PDA

View Full Version : ESPN-five smartest and dumbest moves of the offseason


mikeauran
04-10-2009, 11:44 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeffri&id=4058242

You have to admit this has been the most compelling NFL offseason in years.
2008: Best of Albert Haynesworth

NFL.com Video

The Titans' Albert Haynesworth shows why he is one of the top defensive tackles in the NFL.

We've had stunning trades, surprising releases, the annual slew of coaching firings and the first defensive player in NFL history to receive a $100 million contract in free agency (Washington Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth). Talk about your nonstop news. The stories have been flying so fast and furiously it's been hard to take time to make sense of them.

We'll sort things out now. There have been so many interesting moves this offseason that it's worth sorting out the good and the bad before the draft begins in two weeks. And I'm not talking about no-brainers like the Oakland Raiders' making Pro Bowl cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha the highest-paid defensive back in football, or the Detroit Lions' firing head coach Rod Marinelli after an 0-16 season. I'm more focused on the decisions that entail a lot more risk, mainly because they're the ones we'll likely be talking about in the fall.

So here are the five smartest and dumbest moves up to this point:

The Smartest

1. The New York Giants release Plaxico Burress: It was simply time for this to happen. Burress' legal problems haven't gone away quickly -- he's still trying to negotiate a plea agreement for carrying an unregistered handgun into a New York City nightclub last year -- and the Giants still didn't know how hard NFL commissioner Roger Goodell might hammer the star wide receiver. Granted, it will be hard for them to fill the void Burress' absence created when the wide receiver's off-field problems eventually led to a suspension. But the Giants also found a way to win consistently without him for most of the 2008 season. They can win without him in 2009.

2. The Kansas City Chiefs trade for New England Patriots quarterback Matt Cassel: I'm still not totally sold on Cassel. It will be harder for him to succeed without Randy Moss and Wes Welker running routes and Bill Belichick roaming the sidelines. That said, he's still the best option for a team that was desperate to stabilize the quarterback position. His presence allows the Chiefs to focus on other pressing needs in the draft, and it also lets us know that new general manager Scott Pioli already understands something that escaped the Carl Peterson/Herm Edwards regime: If you're going to rebuild, make sure you've a got a quarterback you believe in.



3. Kurt Warner re-signs with the Arizona Cardinals: It's hard to know how seriously Warner considered leaving the Cardinals when free agency arrived. What we do know is that he didn't need long to realize that Arizona was the best place for him to be. He's coming off a Pro Bowl season that nearly ended with the Cardinals upsetting the Pittsburgh Steelers in the Super Bowl. For a man who maybe has two good seasons left in him, it was best for him to stay loyal to the franchise that allowed him to revitalize his playing career.

4. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers dump Jon Gruden and Bruce Allen: As shocking as this move seemed at the time -- it appeared to come out of nowhere -- it has made far more sense as more time has passed. The bottom line is that the players were tired of Gruden's cold-hearted personality, and the Bucs' ownership sensed it already had the next head-coaching star on staff (Raheem Morris). Throw in the fact that Allen was essentially useless as Gruden's right-hand man in the front office and you can see why the Bucs had to move so quickly. In the end, Gruden will be best remembered in Tampa as a man who won a Super Bowl with Tony Dungy's team.

5. Ray Lewis stays with the Baltimore Ravens: Sometimes you have to go out in the cold to see how harsh reality really can be. That's what happened to Lewis when his contract expired in February. Instead of finding a bunch of teams eager to pay big money for a soon-to-be 34-year-old middle linebacker coming off his 10th Pro Bowl season, he found a market in which nobody was willing to come close to Baltimore's three-year, $22 million offer. Lewis essentially learned the same lesson most people already knew: Aging middle linebackers are poor investments because their production usually goes downhill in a hurry (see Jeremiah Trotter and Zach Thomas). When that happens to Lewis, it's probably best that he's in a town where fans still can appreciate everything he did for their franchise.

The Dumbest

1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve. The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks. Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.

Winslow joins the Bucs
2. The Bucs make Kellen Winslow the highest-paid tight end ever: I like Winslow's talent. What I don't like is his track record. You're talking about a player who has had two productive years in five seasons (he caught 171 passes between 2006 and 2007). A high ankle sprain partly explains why he finished last season with only 428 receiving yards. Oh yeah, he can be a little high-maintenance at times, as well. The point here is that Tampa Bay already gave up a second-round pick in this year's draft and a fifth-rounder in 2010 for a player with two years left on his old deal. It could have at least waited to see if he could stay healthy and play nice with others before giving him $20.1 million in guaranteed cash.

3. The Detroit Lions don't clean house: Sure, they finally got rid of president/general manager Matt Millen after eight comical seasons, and they also dumped Marinelli after three years (replacing him with former Tennessee defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz). But what still defies explanation is why Millen was replaced with Martin Mayhew, who previously served as assistant general manager. Unless Mayhew is the second coming of Ron Wolf, the Lions missed a golden chance to inject some new perspective into an organization sorely in need of that. Note to Lions owner William Clay Ford Sr.: Whenever your team goes a full season without a victory, it's time to ship as many people out the door as possible.

4. The Dallas Cowboys keep Wade Phillips as head coach: There are only two reasons this makes sense to me: (a) Cowboys owner Jerry Jones really has a soft spot for Phillips, or (b) Jones couldn't find a way to find a better coach for his team next season. Regardless, it's a mistake to keep Phillips in charge of this bunch. He's undoubtedly a great guy, but he's also the man who lorded over a team that flamed out at the end of last season when most people had the Cowboys pegged as preseason Super Bowl favorites. Look at it this way: If Jones can swallow a $9 million salary-cap hit to release Terrell Owens, he can find the courage to fire a coach who's not going to lead his team to the promised land.
2008: Best of Marvin Harrison


5. Marvin Harrison asks for his release from the Indianapolis Colts: Hey, it would be hard for most people to take a pay cut when your contract calls for a $9 million salary and you've got 1,102 receptions to your name. But when Harrison balked and told the Colts he wanted out, he quickly found out just how chilly the open market can be for a 36-year-old wide receiver coming off the two worst seasons of his career. Oh, yeah: Let's not forget there are legal issues for Harrison in Philadelphia. In other words, he was better off finding a way to work things out in Indy.

tsiguy96
04-10-2009, 11:49 AM
The Dumbest

1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve. The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks. Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.


didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

Drek
04-10-2009, 11:58 AM
1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense
16th in points. Those things that determine who won and lost the game.

despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve.
Still 12th in total rushing yardage.

The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks.
Ask Vince Young and Derek Anderson how much those Pro Bowl nods have guaranteed them for future success.

Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.
Like the Dolphins, Ravens, Vikings, Titans, and Panthers last year? Only about half the '09 playoff teams had what anyone would consider a "big-time player" at QB going into the season, and thats giving Warner.

Oh, or McDaniels' own 11-5 record with Matt Cassel behind center.

Massive fail.

