PDA

View Full Version : McDaniels backs Kyle Orton's performance


Bronco Rob
08-08-2009, 06:36 AM
Peyton Manning has said it, Mike Shanahan has said it, plenty of defensive coordinators have said it, and Friday afternoon Broncos coach Josh McDaniels joined the chorus.

"Brandon Stokley is one of the toughest slot receivers I've coached against; (he is) everything I thought he was when I came here," McDaniels said, adding that Stokley "just has a knack of how to get open. That's an invaluable skill for a wide receiver, particularly on third down."

And with the Broncos positioning themselves to play in three-wide-receiver sets plenty in McDaniels' offense, Stokley once again finds himself in high demand in the slot.

With Brandon Marshall out with a hip injury and having stayed away from the team's offseason workouts, the Broncos have lined up with Eddie Royal and Jabar Gaffney in the two outside spots, with Stokley as the third receiver when they go to the three-wide look.

McDaniels' offense favors a three-wide look, with the quarterback in the shotgun and a single running back in many mid- to long-yardage situations.

"We'll play Brandon probably more than they did last year just because of the way we were going to be in three-receiver offense as much as we may end up being in it," McDaniels said.

Stokley, who has iced his knee some after practices in this training camp as a precaution, finished the 2008 season with 49 catches, the second-highest total of his career after his 68-catch, 1,077-yard season for the Colts in 2004

Back him up.

After reviewing the video from Thursday night's scrimmage at Invesco Field at Mile High, McDaniels continued to back quarterback Kyle Orton's performance overall.

Orton threw two interceptions in the scrimmage wide receiver Brandon Lloyd fell down on one of them had a pass batted down by cornerback Alphonso Smith and underthrew a long ball on a play that drew a particularly hostile reaction from the crowd.

"Kyle did fine," McDaniels said. "There are a couple plays he wishes he could have had back. He made no more mistakes than anybody else did.

"(I'm) not disappointed in anybody's performance. A lot of them can get better; certainly Kyle's in that group."

Backup Chris Simms, who took some snaps with the starting offense Thursday night, also took some plays with the starters on Friday afternoon in a light practice.

Most of Simms' work with the starters Friday did come in a practice period geared for the defense.



http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_13019527?source=rss




:thumbs:

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 06:40 AM
Go Orton!

footstepsfrom#27
08-08-2009, 07:53 AM
"He made no more mistakes than anybody else did."

What a glowing recommendation. I can see why it warranted a thread of its own. LOL

TheDave
08-08-2009, 07:55 AM
McDaniels and Orton are bound at the hip... He's going to back him no matter what, at least for this season.

defenseman
08-08-2009, 08:00 AM
McDaniels and Orton are bound at the hip... He's going to back him no matter what, at least for this season.

Yep, he lives and dies on Orton's performance. That said, I'm thinking the HC is not going to be smelling like roses this year, toss orton in that briar patch with him...dman

RMT
08-08-2009, 08:16 AM
McDaniels and Orton are bound at the hip... He's going to back him no matter what, at least for this season.

they are bound at the hip in the same way that Shanahan the Coach was to Shanahan the Man in Charge of Personnel.

TonyR
08-08-2009, 08:16 AM
...he lives and dies on Orton's performance.

I'd suggest that he "lives and dies" with the team's performance, but that's just me. And either way he "lives" because he will be the head coach again next season.

defenseman
08-08-2009, 08:33 AM
I'd suggest that he "lives and dies" with the team's performance, but that's just me. And either way he "lives" because he will be the head coach again next season.

Perhaps, I'm guessing though, based on the "other" qb's are on the bronco roster, this season anyway, he'll be hanging his hat or Orton...dman

*I wouldn't be taking for granted any job provided by an employer these days. The economy can and will be headed south, again I might add, sometime just prior or after halloween.

missingnumber7
08-08-2009, 08:36 AM
Does he have a choice???? Gee he could not support Orton, and then he could be stuck with what? Trying to get Vick? Simms ain't a starter, wasn't before he had spleen issues either. I'm guessing at somepoint in the season Bowlen said to McD that you were the one that got rid of Cutler, you deal with what you got, if you can't win with that then its on you.

tsiguy96
08-08-2009, 08:39 AM
Does he have a choice???? Gee he could not support Orton, and then he could be stuck with what? Trying to get Vick? Simms ain't a starter, wasn't before he had spleen issues either. I'm guessing at somepoint in the season Bowlen said to McD that you were the one that got rid of Cutler, you deal with what you got, if you can't win with that then its on you.

i dont know if you realized, it was bowlen who ordered the trade for cutler, not mcdaniels. so why then would mcdaniels be forced to "deal with what you got"?

GreatBronco16
08-08-2009, 08:42 AM
I'm guessing at somepoint in the season Bowlen said to McD that you were the one that got rid of Cutler, you deal with what you got, if you can't win with that then its on you.

And you would be guessing wrong, being that Bowlen is the one that got rid of Cutler.

I take that back, actually Jay was the one that got rid of Cutler.

defenseman
08-08-2009, 08:45 AM
i dont know if you realized, it was bowlen who ordered the trade for cutler, not mcdaniels. so why then would mcdaniels be forced to "deal with what you got"?

No matter how it was played, they get paid to Win, not lose. If Mcdaniels can't get them to win, he's got a problem. That's why Bowlen hired him, Mini-Belicek........he needs to win...dman

tsiguy96
08-08-2009, 08:49 AM
No matter how it was played, they get paid to Win, not lose. If Mcdaniels can't get them to win, he's got a problem. That's why Bowlen hired him, Mini-Belicek........he needs to win...dman

i agree, bowlen most definitely holds coaches responsible, and has a really good history at picking them. mcdaniels needs atleast 2 years to show if this team is making progress and buying into the system, like wade got, and hopefully work the entire contract so he has time to get his guys in and get the d-help that we cannot get in one year.

snowspot66
08-08-2009, 08:51 AM
Yeah he needs to win. That's his job. But he's under no more pressure than any other coach. In Pat's history as owner we've had four Head Coaches. One when he came in, Wade as place holder, Shanahan, and now McDaniels. As long as Bowlen owns the team McDaniels isn't going anywhere for at least three years and the only way he'll get fired after three years is if the team completely tanks, gets worse, and puts up a couple of 2-14 seasons.

colonelbeef
08-08-2009, 08:59 AM
i agree, bowlen most definitely holds coaches responsible, and has a really good history at picking them. mcdaniels needs atleast 2 years to show if this team is making progress and buying into the system, like wade got, and hopefully work the entire contract so he has time to get his guys in and get the d-help that we cannot get in one year.

the whole "buying into the system" is totally overrated, if not an outright load of crap.

