PDA

View Full Version : Totally Awesome Jay Cutler Poll


Popps
06-25-2009, 02:21 PM
Jay's and his agent's decision to part ways with the Broncos is being discussed.

Some are saying finances could have influenced them to quickly ask for the trade, and some ruling it out.

Where do you stand?

Doggcow
06-25-2009, 02:22 PM
No poll.

Popps
06-25-2009, 02:26 PM
No poll.

Up.

broncofan2438
06-25-2009, 02:29 PM
I was just listening to the guys on Sirius NFL Radio and they were discussing this. THey said that he will probably be another $100million dollar contract man. They said that he would receive about $1mil per game. Rediculous.....The Broncos may have lost a great QB but at least we dont have to pay that fag that kind of money

UberBroncoMan
06-25-2009, 02:30 PM
Option #3: is sick of talking about Jay Cutler.

24champ
06-25-2009, 02:31 PM
People can't let go of Jay...poor Popps.

Anaximines
06-25-2009, 02:31 PM
ah course

Bronx33
06-25-2009, 02:33 PM
I was just listening to the guys on Sirius NFL Radio and they were discussing this. THey said that he will probably be another $100million dollar contract man. They said that he would receive about $1mil per game. Rediculous.....The Broncos may have lost a great QB but at least we dont have to pay that fag that kind of money


Owners are stupid if you ask me if they would all get on the same page these primadonnas would be making what they are worth which isn't 100 million.

Northman
06-25-2009, 02:35 PM
He had issues with the coach before McD even took the reigns.

BroncoBuff
06-25-2009, 02:37 PM
Circumstances have long since settled this issue, but if you insist....

TheDave
06-25-2009, 02:37 PM
I think Jay was looking for a raise but I doubt the Broncos financial situation (whether real or imaginary) played into their decision.

Beantown Bronco
06-25-2009, 02:38 PM
He had issues with the coach before McD even took the reigns.

How could he have issues with a guy before he was even hired?

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 02:39 PM
opps there goes another Jay Cutler poll by popps.

Anyone with an IQ of one is going to understand that the Bears will give Cutler a new ****ing contract, its only a matter of when they will do it. For the love of god popps they have 2 first round picks and a third rounder invested in him. So yeah they will pay him. But the thing that you will always miss is the fact that the contract wasn't inplace prior to him getting into Chitown. If this was about money contract talks would have been all over the media which they are not. My guess is Cutler will play out this year under his new contract and then he will get a new one worked out giving your theory no legs to stand on.

OBF1
06-25-2009, 02:40 PM
Waffles, plain and simple

Rabb
06-25-2009, 02:41 PM
Option #3: is sick of talking about Jay Cutler.

this

Beantown Bronco
06-25-2009, 02:41 PM
Waffles, plain and simple

I'll see your waffles and raise you a stack of chocolate chip pancakes and a heaping pile of crispy bacon.

24champ
06-25-2009, 02:42 PM
opps there goes another Jay Cutler poll by popps.


http://dontgosouth.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obsession1.jpg

BroncoBuff
06-25-2009, 02:44 PM
http://dontgosouth.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obsession1.jpg

ya think? hmmm...

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 02:47 PM
I love how he talks about not having an agenda but somehow in every thread it gets turned into Jay wanted more money and he and his agent are babies. Start a thread about Marshall wanting more money and poof he is doing what Cuterbus did. Its sad really

Popps
06-25-2009, 03:24 PM
I was just listening to the guys on Sirius NFL Radio and they were discussing this. THey said that he will probably be another $100million dollar contract man.

Again, that's just speculation like anything else. But, my question from the other thread was simply... if Jay or Brandon approached the front office with these kinds of requests, did our front office just tell them that this kind of thing wasn't going to happen... hence the quick "trade me" responses.

.The Broncos may have lost a great QB but at least we dont have to pay that fag that kind of money

ROFL!

Popps
06-25-2009, 03:26 PM
I love how he talks about not having an agenda but somehow in every thread it gets turned into Jay wanted more money

Actually, my other thread was a general question. You and a few buddies went Cutler-crazy.

Then, you made the comment that no one thought money could be involved.

We'll see.

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 03:31 PM
Actually, my other thread was a general question. You and a few buddies went Cutler-crazy.

Then, you made the comment that no one thought money could be involved.

We'll see.

lol I didn't start posting that thread well after Cutler was brought up. Infact Footsteps tried keeping you on the topic and you kept saying his posts are to long. Money isn't the issue pops otherwise he would have a new contract by now or atleast we would have heard about it by now. He has been traded for over what 3 months now and still no new contract.

maher_tyler
06-25-2009, 03:51 PM
I don't think so!!

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 03:51 PM
So for the people that think it was money driven care to give any real reason why there isn't a contract in place for him now and why he is still in camp with the contract he signed with Denver?

Northman
06-25-2009, 04:21 PM
How could he have issues with a guy before he was even hired?

By his actions and comments following Shanahan's firing. Jay was already mouthing off to the media about his displeasure about it. Which means, it didnt matter who Bowlen hired it would seem that Jay just wanted out of the situation altogether.

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 04:27 PM
By his actions and comments following Shanahan's firing. Jay was already mouthing off to the media about his displeasure about it. Which means, it didnt matter who Bowlen hired it would seem that Jay just wanted out of the situation altogether.

I think he would have stayed if Bates was the HC.

Northman
06-25-2009, 04:28 PM
I think he would have stayed if Bates was the HC.

Maybe.

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 04:34 PM
Can anyone tell me out of all the players that held out for a new contract that either got one from his old team or got traded that didn't get a new contract from the new team?