JCMElway
04-10-2009, 12:00 PM
didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

HEY! Stop your damn naysaying! Cutler is teh bomb and Chicago made the best move evah!!!!!

Denver is doomed, Denveris stoopid, Denver won't win 5 gasmes this yeer wahhhhhhh!!

skpac1001
04-10-2009, 12:04 PM
didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

That guy shot himself in the foot with that quote. The jump between Brady and Cassel is much bigger then that between Cutler and Orton.

Bronco X
04-10-2009, 12:04 PM
The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks.

Any team in the league could have a Pro Bowl QB if they want to. Just sign Brian Griese.

gyldenlove
04-10-2009, 12:17 PM
16th in points. Those things that determine who won and lost the game.


Still 12th in total rushing yardage.


Like the Dolphins, Ravens, Vikings, Titans, and Panthers last year? Only about half the '09 playoff teams had what anyone would consider a "big-time player" at QB going into the season, and thats giving Warner.

Oh, or McDaniels' own 11-5 record with Matt Cassel behind center.

Massive fail.


Cutler did more for the run game than any of the runningbacks we had.

How about this sentence:

Mcdaniels is about to find out just how hard it is to win without a big time player at QB when you have one of the worst defenses in the league.

Drek
04-10-2009, 12:25 PM
Cutler did more for the run game than any of the runningbacks we had.

How about this sentence:

Mcdaniels is about to find out just how hard it is to win without a big time player at QB when you have one of the worst defenses in the league.

Miami had the first overall pick last year, so their D was expected to be pretty damn bad for '08 as of this time last year. Pennington was the QB, made the playoffs.

The Falcons started a rookie, were the 3rd worst team the year before, and they went on to make the playoffs.

Arizona had Leinart and Warner in full on QB battle up until nearly the beginning of the season last year, they were thought to have one of the worst defenses in the NFL as well. Warner emerged as a top tier starter and they won despite their defense, which then flipped the switch and kicked some ass in the playoffs prior to their SB loss.

The only thing more idiotic than assuming that Cutler is an irreplaceable commodity in a league that has shown no one to be irreplaceable is to assume that a unit from '08 that has a completely different coaching staff and 2/3rds of the starters already purged will somehow perform the same in '09.

As for Cutler somehow powering the running game, the team ran for over 100 yards in all but three games, two of those it ran for 90+. Cutler had 8 great games and 8 below average games last year. There is no describable correlation between them and total rushing yards though. You'd really think there would be if the rushing game was feeding off his success.

UberBroncoMan
04-10-2009, 12:29 PM
didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

To be fair the team the year before that only went something like oh, 18-1. Also, Cassel had 3 years on the bench learning the difficult system before he was thrust into a starting roll. I'd also reckon the Pats defense was a 'bit' better than ours.

DBBBSBS
04-10-2009, 12:34 PM
To be fair the team the year before that only went something like oh, 18-1. Also, Cassel had 3 years on the bench learning the difficult system before he was thrust into a starting roll. I'd also reckon the Pats defense was a 'bit' better than ours.

so you are saying unless the QB was in that system for a while, there will be no impact. So jay or kyle both would have learnt the system this year. SO lets consider this to be the no impact year.

Second statement , there defense is much better. So lets make our defense better when our QB is learning the complex system. So the coach went and got some picks to get the defense better. So what is the problem

Drek
04-10-2009, 12:35 PM
To be fair the team the year before that only went something like oh, 18-1. Also, Cassel had 3 years on the bench learning the difficult system before he was thrust into a starting roll. I'd also reckon the Pats defense was a 'bit' better than ours.

And Kyle Orton learned to play QB in a very similar system, FYI.

Also, rule out the 11-5 record. The Pats were still 5th in yardage and 8th in points last year, with Matt Cassel at QB, about as many RB injuries as we had, and constant issues on their OL. Their QB didn't even get to take snaps with the first team through camp or pre-season and was damn near a final roster cut to get down to 53.

DBBBSBS
04-10-2009, 12:36 PM
Cutler did more for the run game than any of the runningbacks we had.

How about this sentence:

Mcdaniels is about to find out just how hard it is to win without a big time player at QB when you have one of the worst defenses in the league.

I was seeing the tape this morning, i saw cutler was running instead of hillis. Did you guys see that as well ? Infact cutler threw the ball ran 20 yards caught the ball and broke some tackles and went to end zone. U guys kept thinking it was bmarsh and royal

Drek
04-10-2009, 12:39 PM
I was seeing the tape this morning, i saw cutler was running instead of hillis. Did you guys see that as well ? Infact cutler threw the ball ran 20 yards caught the ball and broke some tackles and went to end zone. U guys kept thinking it was bmarsh and royal

No one else on the Broncos '08 offense even belongs in the NFL. Cutler carried their sorry asses just like he carried the sorry ass defense. If it wasn't for them and Shanahan had just let Cutler go out on his own both ways every down we'd be a 19-0 SB winner. He's a FRANCHISE QB!

DBBBSBS
04-10-2009, 12:39 PM
The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks.

wasn't derek anderson a pro bowl QB.. Hmm the browns should be thinking twice. Why did they draft quinn with pro bowl QB.

DBBBSBS
04-10-2009, 12:40 PM
No one else on the Broncos '08 offense even belongs in the NFL. Cutler carried their sorry asses just like he carried the sorry ass defense. If it wasn't for them and Shanahan had just let Cutler go out on his own both ways every down we'd be a 19-0 SB winner. He's a FRANCHISE QB!

We shall see how much he carries in chicago, who has a better defense. If he has not SB by the end of next year.. then this will continue. Are you ready to take a 100 dollar bet on that

Steve Prefontaine
04-10-2009, 12:47 PM
OMG! An analyst thinks it was a dumb move to get rid of a pro bowl QB. What a ****ing moron! His opinion is wrong.

Flame him.

Jason in LA
04-10-2009, 12:57 PM
16th in points. Those things that determine who won and lost the game.


Still 12th in total rushing yardage.


Ask Vince Young and Derek Anderson how much those Pro Bowl nods have guaranteed them for future success.


Like the Dolphins, Ravens, Vikings, Titans, and Panthers last year? Only about half the '09 playoff teams had what anyone would consider a "big-time player" at QB going into the season, and thats giving Warner.

Oh, or McDaniels' own 11-5 record with Matt Cassel behind center.

Massive fail.

The Broncos were certainly better than the 16th best offense. If I'm remembering right, they were near the bottom of the league in starting field position because their horrible defense couldn't stop any offense from moving the ball. If it wasn't a score the opponent would at least get a few first downs on nearly every drive. I will say that turnovers did hurt the offense. Too many ints and fumbles killed drives. So I'm not about to put all the blame on the D. But the offense was certainly better than the 16th offense in the league.

Being 12th in rushing offense is nothing to be happy about. That's slightly above average, and that wasn't typical for the Shanahan era. Being 12th means that sometimes they were good, but sometimes they couldn't run the ball at all.