Either his schemes work and he is able to properly motivate and manage the team or he fails. He put himself into a position where he not only is competing with a hall of fame coach, he is also competing with Jay Cutler in Chicago.

A smarter man would have never of rocked the QB boat when it was set for the next decade like that, he would have focused on things that needed fixing. The fans are already on him, and rightly so, because of the mismanagement that took place this offseason. He essentially shortened the leash all on his own, and he has no one to blame but himself.

As I have been saying all along, if he starts 0-3, this will be a ****show unlike anything I've ever seen in pro sports.

TonyR
08-08-2009, 09:06 AM
*I wouldn't be taking for granted any job provided by an employer these days. The economy can and will be headed south, again I might add, sometime just prior or after halloween.

Actually, if anything the economy gives McD more job security instead of less. Bowlen is already paying salaries to people no longer working for him, and I doubt he's in a hurry to add more people to his dead money payroll.

Lev Vyvanse
08-08-2009, 09:07 AM
i agree, bowlen most definitely holds coaches responsible, and has a really good history at picking them.

He has only picked two other coaches and one of them sucked balls.

tsiguy96
08-08-2009, 09:08 AM
He has only picked two other coaches and one of them sucked balls.

lets count reeves, as he decided to keep him on as coach instead of bringing in someone else ;)

TonyR
08-08-2009, 09:09 AM
Either his schemes work and he is able to properly motivate and manage the team or he fails.

His schemes do work, this has already been proven. The bigger challenges will be getting enough talent to build a competitive defense and, if necessary, finding a QB to effectively manage the offense.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 09:11 AM
His schemes do work, this has already been proven. The bigger challenges will be getting enough talent to build a competitive defense and, if necessary, finding a QB to effectively manage the offense.

The scheme works with Tom Brady... lets hope it works with Kyle Orton.

TonyR
08-08-2009, 09:15 AM
The scheme works with Tom Brady...

And Matt Cassel.

Lev Vyvanse
08-08-2009, 09:19 AM
lets count reeves, as he decided to keep him on as coach instead of bringing in someone else ;)
The Broncos had made the playoffs the year before and he bought the team over the summer so I don't really think he had a choice.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 09:22 AM
And Matt Cassel.

I wouldn't get too worked up over the performance of Cassel... A 16-0 team managed to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs under Cassel.

McDaniels did a very good job of getting an unknown player to fit into things... I'll give him that. But lets not forget this team was a couple plays away from having the greatest single season EVER in 2007. The 2008 offense wasn't anywhere near that level.

Drek
08-08-2009, 09:39 AM
I wouldn't get too worked up over the performance of Cassel... A 16-0 team managed to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs under Cassel.

McDaniels did a very good job of getting an unknown player to fit into things... I'll give him that. But lets not forget this team was a couple plays away from having the greatest single season EVER in 2007. The 2008 offense wasn't anywhere near that level.

He still took a total unknown who never started a single game of D1 college football, the same guy many in New England where speculating wouldn't make it through the final rounds of cuts based on his pre-season play, and got an 89.4 QB rating and a 63% completion percentage out of him.

Assuming Marshall plays this year you can make a very compelling argument that we've got a better supporting cast than what NE had to offer Cassel last year as well. Moss is very good but a healthy and committed Marshall is at least comparable. Royal and Welker have nearly identical skill sets, both know how to use them very well. We have the very same #3 in Gaffney, and beyond that we've got Stokley who is better than the #4 (and probably the #3) that NE had last year.

At TE we have Scheffler (very comparable to Ben Watson) and Dan Graham (better than any blocking TE NE has had since Graham himself left).

For running backs we have Lamont Jordan from NE, Correl Buckhalter who is very similar in skill set and career production to Kevin Faulk, Peyton Hillis who is in pretty much every way looking like a superior power back to Lawrence Maroney, and the #12 overall pick, first RB off the board this year, Knowshon Moreno as an added perk.

Our line as a whole is at least on par, arguably better as well, and with less history of injury.

We compare extremely well to the very same unit in which McDaniels took an absolute nobody in Matt Cassel and made him into one of the highest paid QBs in the NFL. Why should we immediately rule out any chances that he could potentially do the same with Orton, a guy who has already won football games in this league, who looked like a stud for the first half of last season, and who has played in a similar spread offense previously in his collegiate career?

Like I said previously, most NE fans thought there was a good chance Cassel wasn't going to make the team at the end of last pre-season. McDaniels made something out of him. And Tom Brady came into this league with one of the weakest arms ever allowed to take a snap behind center in the NFL, but since McDaniels became his QB coach he's gotten better on deep balls each and every season, culminating in a dominant 2007 season.

TonyR
08-08-2009, 09:40 AM
I wouldn't get too worked up over the performance of Cassel... A 16-0 team managed to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs under Cassel.


I'm not "worked up". But Cassel played very well in that scheme, and that offense was very good--5th in yards, 8th in scoring.

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 09:42 AM
I wouldn't get too worked up over the performance of Cassel... A 16-0 team managed to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs under Cassel.

McDaniels did a very good job of getting an unknown player to fit into things... I'll give him that. But lets not forget this team was a couple plays away from having the greatest single season EVER in 2007. The 2008 offense wasn't anywhere near that level.

I seriously cannot believe people are still throwing this argument around.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 09:43 AM
I wouldn't get too worked up over the performance of Cassel... A 16-0 team managed to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs under Cassel.

McDaniels did a very good job of getting an unknown player to fit into things... I'll give him that. But lets not forget this team was a couple plays away from having the greatest single season EVER in 2007. The 2008 offense wasn't anywhere near that level.

You're smarter than that Dave, you know that every season is different even if you have the exact same players on the field every year. Do you honestly think that the only thing that kept the Patriots from going undefeated last year was Matt Cassel?

TheDave
08-08-2009, 09:46 AM
He still took a total unknown who never started a single game of D1 college football, the same guy many in New England where speculating wouldn't make it through the final rounds of cuts based on his pre-season play, and got an 89.4 QB rating and a 63% completion percentage out of him.

Assuming Marshall plays this year you can make a very compelling argument that we've got a better supporting cast than what NE had to offer Cassel last year as well. Moss is very good but a healthy and committed Marshall is at least comparable. Royal and Welker have nearly identical skill sets, both know how to use them very well. We have the very same #3 in Gaffney, and beyond that we've got Stokley who is better than the #4 (and probably the #3) that NE had last year.

