PDA

View Full Version : Krieger: Elite QB easier to find than historically great defense


Bronco Rob
01-11-2010, 03:26 AM
Krieger: Elite QB easier to find than historically great defense


It's often hard to know whether an NFL coach endorses his quarterback because he believes in him or because he has no alternative.

So, after Josh McDaniels endorsed Kyle Orton as the Broncos' quarterback of the future last week, I mentioned Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Brett Favre as quarterbacks of top playoff seeds this year and asked if he thought Orton was in their class or had a chance to get there.

"The guys you just mentioned, I think, are really elite players," McDaniels said. "I think there's also a level below that where you say, 'These guys all have really good quarterbacks who win games and are very functional and do the things that their team needs them to do to win games and win championships.'

"I mean, if you look at a lot of the Super Bowl winners this past decade, I don't think you would say every one of those was elite when he won it. So I think our quarterback has done a nice job at doing a lot of things that we asked him to do. He can get better and improve, and I'm sure in the second year in the system he will be a better player."

Let's start by examining McDaniels' historical claim about nonelite quarterbacks winning Super Bowls in the last decade. Pretty much every coach without an elite quarterback has made this argument at one time or another.

It is based mainly on two Super Bowls No. 35, following the 2000 season, and No. 37 two years later. The winning quarterbacks were Trent Dilfer of the Ravens and Brad Johnson of the Buccaneers, nonelite quarterbacks for sure. The other eight Super Bowl winners of the past decade were Tom Brady (three), Ben Roethlisberger (two), Peyton Manning, Eli Manning and Kurt Warner.

McDaniels' contention that some of these quarterbacks weren't considered elite at the time is a fair point, but it renders the distinction between elite and nonelite meaningless. Brady becomes elite for only one or two of his championships, Roethlisberger for only one. So we'll use the knowledge we have now, understanding that the Super Bowl is occasionally a quarterback's coming-out party.

Distinguishing the great quarterbacks from the good ones is a little like the late Potter Stewart's famous assessment of obscenity. You may not be able to define an elite quarterback, but you know him when you see him. Philip Rivers is an elite quarterback, whether or not he wins a Super Bowl. So was Dan Fouts, who never did. Elite quarterbacks make big plays, lots of them. Sometimes, they make magic.

So game managers have won two of the last 10 Super Bowls, or 20 percent. You might conclude that gives you a decent chance with a game manager playing quarterback.

Here's the problem with that reasoning: When you look at the stingiest defenses in the 32 seasons since the NFL went to a 16-game schedule, you'll find that Dilfer's and Johnson's rank first and fourth. In other words, these guys were the beneficiaries of two of the best defenses in modern NFL history.

The 2000 Ravens allowed 10.3 points per game, lowest in the 16-game era. The 2002 Bucs allowed 12.3. So their quarterbacks didn't have to score much to win games.

By contrast, the Broncos' 2009 defense, which was pretty good for much of the year, surrendered 20.3 points per game.

So the history McDaniels pointed to actually shows that if you want to win a Super Bowl with a game manager at quarterback, you'd better also have one of the most dominating defenses of all time. Given how rarely those come along, that seems like a more difficult way to do it.

An elite quarterback may not be absolutely necessary to win a Super Bowl, but it's a common ingredient among the vast majority of NFL champs, including, of course, both Broncos championship teams. For today's Broncos, the question becomes whether Orton can achieve that status as he grows more familiar with McDaniels' offense.

Even if McDaniels drafted a quarterback of the future this year, Orton would likely be the starter next season. And considering the Broncos' many other needs, it seems unlikely McDaniels would devote a high draft pick to a position he thinks is in relatively good hands for the time being.

While Orton has demonstrated an ability to take care of the ball and execute an offense according to plan, he has not yet demonstrated the sort of spontaneous playmaking ability the great ones have. Even the history McDaniels cited suggests rather strongly that the Broncos will need one of those guys if they hope to see the mountaintop again.



Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14162800#ixzz0cInM8SPa

extralife
01-11-2010, 03:41 AM
And that's the problem with the QB position, for the guys that play it. If Kyle Orton played another position at the same level he played quarterback, people wouldn't complain about him. He'd be an above average starter. You can win super bowls with above average players. We'd look at whatever position he played, and we'd think "set there, for the time being. what else we need?"

But you can't do that with quarterback. What's the difference between a pretty good QB and a terrible one? You aren't winning games that matter with either of them. It's a rough conclusion.

chrisp
01-11-2010, 05:36 AM
I basically agree with that article to a point, but my main bone of contention is that they underplay how hard it is to get an elite QB (just like a lot of people on this board)...if we look at the last ten years, you'll see that only two QBs account for five of those 'elite QB' wins..

I also think that the jury's out on Eli - yes he made some great plays in that superbowl, but the main reason they won that was that the defense shut down the patriots passing attack...both Dilfer and Johnson had to make some plays to win, they just weren't the main reason, unitll Eli gets either another ring or some passing records or something I can't put him in the 'elite' category...

barryr
01-11-2010, 05:46 AM
The elite QB's still need a supporting cast, but finding an elite QB is not so easy.