As for having a Pro Bowl QB, I rather have one than not have one. Sure, teams make the playoffs without them. But how many of those teams win the Super Bowl? Over the years a few teams here and there have won it all without a really good QB, but that doesn't happen all that often. The goal isn't to just make the playoffs, it's to win the whole damn thing. Building a good team around Cutler could have produced a Super Bowl. Hell, simply fixing the defense and hoping to keep a RB healthy could have produced a Super Bowl in the very near future.

Jason in LA
04-10-2009, 01:01 PM
wasn't derek anderson a pro bowl QB.. Hmm the browns should be thinking twice. Why did they draft quinn with pro bowl QB.

If I'm remembering right the Browns had drafted Quinn before Anderson made the Pro Bowl. Anderson got the job mostly because Quinn skipped training camp. And I don't think that Anderson was voted in, he made it as an alternate. His stats were good but not all that great that year. He's nowhere near as good as Culter.

oubronco
04-10-2009, 01:11 PM
The Dumbest

1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve. The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks. Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.


undoubtedly the Dumbest

oubronco
04-10-2009, 01:13 PM
If I'm remembering right the Browns had drafted Quinn before Anderson made the Pro Bowl. Anderson got the job mostly because Quinn skipped training camp. And I don't think that Anderson was voted in, he made it as an alternate. His stats were good but not all that great that year. He's nowhere near as good as Culter.

funny thing is Quinn couldn't beat Anderson out of the starting job

atomicbloke
04-10-2009, 01:14 PM
Doesn't matter any way you spin it, losing Cutler sets us back. Not saying its the FO's fault, Cutler wanted out.

But the fact remains, the Denver Broncos without Cutler are an inferior team.

Beantown Bronco
04-10-2009, 01:29 PM
But the fact remains, the Denver Broncos without Cutler are an inferior team.

Hardly a fact.

Inferior at one position and inferior at 52 positions are two completely different things.

HILife
04-10-2009, 01:30 PM
To be fair the team the year before that only went something like oh, 18-1. Also, Cassel had 3 years on the bench learning the difficult system before he was thrust into a starting roll. I'd also reckon the Pats defense was a 'bit' better than ours.

The key word is "1"

telluride
04-10-2009, 01:31 PM
16th in points. Those things that determine who won and lost the game.


Still 12th in total rushing yardage.


Ask Vince Young and Derek Anderson how much those Pro Bowl nods have guaranteed them for future success.


Like the Dolphins, Ravens, Vikings, Titans, and Panthers last year? Only about half the '09 playoff teams had what anyone would consider a "big-time player" at QB going into the season, and thats giving Warner.

Oh, or McDaniels' own 11-5 record with Matt Cassel behind center.

Massive fail.

Nice takedown!

kamakazi_kal
04-10-2009, 01:32 PM
didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

Don't discout the fact that NE had a very good line, Cassel studied that system for YEARS before he was asked to perform.

Oh and I think Billlllacheat may have had a little to do it.

Fact is that all the coaches to leave belicheat have done a very poor job as head coach. Jury's still out on McD, Xanders.

Hopefully Pat has made another solid choice like he did with a young shanny. At this point I'm more worried about xanders falling on his face with all this draft ammo.

If we come out with busts on these first rounders this franchise will be devistated. I think people get all fired up about cutler cause you know you have a good player. The picks are potential and nothing more.

Tombstone RJ
04-10-2009, 02:37 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeffri&id=4058242

You have to admit this has been the most compelling NFL offseason in years.
2008: Best of Albert Haynesworth

The Smartest


2. The Kansas City Chiefs trade for New England Patriots quarterback Matt Cassel: I'm still not totally sold on Cassel. It will be harder for him to succeed without Randy Moss and Wes Welker running routes and Bill Belichick roaming the sidelines. That said, he's still the best option for a team that was desperate to stabilize the quarterback position. His presence allows the Chiefs to focus on other pressing needs in the draft, and it also lets us know that new general manager Scott Pioli already understands something that escaped the Carl Peterson/Herm Edwards regime: If you're going to rebuild, make sure you've a got a quarterback you believe in.



The Dumbest

1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve. The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks. Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.

Good God ESPN Sucks Ballz. Does anyone else besides me see the contradiction in the above two positions?

epicSocialism4tw
04-10-2009, 02:43 PM
The Broncos were certainly better than the 16th best offense. If I'm remembering right, they were near the bottom of the league in starting field position because their horrible defense couldn't stop any offense from moving the ball. If it wasn't a score the opponent would at least get a few first downs on nearly every drive. I will say that turnovers did hurt the offense. Too many ints and fumbles killed drives. So I'm not about to put all the blame on the D. But the offense was certainly better than the 16th offense in the league.

Being 12th in rushing offense is nothing to be happy about. That's slightly above average, and that wasn't typical for the Shanahan era. Being 12th means that sometimes they were good, but sometimes they couldn't run the ball at all.

As for having a Pro Bowl QB, I rather have one than not have one. Sure, teams make the playoffs without them. But how many of those teams win the Super Bowl? Over the years a few teams here and there have won it all without a really good QB, but that doesn't happen all that often. The goal isn't to just make the playoffs, it's to win the whole damn thing. Building a good team around Cutler could have produced a Super Bowl. Hell, simply fixing the defense and hoping to keep a RB healthy could have produced a Super Bowl in the very near future.

Everybody on this site knows that the offense was very good...and on the verge of dominant. All of this overreacting has led to the proliferation of a bunch of senseless ideas in Bronco fandom.

The McD kool-aid doesnt have any flavor, but it sure is strong enough to inebriate those who guzzle it down like agua.

Why anyone would feel the need to voraciously defend the newfound McD camp is beyond me...maybe all of these Broncos fans in the McD camp are nothing but spurned lovers.

2KBack
04-10-2009, 02:44 PM
The Broncos were certainly better than the 16th best offense. If I'm remembering right, they were near the bottom of the league in starting field position because their horrible defense couldn't stop any offense from moving the ball. If it wasn't a score the opponent would at least get a few first downs on nearly every drive. I will say that turnovers did hurt the offense. Too many ints and fumbles killed drives. So I'm not about to put all the blame on the D. But the offense was certainly better than the 16th offense in the league.

Being 12th in rushing offense is nothing to be happy about. That's slightly above average, and that wasn't typical for the Shanahan era. Being 12th means that sometimes they were good, but sometimes they couldn't run the ball at all.

As for having a Pro Bowl QB, I rather have one than not have one. Sure, teams make the playoffs without them. But how many of those teams win the Super Bowl? Over the years a few teams here and there have won it all without a really good QB, but that doesn't happen all that often. The goal isn't to just make the playoffs, it's to win the whole damn thing. Building a good team around Cutler could have produced a Super Bowl. Hell, simply fixing the defense and hoping to keep a RB healthy could have produced a Super Bowl in the very near future.

12th in rushing, but 3rd in the NFL in yards per rush. The problem wasn't the running game being poor, it was that the running game wasn't used.

broncos-rock
04-10-2009, 02:47 PM
this guy was on the fan and he is defintely an idiot. Btw the fan is extremely hard to listen to jim Armstrong is the biggest dork and sandy just loves to hear himself talk!