At TE we have Scheffler (very comparable to Ben Watson) and Dan Graham (better than any blocking TE NE has had since Graham himself left).

For running backs we have Lamont Jordan from NE, Correl Buckhalter who is very similar in skill set and career production to Kevin Faulk, Peyton Hillis who is in pretty much every way looking like a superior power back to Lawrence Maroney, and the #12 overall pick, first RB off the board this year, Knowshon Moreno as an added perk.

Our line as a whole is at least on par, arguably better as well, and with less history of injury.

We compare extremely well to the very same unit in which McDaniels took an absolute nobody in Matt Cassel and made him into one of the highest paid QBs in the NFL. Why should we immediately rule out any chances that he could potentially do the same with Orton, a guy who has already won football games in this league, who looked like a stud for the first half of last season, and who has played in a similar spread offense previously in his collegiate career?

Like I said previously, most NE fans thought there was a good chance Cassel wasn't going to make the team at the end of last pre-season. McDaniels made something out of him. And Tom Brady came into this league with one of the weakest arms ever allowed to take a snap behind center in the NFL, but since McDaniels became his QB coach he's gotten better on deep balls each and every season, culminating in a dominant 2007 season.

The fact remains a 16-0 team under Brady became an 11-5 team under Cassel. Their 2007 offense set league recors accross the board. In 2007 they were 10th in pts... with the only change being Matt Cassel.

and remember both Cassel and Brady have had years in this system...

This is going to be much more of a challenge than some of you want to believe.

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 09:47 AM
Yeah, Cassell, and Kyle Brady, and Maroney, and injuries on the OL.

But it was all Matt Cassell. Right.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 09:48 AM
You're smarter than that Dave, you know that every season is different even if you have the exact same players on the field every year. Do you honestly think that the only thing that kept the Patriots from going undefeated last year was Matt Cassel?

Let me put it this way... I don't think Matt Cassel is anywhere near as good as Brady is. I think he was a major reason for their drop off.

With Brady under center they are 13-3 or 14-2... big difference.

meangene
08-08-2009, 09:54 AM
You know, maybe his assessment of Orton's performance was just honest. This was the first time in a brand new offense with a bunch of new faces facing a defense in game-like conditions. What can you realistically expect? Not to mention that the defense is usually ahead of the offense at this time of the year. They moved the ball and also had some turnovers. Basically growing pain mistakes. Geez people, we haven't even played our first preseason game!

TheDave
08-08-2009, 09:55 AM
Yeah, Cassell, and Kyle Brady, and Maroney, and injuries on the OL.

But it was all Matt Cassell. Right.

589 pts in 2007 vs. 410 pts in 2008

TD passes

2007 Tom Brady - 50

2008 Matt Cassel - 21

Hmmmm....

Harvitz81
08-08-2009, 09:57 AM
He still took a total unknown who never started a single game of D1 college football, the same guy many in New England where speculating wouldn't make it through the final rounds of cuts based on his pre-season play, and got an 89.4 QB rating and a 63% completion percentage out of him.

Assuming Marshall plays this year you can make a very compelling argument that we've got a better supporting cast than what NE had to offer Cassel last year as well. Moss is very good but a healthy and committed Marshall is at least comparable. Royal and Welker have nearly identical skill sets, both know how to use them very well. We have the very same #3 in Gaffney, and beyond that we've got Stokley who is better than the #4 (and probably the #3) that NE had last year.

At TE we have Scheffler (very comparable to Ben Watson) and Dan Graham (better than any blocking TE NE has had since Graham himself left).

For running backs we have Lamont Jordan from NE, Correl Buckhalter who is very similar in skill set and career production to Kevin Faulk, Peyton Hillis who is in pretty much every way looking like a superior power back to Lawrence Maroney, and the #12 overall pick, first RB off the board this year, Knowshon Moreno as an added perk.

Our line as a whole is at least on par, arguably better as well, and with less history of injury.

We compare extremely well to the very same unit in which McDaniels took an absolute nobody in Matt Cassel and made him into one of the highest paid QBs in the NFL. Why should we immediately rule out any chances that he could potentially do the same with Orton, a guy who has already won football games in this league, who looked like a stud for the first half of last season, and who has played in a similar spread offense previously in his collegiate career?

Like I said previously, most NE fans thought there was a good chance Cassel wasn't going to make the team at the end of last pre-season. McDaniels made something out of him. And Tom Brady came into this league with one of the weakest arms ever allowed to take a snap behind center in the NFL, but since McDaniels became his QB coach he's gotten better on deep balls each and every season, culminating in a dominant 2007 season.


Good post. The only thing though is that Cassel studied McDaniel's offense for several years along with most of the rest of that offense, whereas we only have 1 offseason to implement it. I honestly don't know what to expect this year, but I think we will shock some people and not go 4-12 as most of the media is predicting. I have us at 7 to 9 wins, which I think would be a pretty good direction for a new coach, offensive scheme, and defensive scheme. Next year though, I definitely expect a playoff birth.

Drek
08-08-2009, 09:57 AM
The fact remains a 16-0 team under Brady became an 11-5 team under Cassel. Their 2007 offense set league recors accross the board. In 2007 they were 10th in pts... with the only change being Matt Cassel.

and remember both Cassel and Brady have had years in this system...

This is going to be much more of a challenge than some of you want to believe.

10th in points would be a massive improvement from where we ended last year, FYI.

And I agree, the difference between Cassel and Brady is quite obvious. One at the helm shatters NFL records and posts a 117.2 QB rating, 68.9 completion %, and 50 TDs to only 8 INTs. The other drags that offense down to where he posts a lowly 89.4 QB rating and 63 completion %.

However, the Broncos 2008 offense was VERY similar to the 2007 Patriots in yardage production, FYI. It just constantly failed to make touchdowns out of promising drives. We can also see the similarity in surrounding cast with the previously mentioned player by player comparisons.

So what really matters is where Orton falls in relation to Cassel and Brady. Previous history would assure us he's no Tom Brady, but we can just as definitively say he's superior to Matt Cassel since he actually started football games in college and the NFL prior to finding himself in McDaniels' offense.

I guess we'll just have to live with a QB who's rating floor/ceiling is an 89.4 to a 117.2. Thats what this straight by the numbers comparison you're trying to apply obviously tells us.

colonelbeef
08-08-2009, 09:58 AM
His schemes do work, this has already been proven. The bigger challenges will be getting enough talent to build a competitive defense and, if necessary, finding a QB to effectively manage the offense.