The Ravens did not beat the Pats because their QB had a great game. They barely threw the ball. Having a great run game and defense, plus a QB who doesn't turn the ball over wins most games.

jhns
01-11-2010, 06:02 AM
I have been saying this for a long time now. Those teams that win with game managers also have never been consistent. If you want to be a consistently good team, there is only one way. Get a good QB. Orton is not the answer at QB.

tsiguy96
01-11-2010, 06:45 AM
good job to mis-read mcdaniels quote krieger you retard.

when tom brady won his first SB, he wasnt elite, big ben had probably the worst QB performance of any SB winner ever.

oubronco
01-11-2010, 06:49 AM
I find it funny McD doesn't name Tom Terrific as an elite QB with Manning, Brees, and Favre

strafen
01-11-2010, 07:02 AM
good job to mis-read mcdaniels quote krieger you retard.

when tom brady won his first SB, he wasnt elite, big ben had probably the worst QB performance of any SB winner ever.Shut up, dude, just shut da' hell up!

tsiguy96
01-11-2010, 07:07 AM
Shut up, dude, just shut da' hell up!

youre right, mcdaniels did NOT say that, i just made it up.

"I mean, if you look at a lot of the Super Bowl winners this past decade, I don't think you would say every one of those was elite when he won it.

genius. and its true, given the examples i pointed out.

strafen
01-11-2010, 07:08 AM
Nothing new. Good article though...
The only disturbing thing I took from that is that Orton will be back for another year...
That sucks big time.
Folks, it's not about Orton having another year running the system; he just doesn't have it, and unless he's allowed to throw the ball downfield, we will not be any better next year that we were this year.
Orton doesn't need another year under the system. The guy is a slug. He lacks talent, you can't teach that. What you saw in Orton is what you get; no more no less.
He's flat out a lousy QB, period!

TheDave
01-11-2010, 07:25 AM
Nothing new. Good article though...
The only disturbing thing I took from that is that Orton will be back for another year...
That sucks big time.
Folks, it's not about Orton having another year running the system; he just doesn't have it, and unless he's allowed to throw the ball downfield, we will not be any better next year that we were this year.
Orton doesn't need another year under the system. The guy is a slug. He lacks talent, you can't teach that. What you saw in Orton is what you get; no more no less.
He's flat out a lousy QB, period!

What else are we going to do at the QB position?

Clausen and Bradford will be gone in the top 5... and since we no longer have #14 we would need to trade future #1(s) to get them. Do that and start a rookie and we could very well end up giving up multiple top 10 picks for a 50/50 chance and frankly neither of them are "Elite". McD might not survive that move... and I think he knows it.

On the other side of the coin we could reach for McCoy, Tebow, or that kid from Div 1-AA with our 2nd. Problem there is that none of them would be ready to step in right away, so you better have Orton to buy you some time while these kids mature.

Either way, Orton is the guy next season.

_Oro_
01-11-2010, 07:34 AM
I don't think Eli or Ben are elite. And that's probably what McD was referring to.

strafen
01-11-2010, 07:45 AM
What else are we going to do at the QB position?

Clausen and Bradford will be gone in the top 5... and since we no longer have #14 we would need to trade future #1(s) to get them. Do that and start a rookie and we could very well end up giving up multiple top 10 picks for a 50/50 chance and frankly neither of them are "Elite". McD might not survive that move... and I think he knows it.

On the other side of the coin we could reach for McCoy, Tebow, or that kid from Div 1-AA with our 2nd. Problem there is that none of them would be ready to step in right away, so you better have Orton to buy you some time while these kids mature.

Either way, Orton is the guy next season.Brandstater will be one that I'd like to see what we have in.
The guy was a 4-year starter in college, and he should be ready to show us if he's the guy.
I don't know how much longer you want to keep him on the bench before you open up the package and see what you've just got, know what I mean?

Let's see why McDaniels drafted the guy. I've liked what little I saw of Tom Brandstater and some of his college highlights.
But, as everyone else, we want to see him perform at the next level.
I personally think he'll be a good NFL QB and perfect for McD system, but we won't know for sure until we start playing the guy.

As for drafting another QB. Well, I can see us doing that. I highly doubt Simms will be retained, so two "rookies" at QB plus a veteran, is quite a possibility...

If everybody is buying into the bashing of Tebow...let me tell you, I will love to have him fall right on our laps. That guy I think will have a good NFL career.
He's better than a lot of QB currently starting in the NFL, so, hell yeah, he's worth a shot...

TheDave
01-11-2010, 07:58 AM
Brandstater will be one that I'd like to see what we have in.
The guy was a 4-year starter in college, and he should be ready to show us if he's the guy.
I don't know how much longer you want to keep him on the bench before you open up the package and see what you've just got, know what I mean?

Let's see why McDaniels drafted the guy. I've liked what little I saw of Tom Brandstater and some of his college highlights.
But, as everyone else, we want to see him perform at the next level.
I personally think he'll be a good NFL QB and perfect for McD system, but we won't know for sure until we start playing the guy.

As for drafting another QB. Well, I can see us doing that. I highly doubt Simms will be retained, so two "rookies" at QB plus a veteran, is quite a possibility...

If everybody is buying into the bashing of Tebow...let me tell you, I will love to have him fall right on our laps. That guy I think will have a good NFL career.
He's better than a lot of QB currently starting in the NFL, so, hell yeah, he's worth a shot...

I know Brandstater looked OK in preseason, but so did Simms. I'm just not impressed...

I think our best option is getting someone on day 2 or 3 and hoping for the best. Until then Orton is the guy.

yerner
01-11-2010, 08:00 AM
All those quarterbacks are way more physically talented than Orton in my opinion. That includes Dilfer and Johnson. Elite or not.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 08:09 AM
If Ryan Mallet is there at 10...you'd have a hard time not pulling the trigger. He's probably got the most upside at the QB position in this draft.

TheDave
01-11-2010, 08:13 AM
If Ryan Mallet is there at 10...you'd have a hard time not pulling the trigger. He's probably got the most upside at the QB position in this draft.