DBroncos4life
04-10-2009, 03:30 PM
Miami had the first overall pick last year, so their D was expected to be pretty damn bad for '08 as of this time last year. Pennington was the QB, made the playoffs.

The Falcons started a rookie, were the 3rd worst team the year before, and they went on to make the playoffs.

Arizona had Leinart and Warner in full on QB battle up until nearly the beginning of the season last year, they were thought to have one of the worst defenses in the NFL as well. Warner emerged as a top tier starter and they won despite their defense, which then flipped the switch and kicked some ass in the playoffs prior to their SB loss.

The only thing more idiotic than assuming that Cutler is an irreplaceable commodity in a league that has shown no one to be irreplaceable is to assume that a unit from '08 that has a completely different coaching staff and 2/3rds of the starters already purged will somehow perform the same in '09.

As for Cutler somehow powering the running game, the team ran for over 100 yards in all but three games, two of those it ran for 90+. Cutler had 8 great games and 8 below average games last year. There is no describable correlation between them and total rushing yards though. You'd really think there would be if the rushing game was feeding off his success.

The thing is both the Falcons and the Phins brought in more talented QBs then the year they had before to improve thier overall records. Something that gets over looked from time to time on this board.

GoBroncos84
04-10-2009, 03:40 PM
Yeah, I saw this on espn's site. Sadly, I whole heartedly agree. Dumbest move in recent memory by any team. We are without question an inferior team right now than we were before we traded Jay. I hope the draft picks eventually justify it, but right now its hard to see that happening. They will have to be extremely good for a very long time to come close to matching what I think Jay would have done.


But, as hard as it is to do, we have to move on. I just want this story to die now

Jason in LA
04-10-2009, 03:53 PM
funny thing is Quinn couldn't beat Anderson out of the starting job

Again, Quinn held out, which cost him any chance of competing for the starting job. They we're about to give the starting job to a rookie that missed most of training camp. Anderson got the job and made the most out of it.

Jason in LA
04-10-2009, 03:56 PM
12th in rushing, but 3rd in the NFL in yards per rush. The problem wasn't the running game being poor, it was that the running game wasn't used.

That's a misleading stat too. It's easier to run the ball when the defense is reading pass. Seeing that the Broncos passed so much (which I don't care for, I rather see them come out and run), the defense just played the pass. If the Broncos had come out and tried to run the ball early and often, and the defense stacked the box, they probably wouldn't have been so successful. So I wouldn't put a lot of stock into the YPC.

Rock Chalk
04-10-2009, 04:03 PM
OMG! An analyst thinks it was a dumb move to get rid of a pro bowl QB. What a ****ing moron! His opinion is wrong.

Flame him.

Wait a minute.

An analyst writes his opinion. Said opinion is read on a message board. Fans respond to that opinion. Some agree, most disagree.

How exactly is that flaming and yes, his opinion is wrong. Wrong to those that disagree with him. Right to those that agree with him.

Flamed? I didnt see anyone flame the guy. Just refute his opinion. Drek did so nicely with authority I might add.

Rock Chalk
04-10-2009, 04:05 PM
That's a misleading stat too. It's easier to run the ball when the defense is reading pass. Seeing that the Broncos passed so much (which I don't care for, I rather see them come out and run), the defense just played the pass. If the Broncos had come out and tried to run the ball early and often, and the defense stacked the box, they probably wouldn't have been so successful. So I wouldn't put a lot of stock into the YPC.

True Jason, but then the pass would have been even more successful. Which would have emptied the box and opened the run game back up.

Either way, you cannot argue that 7 different running backs ALL averaged 4 yards per carry. What other team in NFL history could boast that? And yet the team, more specifically Bates, refused to ****ing run the god damn rock.

Jason in LA
04-10-2009, 04:37 PM
True Jason, but then the pass would have been even more successful. Which would have emptied the box and opened the run game back up.

Either way, you cannot argue that 7 different running backs ALL averaged 4 yards per carry. What other team in NFL history could boast that? And yet the team, more specifically Bates, refused to ****ing run the god damn rock.

I love a great running game. Actually, I was against the thought that Shanahan should let Cutler go wild and pass every down. I wish they had done more to establish the running game. A balanced attack is the best. Actually, I like an attack that has a little more run than pass.

But I don't think Shanahan had the RBs to stick with the run (mainly because they all kept getting hurt). Seemed like once he had faith in a RB to carry the load, and was on the verge of running more, that RB got hurt, and it was back to passing all the time.

I don't think that the answer with this past year's team was simply to run the ball more. That's like the thought that a team has a great record when they run the ball more than 30 times. Does that mean simply run the ball 30 times and you'll win? No. The team ran the ball 30 times because of the flow of the game, because they were winning. So it's not as simply as to say that the RBs averaged over 4 yards so they should have ran the ball more. If they ran the ball a lot, that stat may have been lower (I'd say it probably would have been).

skpac1001
04-10-2009, 04:54 PM
Everybody on this site knows that the offense was very good...and on the verge of dominant. All of this overreacting has led to the proliferation of a bunch of senseless ideas in Bronco fandom.

The McD kool-aid doesnt have any flavor, but it sure is strong enough to inebriate those who guzzle it down like agua.

Why anyone would feel the need to voraciously defend the newfound McD camp is beyond me...maybe all of these Broncos fans in the McD camp are nothing but spurned lovers.

I just don't understand this point of view. We gained alot of yards. 2nd place just behind New Orleans. Because we passed alot. 2nd most just behind New Orleans. Teams that pass more gain more yards. We passed alot for several reasons. One is our bad defense put us in holes. Two is our turnovers on offense made the holes worse. Three is our lack of scoring made the holes even worse. The only defenses we looked above average against are those that were below average defenses.

wandlc
04-10-2009, 05:31 PM
16th in points. Those things that determine who won and lost the game.


Still 12th in total rushing yardage.


Ask Vince Young and Derek Anderson how much those Pro Bowl nods have guaranteed them for future success.


Like the Dolphins, Ravens, Vikings, Titans, and Panthers last year? Only about half the '09 playoff teams had what anyone would consider a "big-time player" at QB going into the season, and thats giving Warner.

Oh, or McDaniels' own 11-5 record with Matt Cassel behind center.

Massive fail.

And they led the league with 22 TD drives greater than 75 yards.

Drek
04-10-2009, 05:51 PM
The Broncos were certainly better than the 16th best offense.
The number of points they score said otherwise.

We going to be like Chargers fans now and proclaim the '08 Broncos the best 8-8 team to ever choke away a three game divisional lead? Like somehow thats worth something?