I agree, although there are some things I didn't like about the offensive philosophy going into the superbowl against the Giants. The Pats were exposed to a degree in that that game- if you get a pass rush up the middle, an immobile QB, even a great one like Brady, will be unable to get the ball to the slot, let alone down the field. The Patriots-McDaniels- never adjusted in that game, and that scares me a bit.

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 10:00 AM
589 pts in 2007 vs. 410 pts in 2008

TD passes

2007 Tom Brady - 50

2008 Matt Cassel - 21

Hmmmm....

Not factoring in the defense that pretty much went on the IR. Thomas, Mayo, Harrison, and those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

Or are you really that dense?

2KBack
08-08-2009, 10:05 AM
Let me put it this way... I don't think Matt Cassel is anywhere near as good as Brady is. I think he was a major reason for their drop off.

With Brady under center they are 13-3 or 14-2... big difference.

I don't doubt that Brady is a better QB than Cassel. I think Orton is probably better as well actually. That is not the only difference between the 2007 and 2008 patriots. By stating that Cassel turned an undefeated team into an 11 win team, you are essentially claiming that NE was going to go 16-0 again. That wasn't going to happen, and it sells short the coaching of Bellichick/ McDaniels and the performance of Cassel. Of course that is likely the agenda of anyone making that statement.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 10:06 AM
10th in points would be a massive improvement from where we ended last year, FYI.

And I agree, the difference between Cassel and Brady is quite obvious. One at the helm shatters NFL records and posts a 117.2 QB rating, 68.9 completion %, and 50 TDs to only 8 INTs. The other drags that offense down to where he posts a lowly 89.4 QB rating and 63 completion %.

However, the Broncos 2008 offense was VERY similar to the 2007 Patriots in yardage production, FYI. It just constantly failed to make touchdowns out of promising drives. We can also see the similarity in surrounding cast with the previously mentioned player by player comparisons.

So what really matters is where Orton falls in relation to Cassel and Brady. Previous history would assure us he's no Tom Brady, but we can just as definitively say he's superior to Matt Cassel since he actually started football games in college and the NFL prior to finding himself in McDaniels' offense.

I guess we'll just have to live with a QB who's rating floor/ceiling is an 89.4 to a 117.2. Thats what this straight by the numbers comparison you're trying to apply obviously tells us.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but this is where time in the system becomes important... Everything right now is being learned on the fly for both the coach and the players. McDaniels knew exactly what Brady and Cassels strenghts and weakneses were. Add to that they knew this system backwards and forwards.

Now we have a group of players with the talent level similiar to the 2007 pats but they only have 3 months in the system vs 3+ years.

mind you all of this is ignoring what I witnessed thursday night, because if our offense resembles that were screwed.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 10:08 AM
Not factoring in the defense that pretty much went on the IR. Thomas, Mayo, Harrison, and those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

Or are you really that dense?

What the hell does Mayo and Harrison have to do with the # of TD's brady threw?

Paladin
08-08-2009, 10:15 AM
I'd suggest that he "lives and dies" with the team's performance, but that's just me. And either way he "lives" because he will be the head coach again next season.

QFT.

I am not sure that there should be so much emphasis placed on Orton's performance as some pundits hereon suggest. Id' say the HC has a safe job for at least two years, probably to the chagrin ocf some. Tough.

The running game will be more impoirtant that whether Orton can throw the ball 70 yards. That is not the O we will see (which is why I think Quitler whined and pouted his way out of Denver).

snowspot66
08-08-2009, 10:25 AM
What the hell does Mayo and Harrison have to do with the # of TD's brady threw?

Our ****ty defense seemed to have a pretty adverse affect on our offense. Bronco fans of all people should know what losing defensive players like that does the points total.

Drek
08-08-2009, 10:25 AM
I don't disagree with what you are saying, but this is where time in the system becomes important... Everything right now is being learned on the fly for both the coach and the players. McDaniels knew exactly what Brady and Cassels strenghts and weakneses were. Add to that they knew this system backwards and forwards.

Now we have a group of players with the talent level similiar to the 2007 pats but they only have 3 months in the system vs 3+ years.

mind you all of this is ignoring what I witnessed thursday night, because if our offense resembles that were screwed.

McDaniels started calling the plays for NE in '05, but then it was more of a power run/short passing attack focused primarily on Dillon carrying the ball, Watson as the primary receiver, and Brown, Branch, etc. primarily taking shorter passing routes and trying to make something of it.

In '06 they started some movement towards a more wide open offense, but still didn't really have the ponies to make any significant change to the scheme.

In '07 the added Welker and Moss who both became the primary targets literally over night. Brady's role as a game manager changed to that of a play maker, and their running game all but disappeared as Maroney was largely a disappointment and Dillon was gone.

The Pats basically made that transition in one season. Sure there was some groundwork in Brady's development in previous years, but other than him and a solid OL McDaniels effectively rebuilt the offense heading into '07.

Now Matt Cassel did have more time in the system, but none of it prepared him for starting real NFL games on Sundays, something Orton has done. And its not like Orton is coming into this blind, he did play in a similar spread offense in college.

Of course that is our big concern with Orton. Can he learn the system and how to execute it effectively by the end of pre-season? But if you where to ask that question of both him and Matt Cassel this time last year I'd bet that 99% of respondents would believe Orton to be the more likely to succeed.

Orton very well might just be a mediocre QB who happens to have the stones to rally a team but not the consistency to be a good starting QB. Or he might be a QB who knows how to rally his team but has been forced to play within a mediocre system and with a mediocre supporting cast up to this point. We won't know until he shows us in the regular season. I just think the assumption that he can't possibly perform well and that our offense absolutely is going to regress is grossly premature.

lex
08-08-2009, 10:30 AM
I agree, although there are some things I didn't like about the offensive philosophy going into the superbowl against the Giants. The Pats were exposed to a degree in that that game- if you get a pass rush up the middle, an immobile QB, even a great one like Brady, will be unable to get the ball to the slot, let alone down the field. The Patriots-McDaniels- never adjusted in that game, and that scares me a bit.


Whats even more scary is that that team fell in love with the pass. They lost the superbowl because they failed to cultivate a running game. They used their passing game to a large degree to pour on points against weaker teams during the regular season and forewent then opportunity to cultivate a running game that would give them balance in the playoffs. Thats why they went from averaging in the mid 30s in the regular season to averaging 22 pts a game during those playoffs.