I think he is staying in college

PRBronco
01-11-2010, 08:20 AM
Another steaming pile from Krieger. Wtf does he want McDaniels to say "yeah Orton's a stop gap, but i hope he doesn't read this."?

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 09:05 AM
I think he is staying in collegeI hadn't heard that.

snowspot66
01-11-2010, 09:05 AM
Brandstater will be one that I'd like to see what we have in.
The guy was a 4-year starter in college, and he should be ready to show us if he's the guy.
I don't know how much longer you want to keep him on the bench before you open up the package and see what you've just got, know what I mean?

Let's see why McDaniels drafted the guy. I've liked what little I saw of Tom Brandstater and some of his college highlights.
But, as everyone else, we want to see him perform at the next level.
I personally think he'll be a good NFL QB and perfect for McD system, but we won't know for sure until we start playing the guy.

As for drafting another QB. Well, I can see us doing that. I highly doubt Simms will be retained, so two "rookies" at QB plus a veteran, is quite a possibility...

If everybody is buying into the bashing of Tebow...let me tell you, I will love to have him fall right on our laps. That guy I think will have a good NFL career.
He's better than a lot of QB currently starting in the NFL, so, hell yeah, he's worth a shot...

He's a seventh round QB. The odds are far more likely that he'll never accumulate the stats in his career that Orton put up in one year. If you honestly think we'd be better off with Brandstater than Orton next year then you know nothing about QB's. QB's taken after the first round or two almost always take years to reach their potential if they even get a chance to. They just aren't NFL ready.

You start Brandstater next year (without an Orton injury) you lose the locker room and you're looking at a four to six win season and it's only that high because we get to play a much softer schedule next year.

Lolad
01-11-2010, 09:07 AM
And that's the problem with the QB position, for the guys that play it. If Kyle Orton played another position at the same level he played quarterback, people wouldn't complain about him. He'd be an above average starter. You can win super bowls with above average players. We'd look at whatever position he played, and we'd think "set there, for the time being. what else we need?"

But you can't do that with quarterback. What's the difference between a pretty good QB and a terrible one? You aren't winning games that matter with either of them. It's a rough conclusion.

Kyle Orton is NOT above average... he is "average" If he was playing another skilled position he would have been replaced by now.

Lolad
01-11-2010, 09:12 AM
good job to mis-read mcdaniels quote krieger you retard.

when tom brady won his first SB, he wasnt elite, big ben had probably the worst QB performance of any SB winner ever.

Both QB's made plays when it counted, only special players can make those type of plays. Both of those QB's did it when their team needed it.

Name 1 play Orton made on his own by maneuvering in or outside of the pocket to make a great throw

Tombstone RJ
01-11-2010, 09:16 AM
Krieger: Elite QB easier to find than historically great defense


It's often hard to know whether an NFL coach endorses his quarterback because he believes in him or because he has no alternative.

So, after Josh McDaniels endorsed Kyle Orton as the Broncos' quarterback of the future last week, I mentioned Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Brett Favre as quarterbacks of top playoff seeds this year and asked if he thought Orton was in their class or had a chance to get there.

"The guys you just mentioned, I think, are really elite players," McDaniels said. "I think there's also a level below that where you say, 'These guys all have really good quarterbacks who win games and are very functional and do the things that their team needs them to do to win games and win championships.'

"I mean, if you look at a lot of the Super Bowl winners this past decade, I don't think you would say every one of those was elite when he won it. So I think our quarterback has done a nice job at doing a lot of things that we asked him to do. He can get better and improve, and I'm sure in the second year in the system he will be a better player."

Let's start by examining McDaniels' historical claim about nonelite quarterbacks winning Super Bowls in the last decade. Pretty much every coach without an elite quarterback has made this argument at one time or another.

It is based mainly on two Super Bowls No. 35, following the 2000 season, and No. 37 two years later. The winning quarterbacks were Trent Dilfer of the Ravens and Brad Johnson of the Buccaneers, nonelite quarterbacks for sure. The other eight Super Bowl winners of the past decade were Tom Brady (three), Ben Roethlisberger (two), Peyton Manning, Eli Manning and Kurt Warner.

McDaniels' contention that some of these quarterbacks weren't considered elite at the time is a fair point, but it renders the distinction between elite and nonelite meaningless. Brady becomes elite for only one or two of his championships, Roethlisberger for only one. So we'll use the knowledge we have now, understanding that the Super Bowl is occasionally a quarterback's coming-out party.

Distinguishing the great quarterbacks from the good ones is a little like the late Potter Stewart's famous assessment of obscenity. You may not be able to define an elite quarterback, but you know him when you see him. Philip Rivers is an elite quarterback, whether or not he wins a Super Bowl. So was Dan Fouts, who never did. Elite quarterbacks make big plays, lots of them. Sometimes, they make magic.

So game managers have won two of the last 10 Super Bowls, or 20 percent. You might conclude that gives you a decent chance with a game manager playing quarterback.

Here's the problem with that reasoning: When you look at the stingiest defenses in the 32 seasons since the NFL went to a 16-game schedule, you'll find that Dilfer's and Johnson's rank first and fourth. In other words, these guys were the beneficiaries of two of the best defenses in modern NFL history.

The 2000 Ravens allowed 10.3 points per game, lowest in the 16-game era. The 2002 Bucs allowed 12.3. So their quarterbacks didn't have to score much to win games.

By contrast, the Broncos' 2009 defense, which was pretty good for much of the year, surrendered 20.3 points per game.