Popps
06-25-2009, 04:39 PM
lol I didn't start posting that thread well after Cutler was brought up.

Cutler was brought up in the OP. He was part of the story. No need to ignore him. Also no need to make it just about him. But, for fun... I figured why not see if "most" (in your words) people believed this had absolutely nothing to do with money.

Money isn't the issue pops otherwise he would have a new contract by now or atleast we would have heard about it by now.

Nonsense.

If Cutlerbus was told that the cupboard was bare in Denver, they may have thought "anywhere is better than here." The agent may have gotten a read on Chicago as being a potentially contract-friendly city, never having had a real "franchise" QB.

Beyond that, teams trade players.... not agents. So, your assertion that Jay hasn't asked for a raise, therefore he WON'T is pretty baseless.

Northman
06-25-2009, 04:50 PM
Cutler was brought up in the OP. He was part of the story. No need to ignore him. Also no need to make it just about him. But, for fun... I figured why not see if "most" (in your words) people believed this had absolutely nothing to do with money.



Nonsense.

If Cutlerbus was told that the cupboard was bare in Denver, they may have thought "anywhere is better than here." The agent may have gotten a read on Chicago as being a potentially contract-friendly city, never having had a real "franchise" QB.

Beyond that, teams trade players.... not agents. So, your assertion that Jay hasn't asked for a raise, therefore he WON'T is pretty baseless.



Its certainly possible money could of been a motive but seeing how Denver and its players cant keep anything secret i highly doubt his issue was money. Jay wears his emotions on his sleeve and is too careless to keep anything secret. Im sure we would of heard at least something in regards to a new contract at some point during that fiasco.

mr007
06-25-2009, 05:13 PM
Cutler was brought up in the OP. He was part of the story. No need to ignore him. Also no need to make it just about him. But, for fun... I figured why not see if "most" (in your words) people believed this had absolutely nothing to do with money.



Nonsense.

If Cutlerbus was told that the cupboard was bare in Denver, they may have thought "anywhere is better than here." The agent may have gotten a read on Chicago as being a potentially contract-friendly city, never having had a real "franchise" QB.

Beyond that, teams trade players.... not agents. So, your assertion that Jay hasn't asked for a raise, therefore he WON'T is pretty baseless.

I don't see how you could possibly think this has anything to do with money. It makes absolutely no sense, if it did, I think he would have signed a new contract before ever taking the field with the Bears.

He's going to a team with an offense that really doesn't compare with Denver's on paper. Statistically speaking, he most likely won't have the type of yards and TDs he put up here. He has a real chance of regression and an added chance of injury if you consider the difference in o-lines and QB pressure.

He was disgruntled, was promised certain things, and saw promises fall before his face. He was pissed and his pride took precedence over being with this team... that's all there is to it.

Popps
06-25-2009, 06:04 PM
Its certainly possible money could of been a motive but seeing how Denver and its players cant keep anything secret i highly doubt his issue was money..

Well, I think it was a contributory factor, at very least.

When there is purported to be a "personality" dispute between two people, and one of those people brings his finance person to that meeting... I think there's a very clear tell in that scenario.

Was it solely financial? I don't think so. But, Bus Cook screwed up the Favre situation and likely got his claws into this one, as well.

Again, if Bowlen/McDaniels would have plopped a fat contract out there on the table, there's a chance this may have gone much differently.

footstepsfrom#27
06-25-2009, 06:11 PM
Who gives a rat crap? It doesn't matter whether he did or didn't so this is just another worthless poll/thread.

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 07:34 PM
I don't see how you could possibly think this has anything to do with money. It makes absolutely no sense, if it did, I think he would have signed a new contract before ever taking the field with the Bears.

He's going to a team with an offense that really doesn't compare with Denver's on paper. Statistically speaking, he most likely won't have the type of yards and TDs he put up here. He has a real chance of regression and an added chance of injury if you consider the difference in o-lines and QB pressure.

He was disgruntled, was promised certain things, and saw promises fall before his face. He was pissed and his pride took precedence over being with this team... that's all there is to it.
See its really that simple. It would have been much easier for him to cash in on a new deal with his new team when he was traded, instead not one word about more money or a new contract. Its not like the Bears have a first round pick this year or next year to worry about so they have extra money sitting around for Jay.

Kaylore
06-25-2009, 07:56 PM
There are people here who really believe a man is that sensitive, that this was all about hurt feelings. He played QB in the SEC and in the pros, probably has heard it all - but no! McDaniels' ways were the thing that really hurt his feelings!

Some of you are idiots.

Florida_Bronco
06-25-2009, 08:06 PM
I think he would have stayed if Bates was the HC.

Please don't even make me think about that.

Popps
06-25-2009, 08:18 PM
[B]There are people here who really believe a man is that sensitive, that this was all about hurt feelings. He played QB in the SEC and in the pros, probably has heard it all - but no! McDaniels' ways were the thing that really hurt his feelings!

Some of you are idiots.


















Lock it up.

Br0nc0Buster
06-25-2009, 09:44 PM
I am not sure, but there obviously was another motive(or at least part of the motive) for his behavior other than he didnt trust McDaniels.

No way a grown man gets that upset over rumors.

I am not concerned so much with they why, just the fact that he did want out.

He said as much himself, on several occasions.