And the thing was that leading up to the SB, Brady had been wearing a cast on his ankle, so there was a health and at the very least a mobility concern. New England did nothing more than a token attempt at establishing the run vs the Giants and they allowed themselves to be undone by hanging an injured/immobile QB out to dry vs a team with an outstanding pass rush. They let the Giants pin their ears back and go after an immobile Brady.

NYBronco
08-08-2009, 10:37 AM
I wasn't there at the scrimmage but it sounds like the Broncos need to dump Orton because there doesn't seem to be either room, motivation or interest in Orton's improvement. What was witnessed at the scrimmage is what will be executed each gameday.

Find a replacement before it's to late. Someone who can come in and throw completions on each attempt. Next...

Lev Vyvanse
08-08-2009, 10:41 AM
I wasn't there at the scrimmage but it sounds like the Broncos need to dump Orton because there doesn't seem to be either room, motivation or interest in Orton's improvement. What was witnessed at the scrimmage is what will be executed each gameday.

Find a replacement before it's to late. Someone who can come in and throw completions on each attempt. Next...

You have some high expectations.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 10:45 AM
I wasn't there at the scrimmage but it sounds like the Broncos need to dump Orton because there doesn't seem to be either room, motivation or interest in Orton's improvement. What was witnessed at the scrimmage is what will be executed each gameday.

Find a replacement before it's to late. Someone who can come in and throw completions on each attempt. Next...

What?

NYBronco
08-08-2009, 10:46 AM
What?

Chicken with head cut off mentality.

lex
08-08-2009, 10:46 AM
What?


I think he's saying that Orton is what you saw in the scrimmage.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 10:52 AM
I think he's saying that Orton is what you saw in the scrimmage.

I'm sure. What I find dumbfounding is coming to that conclusion in the first week of training camp in a brand new system.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 10:53 AM
Chicken with head cut off mentality.

I think you are trying to refer to the ostrich with its head in the sand. I don't think the chicken one works for me.

NYBronco
08-08-2009, 11:02 AM
I'm sure. What I find dumbfounding is coming to that conclusion in the first week of training camp in a brand new system.

There is no room for Orton to make these kind of mistakes. He has to come in and be perfect after all a scrimmage is just like gameday.

The season is lost, oh my what are the Broncos to do?

Disclaimer: Another chicken little statement.

TonyR
08-08-2009, 11:15 AM
Thats why they went from averaging in the mid 30s in the regular season to averaging 22 pts a game during those playoffs.


Yes, I suppose it had nothing to do with facing better defenses in the playoffs and Brady's injury reducing his effectiveness.

lex
08-08-2009, 11:17 AM
Yes, I suppose it had nothing to do with facing better defenses in the playoffs and Brady's injury reducing his effectiveness.

Better defenses are precisely why balance should be so heavily valued. LOL. Run along now.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 11:18 AM
There is no room for Orton to make these kind of mistakes. He has to come in and be perfect after all a scrimmage is just like gameday.

The season is lost, oh my what are the Broncos to do?

Disclaimer: Another chicken little statement.

My bad, were on the same side

Cito Pelon
08-08-2009, 11:19 AM
"He made no more mistakes than anybody else did."

What a glowing recommendation. I can see why it warranted a thread of its own. LOL

Gives you a chance to sneer and snivel some more. You should be happy.

lex
08-08-2009, 11:19 AM
I'm sure. What I find dumbfounding is coming to that conclusion in the first week of training camp in a brand new system.


The new system excuse really isnt one.

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 11:22 AM
What the hell does Mayo and Harrison have to do with the # of TD's brady threw?

You argued that Cassel was the reason for a 5 win reduction.

2KBack
08-08-2009, 11:23 AM
The new system excuse really isnt one.

I fished you out of ignore for that? What a waste of time.

Bronco Rob
08-08-2009, 11:47 AM
589 pts in 2007 vs. 410 pts in 2008

TD passes

2007 Tom Brady - 50

2008 Matt Cassel - 21

Hmmmm....



Truth.......

TheDave
08-08-2009, 11:47 AM
You argued that Cassel was the reason for a 5 win reduction.

and he was part of the problem... Brady threw for 50 TD's and ran an offense that scored 589 pts. Cassel barely cracked 20 tds and 180 fewer pts.

how can you say he was not a MAJOR reason for the down grade?

Bronco Rob
08-08-2009, 11:50 AM
Matt Cassel is like Scott Mitchell, Steve Bono, Elvis Grbac and the myriad of one hit wonders...

Remember Cassell couldn't beat out Lienhart....

Lienhart is strugling to stay in the league right now....

Cassell took over the most prolific offense in NFL history...

And threw 21 tds and couldn't get a team that went 18-1 the year before to the playoffs...

-

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 11:55 AM
and he was part of the problem... Brady threw for 50 TD's and ran an offense that scored 589 pts. Cassel barely cracked 20 tds and 180 fewer pts.

how can you say he was not a MAJOR reason for the down grade?

That wasn't the argument. You don't have to throw 60 TDs to win games. The argument was the Cassel was why their wins went down from 16 to 11. There's a difference between wins and stats. See: Jay Cutler.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 11:55 AM
Our ****ty defense seemed to have a pretty adverse affect on our offense. Bronco fans of all people should know what losing defensive players like that does the points total.

Good Gawd...

They went from # 4 in 2007 to #10 in 2008... I dount see how that accounts for a nearly 200 pt diference in offensive production.

gyldenlove
08-08-2009, 11:58 AM
That wasn't the argument. You don't have to throw 60 TDs to win games. The argument was the Cassel was why their wins went down from 16 to 11. There's a difference between wins and stats. See: Jay Cutler.

The ONLY way a QB can win games is by scoring TDs. Fact is that Cassel scored less than half as many TDs as Brady did.

Brady score 52 total, Cassel scored 23 total. If you don't score TDs you are not winning games, someone else is winning them for you.

Inkana7
08-08-2009, 11:58 AM
It's a stupid argument to blame Cassel for "only" getting 11 wins. 9 years out of 10 that record not only gets you in the playoffs, but wins the division. Period.

SouthStndJunkie
08-08-2009, 12:02 PM
McDaniels backs Kyle Orton's performance

Actually....he did have one complaint....too much teeth:

<IMG SRC="http://pic16.picturetrail.com/VOL637/2498345/6660043/371451885.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosting by PictureTrail.com">

2KBack
08-08-2009, 12:14 PM
Good Gawd...