So the history McDaniels pointed to actually shows that if you want to win a Super Bowl with a game manager at quarterback, you'd better also have one of the most dominating defenses of all time. Given how rarely those come along, that seems like a more difficult way to do it.

An elite quarterback may not be absolutely necessary to win a Super Bowl, but it's a common ingredient among the vast majority of NFL champs, including, of course, both Broncos championship teams. For today's Broncos, the question becomes whether Orton can achieve that status as he grows more familiar with McDaniels' offense.

Even if McDaniels drafted a quarterback of the future this year, Orton would likely be the starter next season. And considering the Broncos' many other needs, it seems unlikely McDaniels would devote a high draft pick to a position he thinks is in relatively good hands for the time being.

While Orton has demonstrated an ability to take care of the ball and execute an offense according to plan, he has not yet demonstrated the sort of spontaneous playmaking ability the great ones have. Even the history McDaniels cited suggests rather strongly that the Broncos will need one of those guys if they hope to see the mountaintop again.



Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14162800#ixzz0cInM8SPa

Eli Manning is NOT, I repeat, NOT an elite QB. He too was the beneficiary of a fantastic defense and a solid running game.

Go figure.

Bronco LB52
01-11-2010, 09:19 AM
I hadn't heard that.

Get your head out of your ass.

PRBronco
01-11-2010, 09:19 AM
Eli Manning is NOT, I repeat, NOT an elite QB. He too was the beneficiary of a fantastic defense and a solid running game.

Go figure.

Haha that jumped off the page at me too. He can barely tie his shoes without Plaxico out there.

tsiguy96
01-11-2010, 09:23 AM
Both QB's made plays when it counted, only special players can make those type of plays. Both of those QB's did it when their team needed it.

Name 1 play Orton made on his own by maneuvering in or outside of the pocket to make a great throw

again, WHEN THEY WON THE SB, tehy were not elite. big ben nearly cost them the first sb, if it wasnt for defense. eli had a good 3 game run but is far from elite, tom brady was a 6th round rookie in his first SB year if i remember right, was he elite then? no

bloodsunday
01-11-2010, 09:24 AM
I agree with the spirit of the article. In essence, you get a Pro Bowl caliber QB, you are only looking for one player. If you try to get a historically good defense, you need 8 - 11 guys. Obviously the law of numbers works against you. And I will also grant you that most teams that have prolonged periods of success (multiple division titles, multiple playoff wins, and multiple Super Bowls) do so with an "elite QB".

Here's where I depart with Krieger and most others on this topic:

First of all, it is more apparent now then ever that this team is extremely flawed. Cutler was our attempt to find a Pro Bowl caliber QB (and he in fact did make the Pro Bowl), but his supporting cast was weak. We saw how that turned out in Denver and in Chicago. Our running game is awful right now. It was awful last year and has been declining for a couple years IMO. Our defense is improved, but as we saw, there is PLENTY of work left to do there. If we launch into an effort to get a high draft pick QB, with the talent around that person we are likely to go from .500 to .250 in a hurry.

Secondly, I disagree with the assumption that the only way to get a QB is in the top 10 picks of the NFL draft. In fact, I feel that is the RISKIEST way to do it, at least until they sort out the CBA and rookie salaries. You can explore trade opportunities (ala a Matt Schaub), you can draft a later round QB that you don't expect to start for several years (gasp), you can wait to see if a guy that you like slips in the draft (like an Aaron Rodgers), or you could go out and rent a guy (sort of like a Kurt Warner scenario). I know the draft is the easiest idea to consider because everyone has equal (or roughly equal picks). But in reality, there are other opportunities out there.

In summary, what I am saying here is that we SHOULD NOT view this transition to McDaniels as some desperate attempt to win a Super Bowl next year. This is about building a franchise and a team. The cupboard is pretty bare with talent right now -- at least that of the game changing variety. It will take time. For the mean time, it is highly likely that given the style of football we will play and the supporting cast, Orton is our best available option. We should explore other scenarios if reasonable ones unfold. And if we got get a young QB, I think we should view it as an effort to develop a guy as opposed to throwing him to the wolves. Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo, and Phillip Rivers all made amazing transitions to the NFL after sitting for multiple season on the bench. Who knows, we might already have that guy in Brandstader. We can still win some games in the mean time, and maybe even make the playoffs. When the time is right, it will be easier for the right QB to transition to this team if the supporting cast improves. Before that time, it smells of panic.

Bronco LB52
01-11-2010, 09:25 AM
I don't think Eli or Ben are elite. And that's probably what McD was referring to.

Roethlisberger just passed for 4,328 yards, 26 TDs and completed 66.6 pct of his passes this season. He's elite. How many QBs do you know that led their team to a 15-1 record as a rookie, won 2 NFL titles in their first five seasons and had a 32 TD season under their belt?

Garcia Bronco
01-11-2010, 09:34 AM
I find it funny McD doesn't name Tom Terrific as an elite QB with Manning, Brees, and Favre

"I mentioned Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Brett Favre as quarterbacks of top playoff seeds this year and asked if he thought Orton was in their class or had a chance to get there. "

-Krieger


Krieger is not McDaniels

TheDave
01-11-2010, 09:37 AM
In summary, what I am saying here is that we SHOULD NOT view this transition to McDaniels as some desperate attempt to win a Super Bowl next year. This is about building a franchise and a team. The cupboard is pretty bare with talent right now -- at least that of the game changing variety. .

I completely disagree that the cupboard is so bare... hell, we have 5 probowlers on this team.