Just a very odd outcome, I dont think I have ever seen anything like it before

DBroncos4life
06-25-2009, 10:28 PM
So pops are you surprised that he doesn't have a new deal in place and when do you think he will have a new deal? I mean the guy only cares about money so it should be soon right? What are your thoughts if he doesn't get a new deal this year and plays out our contract for the year? Does that change your point of view that this was more about money and not about him being happy with Denver ie McD?

mr007
06-25-2009, 10:43 PM
There are people here who really believe a man is that sensitive, that this was all about hurt feelings. He played QB in the SEC and in the pros, probably has heard it all - but no! McDaniels' ways were the thing that really hurt his feelings!

Some of you are idiots.

Umm if you don't know men that are that <b>STUBBORN</b> maybe you should consider looking elsewhere to call people idiots.

mr007
06-25-2009, 10:44 PM
[B]


Lock it up.

Shocker that would be your response......

GreatBronco16
06-25-2009, 10:46 PM
I am not concerned so much with they why, just the fact that he did want out.

He said as much himself, on several occasions.



He sure did say so himself. Right after he found out he had been traded, he was quoted as saying that he never wanted it to get that far, and that he really didn't want to be traded.

The boy must have gotten a hold of some bad puntang. Cause everyone knows that P**y makes a man go stupid.

Popps
06-25-2009, 11:03 PM
Shocker that would be your response......


You're correct. It shouldn't be a shocker that my opinion hasn't changed on the issue.

And, it looks like "most" of the respondents in fact DO believe that finances played an issue in how things played out.

So, if feel this was strictly a touchy-feely situation, you're welcome to to share that opinion with the minority of posters around here.

Popps
06-25-2009, 11:06 PM
He sure did say so himself. Right after he found out he had been traded, he was quoted as saying that he never wanted it to get that far, and that he really didn't want to be traded.
.

Gosh, now... I wonder what he could have meant by that?

If, when he said... "I want to be traded"....

he really didn't mean... "I want to be traded"....

I wonder what he really meant....

http://www.lovespeaks.net/images/confused-chimp-chimpanzee-monkey1.jpg


Hmmmmmmmmm.......

Blueflame
06-26-2009, 12:38 AM
By his actions and comments following Shanahan's firing. Jay was already mouthing off to the media about his displeasure about it. Which means, it didnt matter who Bowlen hired it would seem that Jay just wanted out of the situation altogether.

In that case, all the reports that he was in the office on his own time (while most other NFL players were on vacation) trying to get acquainted with the new coaches and familiarize himself with the new offensive system.... must have been false. Why would he have done all of that if he had (at that time) been determined to force a trade? No. Something had to have happened between the "going in to the office and doing everything possible to ease the transition" and "leaving Denver, refusing to take calls, requesting a trade". We all know what that was: the bungled attempt to trade him away.

Popps
06-26-2009, 12:44 AM
We all know what that was: the bungled attempt to trade him away.

No, Blue... apparently, the majority of the people here DON'T believe that's all it was.

The majority of the people here believe this ran deeper than a bratty kid being bratty when he realized he was a business commodity like all NFL players.

Taco John
06-26-2009, 01:21 AM
Hopefully everything we saw out of the guy was a fluke, and he'll completely suck in Chicago. It would suck if this guy went on to be the next mega-Super star. Worse if he's in our face every week selling us Dish Network or some such. I think I would want to punch Jay Cutler in the face if he tried to sling Dish Network on me.

Blueflame
06-26-2009, 01:21 AM
No, Blue... apparently, the majority of the people here DON'T believe that's all it was.

The majority of the people here believe this ran deeper than a bratty kid being bratty when he realized he was a business commodity like all NFL players.

Yeah, his agent realized that a rookie coach had made an epic blunder, leaving an exit... and opportunity... open. Still... Cutler was doing everything right until McDaniels screwed the pooch and got schooled by Belicheat.

Popps
06-26-2009, 01:42 AM
Hopefully everything we saw out of the guy was a fluke, and he'll completely suck in Chicago. It would suck if this guy went on to be the next mega-Super star. Worse if he's in our face every week selling us Dish Network or some such. I think I would want to punch Jay Cutler in the face if he tried to sling Dish Network on me.

:rofl:

Blueflame
06-26-2009, 01:46 AM
Hopefully everything we saw out of the guy was a fluke, and he'll completely suck in Chicago. It would suck if this guy went on to be the next mega-Super star. Worse if he's in our face every week selling us Dish Network or some such. I think I would want to punch Jay Cutler in the face if he tried to sling Dish Network on me.

I will never go back to Dish Network... their "customer service" is nonexistent.

Blueflame
06-26-2009, 03:47 AM
There are people here who really believe a man is that sensitive, that this was all about hurt feelings. He played QB in the SEC and in the pros, probably has heard it all - but no! McDaniels' ways were the thing that really hurt his feelings!

Some of you are idiots.

My hypothesis of what really happened? Belicheat knew McDaniels would "bite" on any possibility of acquiring Cassel (his ego would want to prove that he can win with a "nobody" QB with two different teams and/or he would want to build his new offense around "his guy"... whatever). Belicheat never intended to actually make that trade regardless. Is it a coincidence that the "McDaniels tried unsuccesfully to trade Cutler for Cassel" (complete with a non-specific offer rumor that hinted at the possibility of a straight-up, one-for-one bargain) scandal broke in the Boston media? I don't think it is.

kamakazi_kal
06-26-2009, 06:39 AM
Yeah, his agent realized that a rookie coach had made an epic blunder, leaving an exit... and opportunity... open. Still... Cutler was doing everything right until McDaniels screwed the pooch and got schooled by Belicheat.

yeah .... this ...

Cutler is/was going to get paid.