They went from # 4 in 2007 to #10 in 2008... I dount see how that accounts for a nearly 200 pt diference in offensive production.

They also went from a +16 turnover ratio to a +1, and that's not all on Cassel, who only threw 2 more Ints than brady.

lex
08-08-2009, 12:30 PM
I fished you out of ignore for that? What a waste of time.

boo hoo

TheDave
08-08-2009, 12:33 PM
That wasn't the argument. You don't have to throw 60 TDs to win games. The argument was the Cassel was why their wins went down from 16 to 11. There's a difference between wins and stats. See: Jay Cutler.

Actually the argument was that McDaniels "System" looked spectacular under Brady and average under Cassel... Who do you think Orton more closely resembles?

TonyR
08-08-2009, 01:01 PM
Actually the argument was that McDaniels "System" looked spectacular under Brady and average under Cassel... Who do you think Orton more closely resembles?

11-5 is average? Offensively 5th in yards and 8th in points is average? Cassel 10th in QB rating is average?

TheDave
08-08-2009, 01:04 PM
11-5 is average? Offensively 5th in yards and 8th in points is average? Cassel 10th in QB rating is average?

Fair enough... above average.

Now hoepfully it won't take Orton 3 years in the system to be above average.

BroncoMan4ever
08-08-2009, 02:00 PM
"He made no more mistakes than anybody else did."

What a glowing recommendation. I can see why it warranted a thread of its own. LOL

it is over a month before the season starts. at this point in the season the defense always looks better than the offense, he is still learning the system and building a rapport with his receivers. give the guy a ****ing break.

Rock Chalk
08-08-2009, 02:06 PM
Yep, he lives and dies on Orton's performance. That said, I'm thinking the HC is not going to be smelling like roses this year, toss orton in that briar patch with him...dman

You know dman, ever since you came back all you have done is whine.

We get it you dont like anything about the team anymore. Shut the **** up already.

You go sit in the corner of douchebaggery with lex.

Northman
08-08-2009, 02:10 PM
And you would be guessing wrong, being that Bowlen is the one that got rid of Cutler.

I take that back, actually Jay was the one that got rid of Cutler.

Yeeeeep.

Paladin
08-08-2009, 02:11 PM
I think you are trying to refer to the ostrich with its head in the sand. I don't think the chicken one works for me.

We need a smilie for sarcasm, and people should use it........

Rock Chalk
08-08-2009, 02:15 PM
The ONLY way a QB can win games is by scoring TDs. Fact is that Cassel scored less than half as many TDs as Brady did.

Brady score 52 total, Cassel scored 23 total. If you don't score TDs you are not winning games, someone else is winning them for you.

Brady scored 52 TDs in a season, by far more than any other QB in the history of the NFL in a single season.

Cassel scored 23, BUT they also ran the ball more under Cassel than under Brady so the scoring balance worked out. Overall the Patriots scored 43 touchdowns last year in addition to 36 field goals for a total of 409 points.

When you score 400+ points in a season, thats well above an average offense.

gyldenlove
08-08-2009, 02:18 PM
Brady scored 52 TDs in a season, by far more than any other QB in the history of the NFL in a single season.

Cassel scored 23, BUT they also ran the ball more under Cassel than under Brady so the scoring balance worked out. Overall the Patriots scored 43 touchdowns last year in addition to 36 field goals for a total of 409 points.

When you score 400+ points in a season, thats well above an average offense.

That is all good, but not part of the argument. The argument is that Cassel contributed less than half of what Brady contributes, which based on TDs is certainly true.

That dropoff in QB talent is by far the main reason that a team that had the first 16-0 regular season in history finished 11-5 a year later.

Rock Chalk
08-08-2009, 02:25 PM
That is all good, but not part of the argument. The argument is that Cassel contributed less than half of what Brady contributes, which based on TDs is certainly true.

That dropoff in QB talent is by far the main reason that a team that had the first 16-0 regular season in history finished 11-5 a year later.

Brady = HOF 3 time Superbowl winning QB. Cassell = first time starter since High school who threw 23 TDs in his first action in 6 years.

Of course there is going to be a drop off but you also have to consider that every year in the NFL the teams are different. To go 16-0 you have to be a damn awesome team but you also have to catch a few lucky breaks (and New England did). Scheduling plays a factor, injuries, age, all of that combine. Even with Brady, the odds of New England replicating their 2007 performance was slim to none with slim being out on the road with Spider. With Brady, they may have went 12-4, 13-3 last year. Without him they went 11-5. That's not really that much of a drop off.

Pseudofool
08-08-2009, 03:03 PM
McDaniels is such a homer.

BroncoMan4ever
08-08-2009, 03:51 PM
Brady scored 52 TDs in a season, by far more than any other QB in the history of the NFL in a single season.

Cassel scored 23, BUT they also ran the ball more under Cassel than under Brady so the scoring balance worked out. Overall the Patriots scored 43 touchdowns last year in addition to 36 field goals for a total of 409 points.

When you score 400+ points in a season, thats well above an average offense.

and you know what the 52 TD season of Brady got that Pats? nothing, a perfect season that ended in a loss during the biggest game of the year.

BroncsRule
08-08-2009, 05:07 PM
11-5 is average? Offensively 5th in yards and 8th in points is average? Cassel 10th in QB rating is average?

According to most on this board, 2nd in total yards and 3rd in passing yards is "below average" and "unacceptable".

So yeah, by 'Mane standards, Cassel must be total garbage.

Picking stats to prop up an argument is like putting lipstick on a pig. The pig doesn't like it, it doesn't really help, and everybody at the prom is gonna know it's a pig anyway.

By the way - the #1 offense last year in both yards and points was New Orleans. How'd that work out for them?

Lev Vyvanse
08-08-2009, 05:17 PM
the #1 offense last year in both yards and points was New Orleans. How'd that work out for them?

#2 and #3 were Denver and Houston. In points scored they were #16 and #17 respectively. I wonder if there is something wrong with Shanahan's system.

tsiguy96
08-08-2009, 05:19 PM
and you know what the 52 TD season of Brady got that Pats? nothing, a perfect season that ended in a loss during the biggest game of the year.

who cares? the giants dline came through and the pats oline folded, how does that take away from the fact that they were the greatest offense in history? no one wanted the pats to win including me, but it still doesnt downplay what they accomplished as a team.

lex
08-08-2009, 05:23 PM
who cares? the giants dline came through and the pats oline folded, how does that take away from the fact that they were the greatest offense in history? no one wanted the pats to win including me, but it still doesnt downplay what they accomplished as a team.