If I'm remembering right, they were near the bottom of the league in starting field position
I don't care where you start on a football field, 2nd in total yardage and 16th in points scored means there was a whole lot of fail inside the red zone by the '08 Broncos offense.

because their horrible defense couldn't stop any offense from moving the ball. If it wasn't a score the opponent would at least get a few first downs on nearly every drive.
The same horrible defense that also lead to the Broncos offense getting a ton of possessions with which to score. Fact is, if the defense doesn't completely suck they take possessions away from the offense and the '08 Broncos actually produce LESS yardage.

I will say that turnovers did hurt the offense. Too many ints and fumbles killed drives. So I'm not about to put all the blame on the D. But the offense was certainly better than the 16th offense in the league.
I'll quote Bill Parcells here. "You are what your record says you are". They put up the 16th most points. So the part of the offense that actually helps win games, scoring points, was the 16th most effective in the league.

Being 12th in rushing offense is nothing to be happy about. That's slightly above average, and that wasn't typical for the Shanahan era. Being 12th means that sometimes they were good, but sometimes they couldn't run the ball at all.
Not really, but it disproves the "8 RBs on IR, we had no running game!" meme so many on here parrot in defense of the 16th best scoring offense in the NFL. The running game was adequate, dare I say even very good for how few opportunities Bates gave them, even before the injury bug took its full measure out of the depth chart.

Also, there was only one game (Miami) where they didn't reach or break 90 yards of total rushing offense. Only three games where they didn't top 100. Thats pretty damn consistent. The biggest thing that screwed the running game was that Bates and Cutler were goofy in love with the pass. The two of them singlehandedly lost us a home game against Oakland, by running the same bull**** plays and making the same bull**** reads every possession like somehow the outcome was going to change.

As for having a Pro Bowl QB, I rather have one than not have one.
And I'd rather have a QB who 1. wants to be a Denver Bronco 2. respects his head coach and doesn't call him a liar publicly through a media interview without ever event talking to said head coach and 3. has won more games than he's lost.

Sure, teams make the playoffs without them. But how many of those teams win the Super Bowl? Over the years a few teams here and there have won it all without a really good QB, but that doesn't happen all that often. The goal isn't to just make the playoffs, it's to win the whole damn thing. Building a good team around Cutler could have produced a Super Bowl. Hell, simply fixing the defense and hoping to keep a RB healthy could have produced a Super Bowl in the very near future.
Isn't this just a self fulfilling prophecy?

Tom Brady was a nobody until he started winning titles. If he hadn't ever won a title and put up the same regular season numbers he had through 2005 he'd have been considered a good but not great QB. Most average fans wouldn't consider Drew Brees a superstar QB but they would say that about Ben Roethslithberger, who Brees outproduces nearly every single season.

Eli Manning was beginning to hear the bust label thrown around about him in NYC until he won a title on the back of a great defense and good running game.

As for star passers somehow guaranteeing titles, Peyton Manning is on pace to be the greatest statistical passer of all time. He's only won a single title (facing a very weak Bears team with Sexy Rexy as their QB), and other than that he's gotten his ass beat by teams with inferior passers. Brett Favre only got a single ring his whole career and he's one of the best passers of all time. Dan Marino? No rings.

The belief that you have a franchise QB then win titles is so insanely misguided that I don't even know where to begin shooting holes through it, this is just one small start. You win titles, then you have a franchise QB, that is how it really works. A guy proves he can win you the big game and that is when he becomes invaluable and irreplaceable. Until then he's just another guy hoping to get his team over the hump.

baja
04-10-2009, 05:55 PM
True Jason, but then the pass would have been even more successful. Which would have emptied the box and opened the run game back up.

Either way, you cannot argue that 7 different running backs ALL averaged 4 yards per carry. What other team in NFL history could boast that? And yet the team, more specifically<b> Bates, refused to ****ing run the god damn rock.

Well he wanted to but Jay said he would take him off speed dial.

colonelbeef
04-10-2009, 06:18 PM
but but but everyone says this is the best move evar!! Draft picks are awesome!!1111!


easily the worst move in franchise history, good to see not everyone is drinking the kool aid

colonelbeef
04-10-2009, 06:19 PM
And they led the league with 22 TD drives greater than 75 yards.

ouch!!!!!

getting angry all over again..

SportinOne
04-10-2009, 06:21 PM
didnt he JUST do that 1 year ago and go to 11 wins?

Yeah, with a TEAM that was 16-0 the year before. Basically, the best regular season team in history.. McDaniels and his boy toy proceeded to go 11-5 with one of the most talented teams ever assembled.

Awesome :thumbsup:

colonelbeef
04-10-2009, 06:22 PM
Yeah, with a TEAM that was 16-0 the year before. Basically, the best regular season team in history.. McDaniels and his boy toy proceeded to go 11-5 with one of the most talented teams ever assembled.

Awesome :thumbsup:

tsiguy won't understand what we are telling him until we have a 6-10 or 5-11 season unfortunately, and even then he will probably blame Shanahan

scttgrd
04-10-2009, 06:23 PM
Oh no most are drinking the kool-aid, lets see how many of these first rounders are starters before we start getting on our knees for the new staff/McDaniels. What you get in return states the value, so far we have butterflies and wishes.

As I have said before, he has what he wanted. All the power and say needed, now win. Nothing less than the playoffs will do in Denver.

SportinOne
04-10-2009, 06:24 PM
True Jason, but then the pass would have been even more successful. Which would have emptied the box and opened the run game back up.

Either way, you cannot argue that 7 different running backs ALL averaged 4 yards per carry. What other team in NFL history could boast that? And yet the team, more specifically Bates, refused to ****ing run the god damn rock.

How dare he, what with the plethora of running backs at his disposal!

We were running the ball just fine until we got to our 20th running back.

SportinOne
04-10-2009, 06:25 PM
tsiguy won't understand what we are telling him until we have a 6-10 or 5-11 season unfortunately, and even then he will probably blame Shanahan

It's going to take 10 losses, eh? Alright, I'll come back in late November.

Arkansas Bronco
04-10-2009, 06:41 PM
Shouldn't we just be glad to be #1 at something. ???

baja
04-10-2009, 07:44 PM
tsiguy won't understand what we are telling him until we have a 6-10 or 5-11 season unfortunately, and even then he will probably blame Shanahan

So do you think Shanahan has no responsibility for next season? It is still mostly his roster.

Kinda like Gruden winning with Dungy's team.

Inkana7
04-10-2009, 07:45 PM
So do you think Shanahan has no responsibility for next season? It is still mostly his roster.

Kinda like Gruden winning with Dungy's team.

Not really..

lazarus4444
04-10-2009, 07:55 PM
I would say #1 dumbest move was Stallworth getting in his car after drinking all night.

gunns
04-10-2009, 08:35 PM
1. The Denver Broncos trade quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears: I realize the Bears gave up a ton to get their hands on Cutler. But let's not forget that he led the league's second-ranked offense despite operating with a running game that saw eight different backs land on injured reserve. The last time I checked, NFL teams have a hard time finding Pro Bowl quarterbacks. Even with Kyle Orton and some high draft picks now in the fold, new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels is about to learn how tough it is to win without a big-time player at that position.