Denver would have had a player to market around. Does it have to go deeper then Cutler didn't trust Mcd after the botched trade?

It's weird how in NE. The team markets around Brady (given) but bellicheck also...... I mean where else does the HC get his own sweatshirt and so much pub .....

rastaman
06-26-2009, 06:54 AM
Owners are stupid if you ask me if they would all get on the same page these primadonnas would be making what they are worth which isn't 100 million.

So why should the owners be the only ones allowed to make 100's of millions or perhaps billions! Last time I checked, it the players that make the game the way it is today. Never saw Pat Bowlen return punts or kicks, never saw him score any TDs. Ummmmmm what am I missing here? Oh wait, Pat Bowlen makes tackles, and kick FG!!! Ah wait, that can't be. But you get my point.

Fans don't fillup football stadiums to go watch the owners....Riiiiiight. Fans come to watch the players. The players take all the risk and they should be paid what the market will bear.

Whats next! Soon the fans will be yelling and protesting the players union should be abolished.

rastaman
06-26-2009, 07:05 AM
He sure did say so himself. Right after he found out he had been traded, he was quoted as saying that he never wanted it to get that far, and that he really didn't want to be traded.

The boy must have gotten a hold of some bad puntang. Cause everyone knows that P**y makes a man go stupid.

So there's bad putang running around in Denver. Maybe Bowlen and McD should quarantine the players so they won't come in contact with any bad putang.....this could be a locker room destroyer. :sunshine:

Captain 'Dre
06-26-2009, 07:07 AM
Jay's and his agent's decision to part ways with the Broncos is being discussed.

Some are saying finances could have influenced them to quickly ask for the trade, and some ruling it out.

Where do you stand?

If money was an issue, it was a secondary concern. IMO, Jay would have hissy-fitted even wth a more lucrative contract in place.

Popps
06-26-2009, 09:40 AM
So why should the owners be the only ones allowed to make 100's of millions or perhaps billions! .

Owners put forth the capital and risk to start (or buy) the business. So, they reap the rewards. (Or not.) Players are employees. Champ Bailey didn't have to risk a penny of capital to become a multi-millionaire.

Those who engage in the financial risk and task of owning a franchise stand to make more money than their employees if things go well. Conversely, there are also plenty of sports owners that lose money... while their players still make millions.

So, it's just basic business principle. I don't blame NFL employees for seeking bigger salaries, and I don't blame the business owners for attempting to turn the largest profit they can.

~Crash~
06-26-2009, 10:22 AM
Actually, my other thread was a general question. You and a few buddies went Cutler-crazy.

Then, you made the comment that no one thought money could be involved.

We'll see.

What part of this has not been covered Cutler was in talks with a long term contract . on Friday he goes in to talk to our back stabbing coach . sits there 45 minuets gives up goes out of town then get told a couple days latter that he is getting traded that Mcd does not believe in him .

then cutler says I was shopped and that I will not be a Bronco he stated he would come to the mandatory stuff but he would not need to that he was getting traded . what the **** is so hard about this ?

mr007
06-26-2009, 10:42 AM
You're correct. It shouldn't be a shocker that my opinion hasn't changed on the issue.

And, it looks like "most" of the respondents in fact DO believe that finances played an issue in how things played out.

So, if feel this was strictly a touchy-feely situation, you're welcome to to share that opinion with the minority of posters around here.

Actually, the wording of your poll is the only reason people are actually "supporting" your point of view. You used words like "could" and "possible" to promote your obvious bias.

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 12:43 PM
Yeah, his agent realized that a rookie coach had made an epic blunder, leaving an exit... and opportunity... open. Still... Cutler was doing everything right until McDaniels screwed the pooch and got schooled by Belicheat.
That's it right there .... :thumbs:

No matter how much you wish it was true, wish it was true, wish it was true ... no matter how many times Popps clicks his heels in girlish anticipation, Cutler's leaving had nothing to do with money. That's been proven. If he thought it was really about money, then why does he keep whining about all these other Jay-hating theories?


If Cutlerbus was told that the cupboard was bare in Denver, they may have thought "anywhere is better than here." The agent may have gotten a read on Chicago as being a potentially contract-friendly city, never having had a real "franchise" QB.
"Cupboard was bare in Denver"?!

Chicago is a "contract friendly city?"

Good heavens ... you're not acting are you? You really are an idiot.

Popps, Lyndon Larouche called ... he wants his crazy back.



So, your assertion that Jay hasn't asked for a raise, therefore he WON'T is pretty baseless.
They're not assertions, they're facts. He hasn't asked for a new contract yet, per both Bus Cook and Jerry Angelo.


But I think on the other point, you just might be on to something there Sherlock ... that point IS baseless! Jay probably WILL ask for a raise someday. That BASTARD!

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 12:46 PM
http://dontgosouth.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obsession1.jpg

Yeah, and this obsession is even worse than his tirades and anti-polls against D.J. Williams, Brandon Marshall and others. This angry obsession honestly makes me wonder what's wrong with the guy ... I've beat him down so often lately he refuses to even respond to me now. footsteps will be next, he's schooled him several times here lately. footsteps ... here's what to look for when he's about ready to surrender: He'll start calling you a "silly c##t," a "****er," and he'll accuse you of "hanging on his nutsack" (whatever that means). That's when you know you've won :thumbs:


One thing I know for sure now ... I wasn't here for the Popps-TJ Griese wars, but based on his behavior, I'm 99% sure TJ was correct on all counts.