That wasnt just a break down of the offensive line. That team piled on a lot of points against weak teams and fell in love with the pass. But this was ultimately its undoing. There have been better offenses in the history of the league beceause they had better balance. Setting a record for points is a hollow accomplishment when it comes at that kind of a price.

BroncoMan4ever
08-08-2009, 05:25 PM
According to most on this board, 2nd in total yards and 3rd in passing yards is "below average" and "unacceptable".

So yeah, by 'Mane standards, Cassel must be total garbage.

Picking stats to prop up an argument is like putting lipstick on a pig. The pig doesn't like it, it doesn't really help, and everybody at the prom is gonna know it's a pig anyway.

By the way - the #1 offense last year in both yards and points was New Orleans. How'd that work out for them?

the NFL rankings of top offenses is bull****, because it is based on yardage. going by points Denver was only the 16th best offense in the league last season. who gives a damn if we could move the ball up and down the field if we couldn't put it in the end zone.

so many are quick to point out Jay led us to the 2nd ranked offense, but they forget he led us to 16th in scoring.

also Jay's passing yards, once again who gives a damn if he threw for over 4500 yards if he leads the team to a .500 record, blow a 3 game lead in the playoff race, or turn the ball over 20 times in a season.

footstepsfrom#27
08-08-2009, 05:32 PM
Gives you a chance to sneer and snivel some more. You should be happy.
Wrong. Didn't you get the memo?

I basically checked out of this debate a month ago. You may see an occasional random dig but I'm so sick of the entire mess I've avoided 99% of it for several weeks now.

Bring on the game.

BroncoMan4ever
08-08-2009, 05:33 PM
That wasnt just a break down of the offensive line. That team piled on a lot of points against weak teams and fell in love with the pass. But this was ultimately its undoing. There have been better offenses in the history of the league beceause they had better balance. Setting a record for points is a hollow accomplishment when it comes at that kind of a price.

Damn right. not to sound homerish, but i would gladly take a team with the offense Denver fielded in the 97 or 98 seasons, over the 2007 Patriots offense. there was an incredible balance with the Denver offense, TD would run all over a defense and John was leading our passing game masterfully(with almost a 3-1 TD-INT ratio)

the Pats became all about the pass, and because of that no one bothered to gameplan to stop the run, they just went after Brady. with a balanced offense you can't just decide to go after the QB all day, you have to devote players to watching out for the run as well as going after the QB. the Pats didn't do that.

snowspot66
08-08-2009, 05:46 PM
Good Gawd...

They went from # 4 in 2007 to #10 in 2008... I dount see how that accounts for a nearly 200 pt diference in offensive production.

Good Gawd...

They put up the most points in NFL history by running up the score whenever possible. You expected them to do that two years in a row? Good thing you're not a Pats fan. Even if Brady had stayed healthy they likely would have put up 100 less if not more and you would have been one pissed off fan wondering what the **** happened to the offense.

TheDave
08-08-2009, 05:53 PM
Good Gawd...

They put up the most points in NFL history by running up the score whenever possible. You expected them to do that two years in a row? Good thing you're not a Pats fan. Even if Brady had stayed healthy they likely would have put up 100 less if not more and you would have been one pissed off fan wondering what the **** happened to the offense.

What are you babbling on about?


They scored almost 600 pts one year and just over 400 the next. I said that had something to do with Brady being on IR...

First you blamed it on their defense now your wandering what would happen if I was a Pat's fan???

baja
08-08-2009, 06:16 PM
<b>McDaniels and Orton are bound at the hip... </b>He's going to back him no matter what, at least for this season.

Are they going to let McDaniels on the field? Will there be an exception the the 12 man rule?

TonyR
08-08-2009, 06:27 PM
That wasnt just a break down of the offensive line. That team piled on a lot of points against weak teams and fell in love with the pass. But this was ultimately its undoing. There have been better offenses in the history of the league beceause they had better balance. Setting a record for points is a hollow accomplishment when it comes at that kind of a price.

Yes, such a failure. 18-0 coming into the Super Bowl and with a gimpy QB the only thing between then and the Lombardi was a lucky, fluke play that set up the game winning score. Not to mention a dropped int that would have sealed the game. I'll take that kind of failure of an offense every season if I can have it.

CEH
08-08-2009, 07:16 PM
Orton and Prater were both disappointing in the fact that coming in both had a serious weakness. His deep ball and Prater's inconsistency from 40 -49. They did not disappoint

The saving grace to Orton is if you review the '08 NE offense Cassell had 58% his yardage (2100 of 3600) off YAC compares to Cutler at 40% and the other top QBs around 45%.

Problem with this approach is it works well if you have a defense that can come up with their share of 3 and outs. That remains to be seen .

We need both units to converge in scoring and then I think we will be on our way.

lazarus4444
08-08-2009, 08:04 PM
Why is a QB starting his first year last year being compared to a HOF season by a HOF player? I mean, peyton manning won't even come close to that season does that make him garbage? I swear some of you are smoking some bad crack, holy ****.

Rock Chalk
08-08-2009, 08:08 PM
Why is a QB starting his first year last year being compared to a HOF season by a HOF player? I mean, peyton manning won't even come close to that season does that make him garbage? I swear some of you are smoking some bad crack, holy ****.

As opposed to smoking good crack?

lex
08-08-2009, 08:20 PM
Yes, such a failure. 18-0 coming into the Super Bowl and with a gimpy QB the only thing between then and the Lombardi was a lucky, fluke play that set up the game winning score. Not to mention a dropped int that would have sealed the game. I'll take that kind of failure of an offense every season if I can have it.

So much of this has been addressed already. So Ill just once again point out that the 2007 Pats scored 22 pts a game in the playoffs against good teams. In the SB, they only scored 14. The "fluke play" had nothing to do with NEs failure to deliver on offense when they needed to most.

maher_tyler
08-08-2009, 09:23 PM
It's a stupid argument to blame Cassel for "only" getting 11 wins. 9 years out of 10 that record not only gets you in the playoffs, but wins the division. Period.

After reading this thread you would think 11-5 is a ****ty record...the Pats were what, the 2nd team ever to go 11-5 and miss the playoffs??

UboBronco
08-08-2009, 09:45 PM
McDaniels and Orton are bound at the hip... He's going to back him no matter what, at least for this season.