Uh, would that be a real big-time player (P. Manning) or a media hyped big-time player (E. Manning or Ben Rotheliesberger) or an average "flash in the pan" player (Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer)? I'm just wondering.

Rock Chalk
04-10-2009, 08:43 PM
How dare he, what with the plethora of running backs at his disposal!

We were running the ball just fine until we got to our 20th running back.

We ran the ball just fine even with the last back we used on the roster who we signed from a cell phone shop.

Or are you going to sit here and tell me that Tatum didnt do a great job when called upon? Oh sure, not every run was a highlight reel, but he did just about everything right when he was called upon after sitting out most of the year.

And you could argue that he wasnt even our least effective back (that honor actually goes to Pittman I believe).

Game 2: San Diego @ Denver. Secpmd Denver offensive drive, 2nd half. 1st down run, 4 yards. 2nd down run, 4 yards. 3rd and two, incomplete pass DEEP to Brandon Marshall.

That was one of SEVERAL stupid ****ing decisions by Bates last year. Our running back? Andre Hall. The QB? Jay Cutler. 3rd and 2 and he throws it ****ing deep to a double covered Brandon Marshall.

Brilliant.

**** Jay Cutler, we are so better off without that dumb****.

baja
04-10-2009, 08:56 PM
Uh, would that be a real big-time player (P. Manning) or a media hyped big-time player (E. Manning or Ben Rotheliesberger) or an average "flash in the pan" player (Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer)? I'm just wondering.

Maybe he meant Casell (I'll take 11 - 5 )

Killericon
04-10-2009, 09:12 PM
Yeah, with a TEAM that was 16-0 the year before. Basically, the best regular season team in history.. McDaniels and his boy toy proceeded to go 11-5 with one of the most talented teams ever assembled.

Awesome :thumbsup:

LOL

You know McDaniels ran the offense for the 16-0 team too, right?

Mr Chatterboodamn
04-10-2009, 11:16 PM
HEY! Stop your damn naysaying! Cutler is teh bomb and Chicago made the best move evah!!!!!

Denver is doomed, Denveris stoopid, Denver won't win 5 games this yeer wahhhhhhh!!


even your sarcasm sounds timid...not just you, but also the usual suspects.

i realize y'all gotta rationalize the situation in a way that doesn't disturb your fanhood...but it was a stupid move and every one of you was on cutler's nuts and optimistic about the FUTURE of the offense prior to McDaniels' Patriot Acts.

We traded that Mickey Mantle Topps card (which may be worth closer to honus wagner one day) for a wax pack of vintage cards that may or may not contain cards equaling the value relinquished.

I don't think you guys are remembering the same games I saw last year. Sure, Cutler wasn't always the hero. But I recall several early 10-20pt leads evaporate as if we had no defense was on the field. More than anything, I can't believe you guys are so ready to gut the team and start with all new guys. Sure it's the name on the front of the jersey, but to a large extent that logo is given meaning by the names on the back. It will play out one way or another, but I have a hunch the end lesson will be "to appreciate what you have" when things are that bad. Worse, no matter the result, our coach will be wearing a stupid hoodie in homage to the most disgusting coach ever. wonderful. i resubmit: WTF happened to our team?

WolfpackGuy
04-11-2009, 08:20 AM
Definitely the dumbest move of this decade, let alone this offseason.
Trade a known solid commodity for a lesser shaky commodity and 3 totally unknown commodities.
Doesn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the upcoming seasons.

colonelbeef
04-11-2009, 08:54 AM
Maybe he meant Casell (I'll take 11 - 5 )

The pats were better before Matt Cassel, and they will be better this year without him again. What does that say about Matt Cassel?

I'll answer for you. He is mediocre at best, and was being carried by what should have been a 15-1 team.

colonelbeef
04-11-2009, 08:56 AM
even your sarcasm sounds timid...not just you, but also the usual suspects.

i realize y'all gotta rationalize the situation in a way that doesn't disturb your fanhood...but it was a stupid move and every one of you was on cutler's nuts and optimistic about the FUTURE of the offense prior to McDaniels' Patriot Acts.

We traded that Mickey Mantle Topps card (which may be worth closer to honus wagner one day) for a wax pack of vintage cards that may or may not contain cards equaling the value relinquished.

I don't think you guys are remembering the same games I saw last year. Sure, Cutler wasn't always the hero. But I recall several early 10-20pt leads evaporate as if we had no defense was on the field. More than anything, I can't believe you guys are so ready to gut the team and start with all new guys. Sure it's the name on the front of the jersey, but to a large extent that logo is given meaning by the names on the back. It will play out one way or another, but I have a hunch the end lesson will be "to appreciate what you have" when things are that bad. Worse, no matter the result, our coach will be wearing a stupid hoodie in homage to the most disgusting coach ever. wonderful. i resubmit: WTF happened to our team?

superb post, and I agree with the sentiment 100%. Spot on. I really have to wonder what some of these people were watching last season- if you think the 08 Broncos missed the playoffs for any reason other than having fielded the single worst defense I have ever seen, you are lost and beyond conventional help.

Jason in LA
04-11-2009, 09:38 AM
The number of points they score said otherwise.

We going to be like Chargers fans now and proclaim the '08 Broncos the best 8-8 team to ever choke away a three game divisional lead? Like somehow thats worth something?


I don't care where you start on a football field, 2nd in total yardage and 16th in points scored means there was a whole lot of fail inside the red zone by the '08 Broncos offense.


The same horrible defense that also lead to the Broncos offense getting a ton of possessions with which to score. Fact is, if the defense doesn't completely suck they take possessions away from the offense and the '08 Broncos actually produce LESS yardage.


I'll quote Bill Parcells here. "You are what your record says you are". They put up the 16th most points. So the part of the offense that actually helps win games, scoring points, was the 16th most effective in the league.


Not really, but it disproves the "8 RBs on IR, we had no running game!" meme so many on here parrot in defense of the 16th best scoring offense in the NFL. The running game was adequate, dare I say even very good for how few opportunities Bates gave them, even before the injury bug took its full measure out of the depth chart.

Also, there was only one game (Miami) where they didn't reach or break 90 yards of total rushing offense. Only three games where they didn't top 100. Thats pretty damn consistent. The biggest thing that screwed the running game was that Bates and Cutler were goofy in love with the pass. The two of them singlehandedly lost us a home game against Oakland, by running the same bull**** plays and making the same bull**** reads every possession like somehow the outcome was going to change.


And I'd rather have a QB who 1. wants to be a Denver Bronco 2. respects his head coach and doesn't call him a liar publicly through a media interview without ever event talking to said head coach and 3. has won more games than he's lost.


Isn't this just a self fulfilling prophecy?

Tom Brady was a nobody until he started winning titles. If he hadn't ever won a title and put up the same regular season numbers he had through 2005 he'd have been considered a good but not great QB. Most average fans wouldn't consider Drew Brees a superstar QB but they would say that about Ben Roethslithberger, who Brees outproduces nearly every single season.