Actually, the wording of your poll is the only reason people are actually "supporting" your point of view. You used words like "could" and "possible" to promote your obvious bias.Exactly. The sad part is he thought we wouldn't notice :oyvey:

Popps
06-26-2009, 01:04 PM
Actually, the wording of your poll is the only reason people are actually "supporting" your point of view. You used words like "could" and "possible" to promote your obvious bias.

The statement in question was...

"Most" feel money had nothing to do with this.

So, the claim was that "most" people feel this had nothing to do with money.

That has since been proven incorrect. The majority in fact feels that money did or could have had something to do with it. Hence, disproving the statement that "most" feel it could have had NOTHING to do with it.

Thanks for voting. :)

kamakazi_kal
06-26-2009, 01:12 PM
Yeah, and this obsession is even worse than his tirades and anti-polls against D.J. Williams, Brandon Marshall and others. This angry obsession honestly makes me wonder what's wrong with the guy ... I've beat him down so often lately he refuses to even respond to me now. footsteps will be next, he's schooled him several times here lately. footsteps ... here's what to look for when he's about ready to surrender: He'll start calling you a "silly c##t," a "****er," and he'll accuse you of "hanging on his nutsack" (whatever that means). That's when you know you've won :thumbs:


One thing I know for sure now ... I wasn't here for the Popps-TJ Griese wars, but based on his behavior, I'm 99% sure TJ was correct on all counts.



Exactly. The sad part is he thought we wouldn't notice :oyvey:


ha ha ha ....... even I got the nutsack comment.. Hilarious!

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 01:14 PM
ha ha ha ....... even I got the nutsack comment.. Hilarious!

You must travel in different circles than I ... ::)

24champ
06-26-2009, 01:27 PM
One thing I know for sure now ... I wasn't here for the Popps-TJ Griese wars, but based on his behavior, I'm 99% sure TJ was correct on all counts.



Well he is obsessed with Jay for some odd reason, just can't stop talking about Jay. He's gone, time to move on. Whatever happens in the following seasons...happens. What's done is done.

I don't know what happened with Popps when he was on a crusade to fix the defensive line...a problem we ignored this offseason. You won't hear anything about the DL from Popps...no,it's all about Jay did this and Jay did that.

Rock Chalk
06-26-2009, 01:33 PM
I'll see your waffles and raise you a stack of chocolate chip pancakes and a heaping pile of crispy bacon.

Sold!

Popps
06-26-2009, 01:52 PM
Well he is obsessed with Jay for some odd reason, just can't stop talking about Jay. .

Oh, you silly Champ.

Now, you know very well that's not the case.

In fact, this poll was the result of someone hijacking a Broncos Finances thread into a Jay Cutler Widow-fest.

But, we have it all straightened out at this point. Thanks. :welcome:

footstepsfrom#27
06-26-2009, 02:01 PM
In fact, this poll was the result of someone hijacking a Broncos Finances thread into a Jay Cutler Widow-fest.
"Somone"...was you. :clown:

Fact is...like everything else related to this...nobody really knows.

Popps
06-26-2009, 02:05 PM
"Somone"...was you. :clown:


Actually, the question related more to whether or not Marshall might have been given the "cupboard is bare" line, and hence... could Cutler have been as well?


Fact is...like everything else related to this...nobody really knows.

Can't argue with that.

footstepsfrom#27
06-26-2009, 02:07 PM
Jay probably WILL ask for a raise someday. That BASTARD!
He goes into Chicago with good will on his side and doesn't ask for a raise...that seems to seal the deal. If he was really worried about that he'd have already been making that point with the Bears. Whether he asked or didn't...doesn't really matter anyway.

footstepsfrom#27
06-26-2009, 02:14 PM
Popps, Lyndon Larouche called ... he wants his crazy back.
LOL

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 02:17 PM
This poll was the result of someone hijacking a Broncos Finances thread into a Jay Cutler Widow-fest.

Who, me?

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 02:18 PM
Whether he asked or didn't...doesn't really matter anyway.

That's true actually ... and even if he did, that makes him different from every other guy in the league how?

mr007
06-26-2009, 02:25 PM
The statement in question was...

"Most" feel money had nothing to do with this.

<b>So, the claim was that "most" people feel this had nothing to do with money.</b>

That has since been proven incorrect. The majority in fact feels that money did or could have had something to do with it. Hence, disproving the statement that "most" feel it could have had NOTHING to do with it.

Thanks for voting. :)

Your poll still inaccurately portrays your first statement of "feelings."

You have proven nothing incorrect by putting statements like "could" and "possibly" and also using words such as "As always, in the NFL blah blah." Could, possibly, and potentially do not constitute "feeling." I can feel all I want that this had to do with feeling, but based on your wording I would have no choice but to vote on your side as I cannot say with 100% certainty this is so.

You've taken a tactic of using a vague reference to gain consensus over a specifically directed statement to "prove" your point, when you've done anything but.

I could put a poll saying "Could Jay's love of windy cities have played ANY part in him deciding to leave" and receive similar results. Your commitment to your Rightness regardless of intelligent remarks that rebuke your thoughts is pretty astounding. Anyone who agrees wholeheartedly with you gets a bold quotes and a "THIS!" or "END THREAD" or whatever random right-on this is exactly how I feel and be damned with anyone who actually puts some thought into a situation and that perception happens to oppose yours.

24champ
06-26-2009, 02:49 PM
Oh, you silly Champ.

Now, you know very well that's not the case.


The whole offseason you have been talking about Jay...

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78831

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79295

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79146

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78976

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78484

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78776

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78439

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78142

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=78170

Not a lot of Orton threads there....hmmm.