On defense, we have a HOF worthy Safety and corner not to mention one of the best OLB's in the game in Doom. On the other side we have a couple of excellent book end tackles and one of the top 5 WR's in the league.

This team is in need of a road grading guard and center a well as some big bodies along the D line. Get those and we will be a playoff team... assuming the QB can take us there.

Do we have holes... yes we do, but the cupboard isn't as empty as some people are saying.

Popps
01-11-2010, 09:41 AM
We may very well need to upgrade at QB to win it all.

But, I like Orton... and he'll be our starter next year.

In the meantime, we'll go about the bigger picture... which is putting together a championship defense/running game. Those are a must, whether you've got Joe Montana or Kyle Orton under center.

bloodsunday
01-11-2010, 09:51 AM
I completely disagree that the cupboard is so bare... hell, we have 5 probowlers on this team.

On defense, we have a HOF worthy Safety and corner not to mention one of the best OLB's in the game in Doom. On the other side we have a couple of excellent book end tackles and one of the top 5 WR's in the league.

This team is in need of a road grading guard and center a well as some big bodies along the D line. Get those and we will be a playoff team... assuming the QB can take us there.

Do we have holes... yes we do, but the cupboard isn't as empty as some people are saying.

Well disagree all you want. But our record that past 4 years in November and December suggests otherwise. Our players are not executing when it matters most (late season, red zone, 3rd and short, etc..). Early in the season (when most of the Pro Bowl voting happens by the way) we look like world beaters. Considering it has happened under 2 different coaches (and about 7 different DC), I'd say it's a safe bet to call it a talent issue.

And as for he Pro Bowlers on this team:
- 2 are getting very long in the tooth (you could argue both Dawkins and Bailey made in on reputation)
- 1 has all but forced his way out of town
- 1 completely disappeared when we needed him most (only 7 sacks in his final 10 games). Not coincidentally, we couldn't stop the run in those 10 games.

Most importantly, only 1 of those players really impacts the line of scrimmage. Football is still won and lost in the trenches and there is no other conclusion than we got kicked there the last 10 games of the year.

TheDave
01-11-2010, 09:56 AM
Well disagree all you want. But our record that past 4 years in November and December suggests otherwise. Our players are not executing when it matters most (late season, red zone, 3rd and short, etc..). Early in the season (when most of the Pro Bowl voting happens by the way) we look like world beaters. Considering it has happened under 2 different coaches (and about 7 different DC), I'd say it's a safe bet to call it a talent issue.

And as for he Pro Bowlers on this team:
- 2 are getting very long in the tooth (you could argue both Dawkins and Bailey made in on reputation)
- 1 has all but forced his way out of town
- 1 completely disappeared when we needed him most (only 7 sacks in his final 10 games). Not coincidentally, we couldn't stop the run in those 10 games.

Most importantly, only 1 of those players really impacts the line of scrimmage. Football is still won and lost in the trenches and there is no other conclusion than we got kicked there the last 10 games of the year.

So even our pro-bowlers are over rated... and people call me negative.

FWIW, I already said we needed a Gaurd and Canter and a couple of wide bodies along the Dline. But that doesn't mean were talentless.

Bigdawg26
01-11-2010, 10:20 AM
The only problem I have with this article is that Mcdaniels said that Kyle Orton is a level under Brees, Manning, and Brady. ARE YOU SERIOUS!!! Kyle Orton is a third tier quarterback. You mention Eli but Eli is a hell of a better quarterback then Orton. At least Eli has a strong arm who can and does make every throw. A high school quarterback has a stronger arm than Orton. There is no way Orton is even close pro bowl caliber McNabb, Farve(now), Rivers, Rogers, Big Ben type of quarterback nor to the good quarterback like Schab, Palmer, Eli, etc. He belongs with Garrad, Campbell, and Pennington type decent qb's.

bpc
01-11-2010, 10:35 AM
Awesome. If we can build a historically great defense that only a handful of teams within 43 super bowl championship teams have been able to match, an average QB should be enough to win the super bowl.

If you were a betting man, would you take the 80% probability, or the 20%?

Everybody would LOVE to build a great defense. If only it was that easy. EVERYBODY would love to have a franchise QB. So in the end, which one is easier to attain? One player vs. 11?

Requiem
01-11-2010, 10:37 AM
Don't know if a great defense needs 11 awesome players, BPC.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-11-2010, 10:37 AM
Wow, Kreiger! Such insight! You mean it's easier to find ONE great player than 11?

Pony Boy
01-11-2010, 10:52 AM
On the other side of the coin we could reach for McCoy, Tebow, or that kid from Div 1-AA with our 2nd. Problem there is that none of them would be ready to step in right away, so you better have Orton to buy you some time while these kids mature.

Couldn't agree more but have I missed something has Tom Brandstater been a bust? He has to be better than a reach for a kid from 1-AA.

colonelbeef
01-11-2010, 11:01 AM
And that's the problem with the QB position, for the guys that play it. If Kyle Orton played another position at the same level he played quarterback, people wouldn't complain about him. He'd be an above average starter. You can win super bowls with above average players. We'd look at whatever position he played, and we'd think "set there, for the time being. what else we need?"

But you can't do that with quarterback. What's the difference between a pretty good QB and a terrible one? You aren't winning games that matter with either of them. It's a rough conclusion.

What about Kyle Orton tells you that he is above average? If anything he is completely average, if not slightly below.

gyldenlove
01-11-2010, 11:19 AM
We may very well need to upgrade at QB to win it all.

But, I like Orton... and he'll be our starter next year.

In the meantime, we'll go about the bigger picture... which is putting together a championship defense/running game. Those are a must, whether you've got Joe Montana or Kyle Orton under center.