Eli Manning was beginning to hear the bust label thrown around about him in NYC until he won a title on the back of a great defense and good running game.

As for star passers somehow guaranteeing titles, Peyton Manning is on pace to be the greatest statistical passer of all time. He's only won a single title (facing a very weak Bears team with Sexy Rexy as their QB), and other than that he's gotten his ass beat by teams with inferior passers. Brett Favre only got a single ring his whole career and he's one of the best passers of all time. Dan Marino? No rings.

The belief that you have a franchise QB then win titles is so insanely misguided that I don't even know where to begin shooting holes through it, this is just one small start. You win titles, then you have a franchise QB, that is how it really works. A guy proves he can win you the big game and that is when he becomes invaluable and irreplaceable. Until then he's just another guy hoping to get his team over the hump.

First of all I've never taken the attitude of the Charger fans as the Broncos being the best average team of all time. Saying that they were better than the 16th best offense is not in any way saying that they were the best 16th scoring offense of all time.

You can't ignore the fact that poor field position hampers the offenses ability to score. The Broncos offense was one of the top teams in the league for yards gained per drive. But when you have a longer distance to go on average, it's going to be tougher to score. It's hard to sustain long drives. A team starting at the 30 yard line is going to have a much better chance of scoring than a team starting at the 15, regardless of which offense is better (the '01 Ravens are a perfect example of that. A great defense mixed in with a punter and punt returner who had great seasons allowed their offense to start a lot of drives with great field position.)

Like I said before, I'm not putting all the blame on the D because the O certainly did shoot themselves in the foot with turnovers. But I'd say the D being one of the worst ever was more of a factor. Putting the O in a hole by giving up a lot of points (which causes the O to abandon the running game) and the D put the O in a hole field position wise by not stopping anybody. Even when they forced a punt chances are they let the opposition get to mid field, meaning that the O would be pinned back inside the 20 yard line all game long.

The running game was decent at best, which isn't typical for Shanahan's offenses. I'd say that the D hurt the team way more because they flat out sucked, but the running game wasn't much help either. When teams know you're passing a lot it makes it easier on them, and they're going to get more ints. I wanted the Broncos to run the ball more, but players kept getting hurt. This team was pretty much a passing offense and that's it because the D sucked and the running game was just decent because of injuries.

As far as Culter goes, if they hadn't traded him he would have shown up and played and they would have gotten passed all of this. The whole thing is BS to me. I rather have a pissed off Cutler than Orton. And the win/loss record is BS. What QB was going to win with what Cutler had to work with? Is he supposed to be superman?

The Tom Brady's of the world are very rare. You can't plan for that. I'm not sure if you're saying that the Broncos may stumble onto a Tom Brady, or that Orton may somehow become a great QB. That's wishful thinking. They had a stud QB. Which is what every team wants.

You don't need a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl, but more times than not the team that wins the Super Bowl has a franchise QB. Actually, this decade, the only two teams have won it with QBs that I wouldn't consider a franchise QB (Ravens and Bucs, who both had great defenses). Go back to the '90, Montana, Aikman, Elway, Farve, Warner, Young, Rypien, and Hostettler won it. Out of that list five are HOFers, one is on the fence, and only Rypien and Hostettler weren't franchise QBs, but Rypien lit it up that year, and the Giants had a great defense. So, yeah, a team kind of does need a great QB to win it (even if that QB is only great for a short period of time). So over the past 18 Super Bowls it has only been won three times by QBs who weren't very good to great at that time. If you don't have a QB you better have a great defense ('01 Ravens, '02 Bucs, and '91 Giants had some great defenses).

Cutler gives the team a much better chance to win than Orton. It's silly to think otherwise.

colonelbeef
04-11-2009, 09:43 AM
First of all I've never taken the attitude of the Charger fans as the Broncos being the best average team of all time. Saying that they were better than the 16th best offense is not in any way saying that they were the best 16th scoring offense of all time.

You can't ignore the fact that poor field position hampers the offenses ability to score. The Broncos offense was one of the top teams in the league for yards gained per drive. But when you have a longer distance to go on average, it's going to be tougher to score. It's hard to sustain long drives. A team starting at the 30 yard line is going to have a much better chance of scoring than a team starting at the 15, regardless of which offense is better (the '01 Ravens are a perfect example of that. A great defense mixed in with a punter and punt returner who had great seasons allowed their offense to start a lot of drives with great field position.)

Like I said before, I'm not putting all the blame on the D because the O certainly did shoot themselves in the foot with turnovers. But I'd say the D being one of the worst ever was more of a factor. Putting the O in a hole by giving up a lot of points (which causes the O to abandon the running game) and the D put the O in a hole field position wise by not stopping anybody. Even when they forced a punt chances are they let the opposition get to mid field, meaning that the O would be pinned back inside the 20 yard line all game long.

The running game was decent at best, which isn't typical for Shanahan's offenses. I'd say that the D hurt the team way more because they flat out sucked, but the running game wasn't much help either. When teams know you're passing a lot it makes it easier on them, and they're going to get more ints. I wanted the Broncos to run the ball more, but players kept getting hurt. This team was pretty much a passing offense and that's it because the D sucked and the running game was just decent because of injuries.

As far as Culter goes, if they hadn't traded him he would have shown up and played and they would have gotten passed all of this. The whole thing is BS to me. I rather have a pissed off Cutler than Orton. And the win/loss record is BS. What QB was going to win with what Cutler had to work with? Is he supposed to be superman?

The Tom Brady's of the world are very rare. You can't plan for that. I'm not sure if you're saying that the Broncos may stumble onto a Tom Brady, or that Orton may somehow become a great QB. That's wishful thinking. They had a stud QB. Which is what every team wants.

You don't need a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl, but more times than not the team that wins the Super Bowl has a franchise QB. Actually, this decade, the only two teams have won it with QBs that I wouldn't consider a franchise QB (Ravens and Bucs, who both had great defenses). Go back to the '90, Montana, Aikman, Elway, Farve, Warner, Young, Rypien, and Hostettler won it. Out of that list five are HOFers, one is on the fence, and only Rypien and Hostettler weren't franchise QBs, but Rypien lit it up that year, and the Giants had a great defense. So, yeah, a team kind of does need a great QB to win it (even if that QB is only great for a short period of time). So over the past 18 Super Bowls it has only been won three times by QBs who weren't very good to great at that time. If you don't have a QB you better have a great defense ('01 Ravens, '02 Bucs, and '91 Giants had some great defenses).

Cutler gives the team a much better chance to win than Orton. It's silly to think otherwise.

rep. have to encourage the posters who actually understand football and how various parts of a team in what is perhaps the most team oriented of sports can affect another portion. In this case, awful D and ST affecting the O, and therefore the popular perception of Cutler.

Drek
04-11-2009, 11:00 AM
rep. have to encourage the posters who actually understand football and how various parts of a team in what is perhaps the most team oriented of sports can affect another portion. In this case, awful D and ST affecting the O, and therefore the popular perception of Cutler.