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 02:57 PM
Well he is obsessed with Jay for some odd reason, just can't stop talking about Jay.Oh, you silly Champ.

Now, you know very well that's not the case.

You cannot be serious ... "obsession" is perhaps a bit mild a description.

Denial ... not just a river in Egypt. :oyvey:


And this coming from a guy who was admittedly "obsessed" for several weeks with Josh and his GM work. If I can admit that, Popps, well then ... why hold back?

Popps
06-26-2009, 04:02 PM
Your poll.

Thanks for voting! See ya next time. :wave:

mr007
06-26-2009, 04:17 PM
Thanks for voting! See ya next time. :wave:

Hilarious! Awesome rebuttal man! :egbgb: ^5

footstepsfrom#27
06-26-2009, 04:34 PM
You've taken a tactic of using a vague reference to gain consensus over a specifically directed statement to "prove" your point, when you've done anything but.
I wondered when somebody would notice that.

watermock
06-26-2009, 05:18 PM
Popps loaded the poll anyway.

It was like a Hugo Chavez ballot.

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.
Poll Options
Could money have been involved in Cutlergate?
Yes: As always in the NFL, money can always been an issue.
No: This was strictly a personality issue. Jay/Agent had no plans of a raise

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 06:38 PM
You've taken a tactic of using a vague reference to gain consensus over a specifically directed statement to "prove" your point, when you've done anything but.

Good analysis ... the specificity of Choice #2 was so great ("strictly," "no plans"), that it excluded too many factors. While Choice #1 offered the broad "can be" wording.

And also - as many have pointed out - this issue has long since been settled in the negative. Neither Cook nor Angelo even discussed a new deal ... there are all kinds of potential reasons why, perhaps the uncapped year persuaded Jay to wait, whatever, none of us save maybe Eddie Mac or Hercules really seems to understand all that.

THREAD HAST FAIL!

DBroncos4life
06-26-2009, 09:27 PM
Good analysis ... the specificity of Choice #2 was so great ("strictly," "no plans"), that it excluded too many factors. While Choice #1 offered the broad "can be" wording.

And also - as many have pointed out - this issue has long since been settled in the negative. Neither Cook nor Angelo even discussed a new deal ... there are all kinds of potential reasons why, perhaps the uncapped year persuaded Jay to wait, whatever, none of us save maybe Eddie Mac or Hercules really seems to understand all that.

THREAD HAST FAIL!

It was just a thread to make the Broncos look like the victim and vilify Bus and Jay. You ask anyone but this fan base on what the motive was about and they will tell you that money wasn't the major factor and the PROOF is in the fact that Jay doesn't have a new contract. I don't know what else to tell the people that think this was a money driven trade. There is NOTHING to even close to being anything that would even point in that direction.

DBroncos4life
06-26-2009, 09:40 PM
Oh, you silly Champ.

Now, you know very well that's not the case.

In fact, this poll was the result of someone hijacking a Broncos Finances thread into a Jay Cutler Widow-fest.

But, we have it all straightened out at this point. Thanks. :welcome:

You brought up Cutlers name 10 times in your first 4 posts, 3 in the first post of the thread alone.

watermock
06-26-2009, 10:02 PM
It was just a thread to make the Broncos look like the victim and vilify Bus and Jay. You ask anyone but this fan base on what the motive was about and they will tell you that money wasn't the major factor and the PROOF is in the fact that Jay doesn't have a new contract. I don't know what else to tell the people that think this was a money driven trade. There is NOTHING to even close to being anything that would even point in that direction.

I said that from the outset.

That doesn't mean that both are looking towards a new contract, only that it wasn't the driving force of the trade.

Jay has 2 huge roster bonus' in '10 and '11. He's living on a nice SB for now. UNLIKE BM.

Popps would be better off arguing that our DL is improved.

BroncoBuff
06-26-2009, 10:04 PM
I don't know what else to tell the people that think this was a money driven trade. There is NOTHING to even close to being anything that would even point in that direction.This doesn't mean that both are looking towards a new contract, only that it wasn't the driving force of the trade.

Yeah .... I guess the saying, "there is none so blind as he who will not see" applies here ???

DBroncos4life
06-26-2009, 10:17 PM
Yeah .... I guess the saying, "there is none so blind as he who will not see" applies here ???

more like pissed of fans that won't even think that maybe possibly someone doesn't like our new coach.

Atlas
06-26-2009, 10:36 PM
Jay's and his agent's decision to part ways with the Broncos is being discussed.

Some are saying finances could have influenced them to quickly ask for the trade, and some ruling it out.

Where do you stand?

He isn't demanding a new contract in Chicago. McDaniels is just a douche.

Popps
06-27-2009, 12:43 AM
Thanks for voting, guys. Better luck next time. :)

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 01:01 AM
Thanks for voting, guys. Better luck next time. :)

When is the new contract going to be signed there popps? We have the proof and you are so very very wrong and everyone knows it. If it was all about money there Popps why is there no new contract huh? Answer that, but we all know you can't because its CLEAR Jay wasn't after money.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 03:12 AM
http://dontgosouth.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obsession1.jpg
I think this one fits better...

http://adamthinks.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/stalker.jpg

Cito Pelon
06-27-2009, 06:55 AM
Well he is obsessed with Jay for some odd reason, just can't stop talking about Jay. He's gone, time to move on. Whatever happens in the following seasons...happens. What's done is done.

I don't know what happened with Popps when he was on a crusade to fix the defensive line...a problem we ignored this offseason. You won't hear anything about the DL from Popps...no,it's all about Jay did this and Jay did that.