This team can certainly win with Orton, maybe not a Super bowl, but we can certainly win we have proved that. We need to get the run game going and that requires better blocking, better running and better playcalling.

Mr.Meanie
01-11-2010, 11:19 AM
I agree with the spirit of the article. In essence, you get a Pro Bowl caliber QB, you are only looking for one player. If you try to get a historically good defense, you need 8 - 11 guys. Obviously the law of numbers works against you. And I will also grant you that most teams that have prolonged periods of success (multiple division titles, multiple playoff wins, and multiple Super Bowls) do so with an "elite QB".

Here's where I depart with Krieger and most others on this topic:

First of all, it is more apparent now then ever that this team is extremely flawed. Cutler was our attempt to find a Pro Bowl caliber QB (and he in fact did make the Pro Bowl), but his supporting cast was weak. We saw how that turned out in Denver and in Chicago. Our running game is awful right now. It was awful last year and has been declining for a couple years IMO. Our defense is improved, but as we saw, there is PLENTY of work left to do there. If we launch into an effort to get a high draft pick QB, with the talent around that person we are likely to go from .500 to .250 in a hurry.

Secondly, I disagree with the assumption that the only way to get a QB is in the top 10 picks of the NFL draft. In fact, I feel that is the RISKIEST way to do it, at least until they sort out the CBA and rookie salaries. You can explore trade opportunities (ala a Matt Schaub), you can draft a later round QB that you don't expect to start for several years (gasp), you can wait to see if a guy that you like slips in the draft (like an Aaron Rodgers), or you could go out and rent a guy (sort of like a Kurt Warner scenario). I know the draft is the easiest idea to consider because everyone has equal (or roughly equal picks). But in reality, there are other opportunities out there.

In summary, what I am saying here is that we SHOULD NOT view this transition to McDaniels as some desperate attempt to win a Super Bowl next year. This is about building a franchise and a team. The cupboard is pretty bare with talent right now -- at least that of the game changing variety. It will take time. For the mean time, it is highly likely that given the style of football we will play and the supporting cast, Orton is our best available option. We should explore other scenarios if reasonable ones unfold. And if we got get a young QB, I think we should view it as an effort to develop a guy as opposed to throwing him to the wolves. Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo, and Phillip Rivers all made amazing transitions to the NFL after sitting for multiple season on the bench. Who knows, we might already have that guy in Brandstader. We can still win some games in the mean time, and maybe even make the playoffs. When the time is right, it will be easier for the right QB to transition to this team if the supporting cast improves. Before that time, it smells of panic.

fantasic post

Lolad
01-11-2010, 11:25 AM
This team can certainly win with Orton, maybe not a Super bowl, but we can certainly win we have proved that. We need to get the run game going and that requires better blocking, better running and better playcalling.

I think we need a QB who can do better than just get us to the playoffs.

gyldenlove
01-11-2010, 12:10 PM
I think we need a QB who can do better than just get us to the playoffs.

4 years sitting at home after new years says we need to get to the playoffs before thinking about super bowl. Shanahan taught us that lesson when he replaced Plummer with Cutler.

Popps
01-11-2010, 12:20 PM
I think we need a QB who can do better than just get us to the playoffs.

Build the team up and give any QB a chance to succeed.

How much did Flacco have to do to win that playoff game yesterday?

Beantown Bronco
01-11-2010, 12:30 PM
How much did Flacco have to do to win that playoff game yesterday?

Seriously. This is what I don't get about the "we could NEVER win a playoff game with Orton under center" crowd. I get it if you don't like the guy and don't think he's a great QB, etc. But to make such a statement like the one above when, just yesterday, we saw a QB complete a whole 4 passes out of 10 and win in a blowout on the road in the first round of the playoffs.....just goes to show you how impossible it is to defend said argument.

Teams win in the playoffs all the time with mediocre and even bad QB play. Teams have even won SBs with mediocre to bad QB play.

Cito Pelon
01-11-2010, 12:44 PM
We may very well need to upgrade at QB to win it all.

But, I like Orton... and he'll be our starter next year.

In the meantime, we'll go about the bigger picture... which is putting together a championship defense/running game. Those are a must, whether you've got Joe Montana or Kyle Orton under center.

That would certainly be nice.

Also, I'd like to see some better ST contributions.

Cito Pelon
01-11-2010, 12:55 PM
Seriously. This is what I don't get about the "we could NEVER win a playoff game with Orton under center" crowd. I get it if you don't like the guy and don't think he's a great QB, etc. But to make such a statement like the one above when, just yesterday, we saw a QB complete a whole 4 passes out of 10 and win in a blowout on the road in the first round of the playoffs.....just goes to show you how impossible it is to defend said argument.

Teams win in the playoffs all the time with mediocre and even bad QB play. Teams have even won SBs with mediocre to bad QB play.

It's a matter of heart, I guess. Denver hasn't had that kind of heart for a long time.

SouthStndJunkie
01-11-2010, 01:02 PM
Haha that jumped off the page at me too. He can barely tie his shoes without Plaxico out there.

Statistically, Eli Manning had his best season ever in 2009:

Best completion percentage: 62.3%

Most passing yards: 4021 passing yards

Most passing TDs: 27 TDs

Most yards per attempt: 7.9 yards per attempt

PRBronco
01-11-2010, 01:05 PM
Statistically, Eli Manning had his best season ever in 2009:

Best completion percentage: 62.3%

Most passing yards: 4021 passing yards

Most passing TDs: 27 TDs

Most yards per attempt: 7.9 yards per attempt

Your "statistics" have no place here, jerk!