Yeah, it gave Cutler about 10% more pass attempts than he probably otherwise would've gotten.

And Bates' pass heavy game plans gave him another 10% or more.

The notion that he was a proven stud QB came entirely from his counting stats, ignoring the fact that his rate stats were pretty damn mediocre. He also didn't deserve to make the Pro-Bowl over Phillip Rivers by a long shot, you could make a damn strong argument that Chad Pennington had a better season, and Matt Cassel's was very comparable with similar offensive weaponry and a scheme that the Broncos were trying to mimic.

He decided he was a franchise QB and he didn't want to play for someone who wasn't going to kiss his ass, so he's gone.

And he's not that damn rare. If we'd kept him he'd have been at best the #2 QB in our division, arguably the #3 (obviously behind Rivers, possibly Cassel). He's now the 2nd best QB in the NFC North (behind Aaron Rogers). There was a QB taken in the '07 draft who is already a better player than Cutler (Matt Ryan) and another who has nearly as much potential (Flacco, and a similar lack of consistency to go with it).

He's being grossly overrated on this board by some who either have an axe to grind with the new coach's previous boss, the owner, or those who just can't get over their hero worship.

Bronx33
04-11-2009, 11:56 AM
Sadly ( cutler) wanted out.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 12:04 PM
You know McDaniels ran the offense for the 16-0 team too, right?

You know McDaniels ran the offense for a team that stole opponents' defensive signals, right?

Cito Pelon
04-11-2009, 12:45 PM
No one else on the Broncos '08 offense even belongs in the NFL. Cutler carried their sorry asses just like he carried the sorry ass defense. If it wasn't for them and Shanahan had just let Cutler go out on his own both ways every down we'd be a 19-0 SB winner. He's a FRANCHISE QB!

Dude was the indomitable force, how can a team win without a guy like that? Really, how can it be possible? 25 TD passes, 18 INT's, man, how do you replace that? It's, like, impossible. Sarcasm/off.

Inkana7
04-11-2009, 01:20 PM
You know McDaniels ran the offense for a team that stole opponents' defensive signals, right?

You're better than that, Buff.

epicSocialism4tw
04-11-2009, 01:39 PM
You know McDaniels ran the offense for a team that stole opponents' defensive signals, right?

Brilliant.

Wes Mantooth
04-11-2009, 01:50 PM
We won! We won!

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 01:58 PM
You're better than that, Buff.

How do you mean? That's not a cheap shot, it's the truth.

Belichick knows 500,000 reasons and one missing 1st rounder why it's the truth. And Josh was calling plays for a couple of those years, and the play-caller MUST'VE known the info - he's the crux of the scandal - the one who used the info to tailor their play calls.

Remember the Eagle (might've even been Brian Dawkins) who said after the Super Bowl, "there's no way they guessed right every single time on our blitzes." That was Josh "guessing" ... starting the next season anyway he called the plays.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 02:00 PM
How do you mean? That's not a cheap shot, it's the truth.

Belichick knows 500,000 reasons and one missing 1st rounder why it's the truth. And Josh was calling plays for a couple of those years, and the play-caller MUST'VE known the info - he's the crux of the scandal - the one who used the info to tailor their play calls.

Remember the Eagle (might've even been Brian Dawkins) who said after the Super Bowl, "there's no way they guessed right every single time on our blitzes." That was Josh "guessing" ... starting the next season anyway he called the plays.

come on. you are so reaching for reasons to hate mcdaniels and you know it.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 03:01 PM
come on. you are so reaching for reasons to hate mcdaniels and you know it.

I don't hate him ... I just think he was far too inexperienced to be in charge UPSTAIRS, and we're missing Cutler and Goodman because of it. BUt you can't blame Josh for taking every bit of power he could. That's what we all do ... can't blame Josh. You must blame Pat Bowlen. He promised power-sharing - and I for one was confident with Goodman. But Pat reneged on the promise. And we lost two of the most important people on the organization.

I am actually 100% confident Josh will be an excellent offensive coach. I'm hopeful he will be an excellent head coach, though the likelihood is slim ... Crennel and Weis had better resumes, and they both failed.



BTW tsiguy ... you say I'm "reaching," but what is wrong with my conclusions there? I'm willing to forgive the Pats scandal, I just can't forget it (I think the scandal is the reason why several teams did not consider Josh for open spots btw).

frerottenextelway
04-11-2009, 03:17 PM
He's being grossly overrated on this board by some who either have an axe to grind with the new coach's previous boss, the owner, or those who just can't get over their hero worship.

How many other players in the league would go for as much as Cutler went for in a trade? Maybe 10...

Dedhed
04-11-2009, 03:20 PM
Four letters: ESPiN, alright 4.5.

Jason in LA
04-12-2009, 08:27 AM
Yeah, it gave Cutler about 10% more pass attempts than he probably otherwise would've gotten.

And Bates' pass heavy game plans gave him another 10% or more.

The notion that he was a proven stud QB came entirely from his counting stats, ignoring the fact that his rate stats were pretty damn mediocre. He also didn't deserve to make the Pro-Bowl over Phillip Rivers by a long shot, you could make a damn strong argument that Chad Pennington had a better season, and Matt Cassel's was very comparable with similar offensive weaponry and a scheme that the Broncos were trying to mimic.

He decided he was a franchise QB and he didn't want to play for someone who wasn't going to kiss his ass, so he's gone.

And he's not that damn rare. If we'd kept him he'd have been at best the #2 QB in our division, arguably the #3 (obviously behind Rivers, possibly Cassel). He's now the 2nd best QB in the NFC North (behind Aaron Rogers). There was a QB taken in the '07 draft who is already a better player than Cutler (Matt Ryan) and another who has nearly as much potential (Flacco, and a similar lack of consistency to go with it).

He's being grossly overrated on this board by some who either have an axe to grind with the new coach's previous boss, the owner, or those who just can't get over their hero worship.

You sound like somebody that just hates Cutler so you'd say any halfway decent QB is better than him, just because you don't like the guy. I liked Cutler a lot and thought he was a stud, but I will say that he did act like a punk this offseason. I can see it both ways. But management should have handled that without trading him. They really screwed the team. When it comes down to it they made the decision, not Cutler. Cutler didn't have an control and would have shown up to play, and he would have been a stud again.

You shouldn't let your hatred for a guy stop you from seeing the positive aspects of him, which out weighted the negatives by a long shot.

BTW, it's crazy to say that Aaron Rogers is better. Based on what? And Matt Ryan? I liked Matt Ryan a lot, but he had a good defense and a great running game. Put him on the '08 Broncos and he'd look like a rookie who didn't know what he was doing. Same with Flacco. The Raven's D drove that team while Flacco got most of the press. You think he'd throw for over 4,000 yards and 29 TDs if he played for the Broncos. I don't think so. And Matt Castle has AJ Feeley and Scott Mitchell written all over him. He played on a team that was coming off an undefeated season. He's not going to have much success in KC, and he wouldn't have with the '08 Broncos.