Bound at the hip is....
I will not get rid of my defensive coordinator, even though he cannot coach, even if it costs me my job....(but not my salary).... I will go someplace else with him, just to prove you wrong ( I hope)

Bronco Rob
08-09-2009, 08:24 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/ross_tucker/07/17/mail/index.html



Kansas City should have made Matt Cassel (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/7406) prove he could do it again. The Chiefs made a large financial commitment to Cassel even though the potential exists that he was only a one-year wonder who profited from being in the right place at the right time in New England. It makes you wonder what the hurry was for the Chiefs, who already had an emerging young signal caller in place in Tyler Thigpen (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/8471). Why not wait until the end of the season before giving Cassel a long-term deal? Yes, the contract numbers might have increased if Cassel proved his worth but how much more would they have had to pay than the $63 million over six years ($28M guaranteed) they are already doling out? And wouldn't that extra money be worth it if it meant having the peace of mind that Cassel could get the job done with your franchise?


Cassel finished an impressive 10-5 as a starter with the Patriots but he had been able to serve the ideal apprenticeship under Tom Brady (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/5228) for three years before taking the reins of a veteran-laden team that included elite weapons like Randy Moss (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4262) and Wes Welker (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/7027). In contrast, Thigpen was thrust onto the field as a second-year player playing with a make-shift offensive line and getting zero support from a defense that produced an NFL-low 10 sacks. Despite those difficulties, Thigpen still finished with a respectable touchdown-to-interception ratio (18 to 12) in 11 games as starter. As a point of comparison, Cassel had a 6-5 record and a 12-10 TD-INT ratio over his first 11 starts. How much better is Cassel than Thigpen and why give Cassel the long-term deal before he takes a snap? I hope the Chiefs know what they're doing.







Hilarious!

Cito Pelon
08-09-2009, 08:41 AM
The fact remains a 16-0 team under Brady became an 11-5 team under Cassel. Their 2007 offense set league recors accross the board. In 2007 they were 10th in pts... with the only change being Matt Cassel.

and remember both Cassel and Brady have had years in this system...

This is going to be much more of a challenge than some of you want to believe.

So we should all have a big snivel-fest along with you?

colonelbeef
08-09-2009, 10:57 AM
the NFL rankings of top offenses is bull****, because it is based on yardage. going by points Denver was only the 16th best offense in the league last season. who gives a damn if we could move the ball up and down the field if we couldn't put it in the end zone.

so many are quick to point out Jay led us to the 2nd ranked offense, but they forget he led us to 16th in scoring.

also Jay's passing yards, once again who gives a damn if he threw for over 4500 yards if he leads the team to a .500 record, blow a 3 game lead in the playoff race, or turn the ball over 20 times in a season.

Cutler was 25 years old. You have to let players of that caliber get to 28 or 29 before you call them a failure.

Cutler at 28 is going to be a thing of beauty in the wrong damn uniform.

snowspot66
08-09-2009, 11:02 AM
What are you babbling on about?


They scored almost 600 pts one year and just over 400 the next. I said that had something to do with Brady being on IR...

First you blamed it on their defense now your wandering what would happen if I was a Pat's fan???

What I'm "babbling" about is you going on about how Cassel isn't any good (and therefore Orton will also suck) because he and McDaniels couldn't replicate a 600 point season and could only get them over 400. This despite the fact that he didn't start a game in six years, didn't take a meaningful NFL snap until week 1 when Brady went down, and didn't even practice as the number 1 during training camp. And he only got an injury riddled team 400 points. If you were a Pats fan you'd have been one miserable sob having to watch that pathetic offense.

Good thing you're a Broncos fan and could watch a team with just as much offensive talent, if not better offensive talent, put up inferior numbers.

Cito Pelon
08-09-2009, 02:29 PM
McDaniels started calling the plays for NE in '05, but then it was more of a power run/short passing attack focused primarily on Dillon carrying the ball, Watson as the primary receiver, and Brown, Branch, etc. primarily taking shorter passing routes and trying to make something of it.

In '06 they started some movement towards a more wide open offense, but still didn't really have the ponies to make any significant change to the scheme.

In '07 the added Welker and Moss who both became the primary targets literally over night. Brady's role as a game manager changed to that of a play maker, and their running game all but disappeared as Maroney was largely a disappointment and Dillon was gone.

The Pats basically made that transition in one season. Sure there was some groundwork in Brady's development in previous years, but other than him and a solid OL McDaniels effectively rebuilt the offense heading into '07.

Now Matt Cassel did have more time in the system, but none of it prepared him for starting real NFL games on Sundays, something Orton has done. And its not like Orton is coming into this blind, he did play in a similar spread offense in college.

Of course that is our big concern with Orton. Can he learn the system and how to execute it effectively by the end of pre-season? But if you where to ask that question of both him and Matt Cassel this time last year I'd bet that 99% of respondents would believe Orton to be the more likely to succeed.

Orton very well might just be a mediocre QB who happens to have the stones to rally a team but not the consistency to be a good starting QB. Or he might be a QB who knows how to rally his team but has been forced to play within a mediocre system and with a mediocre supporting cast up to this point. We won't know until he shows us in the regular season. I just think the assumption that he can't possibly perform well and that our offense absolutely is going to regress is grossly premature.

That's about the size of it. But there's a cadre of posters here that are adamant Orton and McD are gonna stink it up left, right, and sideways. And IMO, 98% of said cadre are posters that I've thought prior to 2009 were not especially savvy.

Cito Pelon
08-09-2009, 02:35 PM
I wasn't there at the scrimmage but it sounds like the Broncos need to dump Orton because there doesn't seem to be either room, motivation or interest in Orton's improvement. What was witnessed at the scrimmage is what will be executed each gameday.

Find a replacement before it's to late. Someone who can come in and throw completions on each attempt. Next...

I bet you're gonna have to be more overtly sarcastic to get your point across . . . .

Bronx33
08-09-2009, 02:38 PM
Cutler was 25 years old. You have to let players of that caliber get to 28 or 29 before you call them a failure.

Cutler at 28 is going to be a thing of beauty in the wrong damn uniform.


http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/7249/crystalball.jpg

Cito Pelon
08-09-2009, 02:38 PM
Chicken with head cut off mentality.

You have to be really overtly sarcastic to make your point clear.

Cito Pelon
08-09-2009, 02:56 PM
It's a stupid argument to blame Cassel for "only" getting 11 wins. 9 years out of 10 that record not only gets you in the playoffs, but wins the division. Period.

You're wasting your time trying to talk sense to some of these posters. I appreciate your sensible posts.