Jeez, do you pay attention to what's going on with the team? There's several new players added to the DL, one a 1st round pick. Underperforming players were let go and the team at least tried to upgrade with younger talent with hopefully some upside. That's far from "ingnoring" the DL problem.

I notice the crowd that's obsessed with the Cutler trade - like you - seem to have lost touch with what else is going on with the team. As proven by the constant references to "ignored the DL problem."

bpc
06-27-2009, 07:13 AM
I'm gonna laugh at this place if/when Cutler wins a super bowl. It's going to comedy in the purest sense.

BroncoInSkinland
06-27-2009, 07:51 AM
Jeez, do you pay attention to what's going on with the team? There's several new players added to the DL, one a 1st round pick. Underperforming players were let go and the team at least tried to upgrade with younger talent with hopefully some upside. That's far from "ingnoring" the DL problem.

I notice the crowd that's obsessed with the Cutler trade - like you - seem to have lost touch with what else is going on with the team. As proven by the constant references to "ignored the DL problem."

I was actually fairly outspoken on this issue until they sloted Ayers for the DE position, when they had him as OLB (even though I realize OLB in a 3-4 is essentially another lineman depending on how you run the scheme) it was a different story. Moving him to the line, even if only in title indicates to me they just wanted to analyze him in mini-camp before they took that step. he is still a single token pick, but I can live with that for now. I would be happier if they had also snagged something besides a never-was third-stringer for NT, but for now I will wait and see how the UDFA's come along. I am looking at it as a baby step, but a step none the less.

It really killed me because I think Nolan can do some incredible things, but it didn't look like he was getting the tools he needed. At this point if he says Ayers is end ready and is comfortable with his NT I will take it over what we have had 'til now. Of course the proof is in the pudding and we will see how it plays out during TC/pre-season, I might be back on the DL rant for the opener, but they have at least tried to address the issue at this point.

Los Broncos
06-27-2009, 08:25 AM
I voted Popps, but you need to let it go man.

Cito Pelon
06-27-2009, 08:55 AM
I'm gonna laugh at this place if/when Cutler wins a super bowl. It's going to comedy in the purest sense.

That's true, if your idea of comedy is the Keystone Kops.

Cito Pelon
06-27-2009, 09:19 AM
I was actually fairly outspoken on this issue until they sloted Ayers for the DE position, when they had him as OLB (even though I realize OLB in a 3-4 is essentially another lineman depending on how you run the scheme) it was a different story. Moving him to the line, even if only in title indicates to me they just wanted to analyze him in mini-camp before they took that step. he is still a single token pick, but I can live with that for now. I would be happier if they had also snagged something besides a never-was third-stringer for NT, but for now I will wait and see how the UDFA's come along. I am looking at it as a baby step, but a step none the less.

It really killed me because I think Nolan can do some incredible things, but it didn't look like he was getting the tools he needed. At this point if he says Ayers is end ready and is comfortable with his NT I will take it over what we have had 'til now. Of course the proof is in the pudding and we will see how it plays out during TC/pre-season, I might be back on the DL rant for the opener, but they have at least tried to address the issue at this point.

They could have addressed the DL issue better than they did, not in FA, but in the draft. There wasn't many top FA DL or LB's made available in FA, anyway. But I'll be looking to see if guys like Brace, Barwin, Kruger they passed on in round two pan out.

The 'baby step' is probably the way they were looking at it. People all the time say DL players sometimes take 2-3 years to get to being good, and it's true. They gambled on signing some young guys in FA, and gambled on the young DL guys already on the roster Moss, Crowder, Elvis, Peterson, Thomas to step it up some. They also gambled that the LB corps is improved with Davis and sticking with Larsen, WW.

The other side of the coin was by passing on DL gambling in round two, they gambled on secondary guys with Al Smith and McBath. Only time will tell how these gambles pay off.

Popps
06-27-2009, 09:30 AM
I voted Popps, but you need to let it go man.

Oh, I'm stoked about our direction. Then someone told me thy "most" people here didn't think finances could have played a role. Turns out... not the case.

Hopefully these folks will cheer up at some point.

BroncoInSkinland
06-27-2009, 09:41 AM
They could have addressed the DL issue better than they did, not in FA, but in the draft. There wasn't many top FA DL or LB's made available in FA, anyway. But I'll be looking to see if guys like Brace, Barwin, Kruger they passed on in round two pan out. This was one of my primary concerns, I think Brace would have been a good pickup and one that was available, but I really don't want it to be about one player that they did or didn't select, I was more concerned by the fact that outside of Ayers they didn't pick ANY, and then Ayers was slotted for OLB. Looking at it from the perspective that they wanted to see his potential in mini-camps before moving him to DE on the roster has calmed me a bit on the complete and total lack of addressing the position(s).

The 'baby step' is probably the way they were looking at it. People all the time say DL players sometimes take 2-3 years to get to being good, and it's true. They gambled on signing some young guys in FA, and gambled on the young DL guys already on the roster Moss, Crowder, Elvis, Peterson, Thomas to step it up some. They also gambled that the LB corps is improved with Davis and sticking with Larsen, WW. This really doesn't help the argument with me, I think I watched more Browns football in the past three years than Broncos (they are local and are my Fiancees team) and I am far from impressed with Davis. If he is the lynchpin of a scheme that focuses on the linebackers ability to make plays this could get ugly. On the flipside, I do think DJ, Larsen, and WW can all contribute in this system, and that Andra could be an excellent mentor, what he brings to the table IMHO is experience to be relayed to the younger talent.