Just ask our 1100 total yards, 9 TD first round "bust" ;)

Serious though, I had no idea his numbers were so good, stupid Eli.

WolfpackGuy
01-11-2010, 01:11 PM
You don't NEED an elite QB to win the big one, but it certainly helps.

Anybody here have any faith in Orton putting the team on his shoulders and carrying the team to a win?

Popps
01-11-2010, 01:13 PM
Seriously. This is what I don't get about the "we could NEVER win a playoff game with Orton under center" crowd. I get it if you don't like the guy and don't think he's a great QB, etc. But to make such a statement like the one above when, just yesterday, we saw a QB complete a whole 4 passes out of 10 and win in a blowout on the road in the first round of the playoffs.....just goes to show you how impossible it is to defend said argument.

Teams win in the playoffs all the time with mediocre and even bad QB play. Teams have even won SBs with mediocre to bad QB play.


Actually, if you look at our wins over Dallas, NE and even the Philly loss... Orton played at a level that I think could win playoff games.

Though, I'd certainly agree that he's not going to carry any teams on his back. Then again, structurally... we want to avoid that, anyway. You want to build up a team that can win a game one week with offense, the next with defense.

The whole argument is moot, as far as I'm concerned. He'll be our starter next year. We'll probably try to develop someone and I think we'll be in good shape at the QB position. We've got a lot of other work to do right now that takes precedent.

TonyR
01-11-2010, 01:19 PM
How much did Flacco have to do to win that playoff game yesterday?

As I posted elsewhere today...

The NFL has become a passing league, no doubt about it. As Bill Simmons pointed out:
QBs throwing for more than 4,000 yards: 1999 (five); 2009 (10).
QBs throwing 26-plus TDs: 1999 (three); 2009 (11).
QBs completing 335-plus passes: 1999 (two); 2009 (11).
QBs with a 95-plus passer rating: 1999 (two); 2009 (nine). (Seven of the top 53 QB ratings all-time were posted this season.)
QBs with 21-plus TDs who were at least plus-9 for TDs versus INTs: 1999 (six); 2009 (14)
According to Peter King, there were 866 pass plays of 25-plus yards (third-highest since 1992)
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100108

But did anyone notice the importance of the running game over the weekend? Check out what the winners did:

Jets: 41 carries, 171 yards vs. only 15 pass attempts
Cowboys: 35 carries, 198 yards vs. 35 pass attempts
Ravens: 52 carries, 234 yards vs. only 10 pass attempts
Cardinals: 23 carries, 156 vs. 33 pass attempts

The Jets and Ravens didn't even try to pass. The Cowboys ran very effectively. And even though passing was more the Cards game they did run very effectively. And all of this rushing success against playoff defenses!

The Broncos need to work towards that ability to run the damn football.

Popps
01-11-2010, 01:22 PM
It's a passing league, but aside from the silly Cardinals game... the others were won on the ground and defensively.

It'll be interesting to see how things work out this year. Last year, playoff QBs averaged something like 230 yards per game passing, with 2 TDs and 1 INT.

So, it may be a passing league... but once you get in, you'd better be able to run the ball and play defense, because that's what tends to happen.

NFLBRONCO
01-11-2010, 01:25 PM
I look at it this way

Orton vs a better QB

If we stay with Orton upgrade road is longer because besides OL upgrades we need more explosion at RB TE WR to cover up his limited ceiling.

An actually better QB with better skillset other then OL upgrades we'd do fine as is on O and BM wouldn't be an issue. Better QB's make others around him better.

Orton is a great teammate and is in his first year of a new system I give him slack on that but, his pocket presence and inability to not fall down is a bigger issue then him not using whole field. If you want to reach next level you have to be able to avoid one on one pressure and not fall down without guys even touching him. This is my biggest issue and concern I have and we all should have with Orton longterm.

Just my own view

Boobs McGee
01-11-2010, 01:26 PM
You don't NEED an elite QB to win the big one, but it certainly helps.

Anybody here have any faith in Orton putting the team on his shoulders and carrying the team to a win?

I think with another year in the system, Orton will be able to shoulder a LOT more load than he did this year. ESPECIALLY if McD beefs up the line, giving us that running game and blockers to fit his scheme.

I'll be curious to see how he looks completely healthy as well.

I just have high hopes for the guy...seeing what his numbers were this year on a bad ankle/dislocated finger, behind a spotty line, and working with an anemic running game...it seems pretty likely he'll flourish next year.

And WITH that flourishing, comfort, and confidence, I think we'll see him win one or two for us by himself.

elsid13
01-11-2010, 01:44 PM
I hadn't heard that.

He is. SI reported it last week.

Beantown Bronco
01-11-2010, 01:47 PM
If we stay with Orton upgrade road is longer because besides OL upgrades we need more explosion at RB TE WR to cover up his limited ceiling.

An actually better QB with better skillset other then OL upgrades we'd do fine as is on O and BM wouldn't be an issue. Better QB's make others around him better.


That's what folks said about Cutler and we saw how much better he made that offense look in Chicago......

I go the other way in this one. Better OLine play makes both the passing AND running games better. Improve the line and EVERYTHING benefits.

BroncoMan4ever
01-11-2010, 01:52 PM
i read this article and it is complete crap. nobody in the league with a so called elite QB is anywhere near the level of Peyton or Brees. those 2 are the top dogs in the NFL and no other QB is anywhere near that level.

with that out of the way, i truly believe Orton can join that group of QBs below Peyton and Brees.

he has the talent to be named along guys like Rivers, Rodgers, Ryan, Brady, Warner, with more time in this system and some work done to improve the interior line.

