think a single reporter from Tampa or Detroit could've gotten someone to even be an anonymous source, let alone maybe even go on record? But instead its all conjecture and its all coming from Jay's camp.

The big problem here? You're buying everything ESPN is selling, even though their entire staff continually referenced Cutler and Cook as their source. Hell, Jaws even wrote a piece referencing text answers Cutler sent him. Not much of a surprise there seeings how ESPN apparently wants the Favre to join their football anal cyst crew.

A hack news organization that happens to dominate the market perpetuates a story long enough so that everyone just stops arguing the point. Its not really too different from how Fox News has ran its outfit the past 10 years or so.

Paladin
04-17-2009, 05:44 PM
Drek: There you go again. Using facts and truth and logic on that poor, poor Brocobuff. He hasn't a chance.....