The other side of the coin was by passing on DL gambling in round two, they gambled on secondary guys with Al Smith and McBath. Only time will tell how these gambles pay off.

The gamble is the part I was waiting for. My problem was I didn't even see a good gamble, I saw buying a few lottery tickets in UDFA, but nothing even resembling a 50/50 chance in the draft. Moving Ayers changed things completely for me. When I thought they drafted him for OLB, the entire D-line looked like a crap shoot. When they moved him, it was one position that they drafted for, but more importantly indicated to me that Nolan probably thought DE was his highest position of need, and therefor really WAS comfortable with Fields or whoever "his" guy at NT is. That is a world of difference in my eyes. The next step is the question "Can they evaluate talent", but that is a far cry from "Will they even attempt to evaluate talent at these positions"? See what I mean?

watermock
06-27-2009, 10:14 AM
Oh, I'm stoked about our direction. Then someone told me thy "most" people here didn't think finances could have played a role. Turns out... not the case.

Hopefully these folks will cheer up at some point.

Money plays a "role" in any contract. Unless your signed for 3 more years like Cutler, not Marshal, in his final year.

Cutler WANTED to be traded, that's why he didn't answer the phone. If we had signed Spaggs, Bates as OC and Dennison and Turner would be running the offense, Spags would of kept the 4/3 and we would of spent 6 of 9 picks on D and kept our '10 pick, or at least kept the choice of either.

We have allready lost a probowl QB, likely another in BM and a potential one in as likely top 8 pick in '10.

All these writers must be wrong, placing us THIRY TWO in passing and God knows what on D considering the switch placing light DE's into OLBs, backups and older players at S and C and ILB.

Buy a clue.

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 10:18 AM
Oh, I'm stoked about our direction. Then someone told me thy "most" people here didn't think finances could have played a role. Turns out... not the case.

Hopefully these folks will cheer up at some point.

Thats cool you worded this poll so even if only 1% of Cutlers agenda was to get more money and 99% of his agenda was to get away from McD you still would be right. Pathetic.

So Popps what percentage of his motive was money based vs his lack of trust with McD and the Broncos FO? You seem to have all the answers for us.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 10:34 AM
There's several new players added to the DL, one a 1st round pick. Underperforming players were let go and the team at least tried to upgrade with younger talent with hopefully some upside. That's far from "ingnoring" the DL problem.
Agreed, not "ignored" per se ... what we mean is not addressed aggressively, not nearly as aggressively as the unit and team needed. Most feel we should've dedicated far more resources toward the D-line.

And your statement, that we "upgraded" the D-Line with "younger talent" is is an enormous overstatement. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons

That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now).

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell ... that seems strange. These three as starters ahead of those guys appears like an Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

Any objective appraisal of our D-Line now would conclude it's a mess, a real mess.

24champ
06-27-2009, 10:37 AM
I notice the crowd that's obsessed with the Cutler trade - like you -


Link? When was the last time I discussed Jay?

I let it go a long time ago, it's all on McDaniels to produce.

I also like how you think Nic Clemons, Mattias Askew, J'Vonne Parker, Ryan McBean are upgrades to this team. Most of the DL we have would be backups or on another teams practice squad...not much has changed for the D. Same ol' same ol' regardless of the coach.

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 11:50 AM
Agreed, not "ignored" per se ... what we mean is not addressed aggressively, not nearly as aggressively as the unit and team needed. Most feel we should've dedicated far more resources toward the D-line.

And your statement, that we "upgraded" the D-Line with "younger talent" is is an enormous overstatement. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons

That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now).

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell ... that seems strange. These three as starters ahead of those guys appears like an Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

Any objective appraisal of our D-Line now would conclude it's a mess, a real mess.

Anyone that says our front three has improved is a ****ing tard. Our LBs for the 3-4 have improved but overall its nothing to jump up and down about on paper. Could they preform better? Thats something we will see and hope for but if they fail then this is a mess created by another coaching staff.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 12:53 PM
Link? When was the last time I discussed Jay?

I let it go a long time ago, it's all on McDaniels to produce.

I also like how you think Nic Clemons, Mattias Askew, J'Vonne Parker, Ryan McBean are upgrades to this team. Most of the DL we have would be backups or on another teams practice squad...not much has changed for the D. Same ol' same ol' regardless of the coach.

True Amigo ....

Hey DB4Life ... I started a thread with that post you replied to abover here ... ;D

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 01:07 PM
True Amigo ....

Hey DB4Life ... I started a thread with that post you replied to abover here ... ;D

Yeah it would suck to hi-jack one of popps Cutlerbus threads. ROFL!

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 01:10 PM
Yeah it would suck to hi-jack one of popps Cutlerbus threads. ROFL!
He actually hijacks his own threads now. ;D

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 01:38 PM
He actually hijacks his own threads now. ;D

Well whatever keeps us on the agenda that he has lol :giggle:

Atlas
06-27-2009, 04:04 PM
Money plays a "role" in any contract. Unless your signed for 3 more years like Cutler, not Marshal, in his final year.

Cutler WANTED to be traded, that's why he didn't answer the phone. If we had signed Spaggs, Bates as OC and Dennison and Turner would be running the offense, Spags would of kept the 4/3 and we would of spent 6 of 9 picks on D and kept our '10 pick, or at least kept the choice of either.

We have allready lost a probowl QB, likely another in BM and a potential one in as likely top 8 pick in '10.

All these writers must be wrong, placing us THIRY TWO in passing and God knows what on D considering the switch placing light DE's into OLBs, backups and older players at S and C and ILB.

Buy a clue.


Rep for the truth