BroncoMan4ever
01-11-2010, 01:57 PM
That's what folks said about Cutler and we saw how much better he made that offense look in Chicago......

I go the other way in this one. Better OLine play makes both the passing AND running games better. Improve the line and EVERYTHING benefits.

damn right. football is won in the trenches.

does anyone truly believe Peyton wins the MVP this season with our line protecting him? the answer is no. it doesn't matter what kind of weapons you have if you don't have any time to scan the field and find the open man. i don't care who you have running the ball. TD, Moreno, AD, Johnson it doesn't matter if your line can't open any rushing lanes for them.

NFLBRONCO
01-11-2010, 02:00 PM
That's what folks said about Cutler and we saw how much better he made that offense look in Chicago......

I go the other way in this one. Better OLine play makes both the passing AND running games better. Improve the line and EVERYTHING benefits.

Take away so many screw up by Cutler they win 9+ games. He beat the Vikes without Hester and lost Knox the 4th qtr. He moved the ball better then we did and our O was supposedly so much superior. Bears OL sucks too just sayin. I have questions about Cutler too but, I'll take his screw ups and higher ceiling then lower ceiling and minimal screw ups. We only won 1 more game then Chicago did.

watermock
01-11-2010, 02:14 PM
I hadn't heard that.

Mallethead declared.

Could be great, or Cutler 2.0.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 02:15 PM
Seriously. This is what I don't get about the "we could NEVER win a playoff game with Orton under center" crowd. I get it if you don't like the guy and don't think he's a great QB, etc. But to make such a statement like the one above when, just yesterday, we saw a QB complete a whole 4 passes out of 10 and win in a blowout on the road in the first round of the playoffs.....just goes to show you how impossible it is to defend said argument.

Teams win in the playoffs all the time with mediocre and even bad QB play. Teams have even won SBs with mediocre to bad QB play.That is the exception to the rule. As the article states...it's an 80/20 proposition. Sure the Ravens/Jets won...with perhaps the best defenses in the league. Talk to me...when they're in the Superbowl.

elsid13
01-11-2010, 02:16 PM
Mallethead declared.

Could be great, or Cutler 2.0.

No he didn't

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/01/08/mallett.ap/
FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (AP) -- Arkansas quarterback Ryan Mallett is staying in college, passing up the NFL with an eye toward helping the Razorbacks become one of the nation's elite teams.

Mallett announced his decision Friday. He threw for a school-record 3,624 yards this season, leading Arkansas' young team to an 8-5 record. Mallett's top wide receivers are expected back next season as well.

"We're excited. We can't wait," Mallett said. "We've got a great team still that's coming back."

Mallett has two years of eligibility remaining, but his performance this season made him a candidate to jump to the pros early. He played at Michigan as a freshman in 2007, then sat out last season after transferring.

Mallett's return should give Arkansas one of the nation's top passing offenses. Sophomores Greg Childs, Jarius Wright and Joe Adams combined for 118 catches for 2,143 yards this season, and tight end D.J. Williams is also a receiving threat, assuming he sticks around for his senior season.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/01/08/mallett.ap/#ixzz0cLQzqiGE
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 02:17 PM
Mallethead declared.

Could be great, or Cutler 2.0.Great. I don't know if I would take him at #10 or not. But I do think he has the most physical upside. I think we all can agree...it takes more than just physical ability to becme a franchise QB. Nevertheless...I bet he goes top 10.

elsid13
01-11-2010, 02:17 PM
Great. I don't know if I would take him at #10 or not. But I do think he has the most physical upside. I think we all can agree...it takes more than just physical ability. Nevertheless...I be he goes top 10.

Mock wrong read above.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 02:18 PM
Mock wrong read above.Wow.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 02:21 PM
I think with another year in the system, Orton will be able to shoulder a LOT more load than he did this year. ESPECIALLY if McD beefs up the line, giving us that running game and blockers to fit his scheme.

I'll be curious to see how he looks completely healthy as well.

I just have high hopes for the guy...seeing what his numbers were this year on a bad ankle/dislocated finger, behind a spotty line, and working with an anemic running game...it seems pretty likely he'll flourish next year.

And WITH that flourishing, comfort, and confidence, I think we'll see him win one or two for us by himself.Disagree. Where he is short...isn't understanding the offense....it's making big plays. He's just not a "playmaker" at the QB position.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 02:22 PM
damn right. football is won in the trenches.

does anyone truly believe Peyton wins the MVP this season with our line protecting him? the answer is no. it doesn't matter what kind of weapons you have if you don't have any time to scan the field and find the open man. i don't care who you have running the ball. TD, Moreno, AD, Johnson it doesn't matter if your line can't open any rushing lanes for them.However, his defenses have been ordinary at best...and this was his 4th. How many of the Olineman do you think other teams would be dieing for?

Beantown Bronco
01-11-2010, 02:30 PM
That is the exception to the rule. As the article states...it's an 80/20 proposition. Sure the Ravens/Jets won...with perhaps the best defenses in the league. Talk to me...when they're in the Superbowl.

The article is talking about a completely different concept when they do the 80/20 ratio. First, they're talking SB only. I'm talking SB and playoffs (because some here don't think we can even win a single playoff game with Orton).

Also, I'm talking about the quality of the play, regardless of the quality of the player. For example: the article counts Big Ben as an elite QB. I don't (in terms of when he won his SBs). He wasn't an elite player during his first SB win. In fact, he did everything he could to single-handedly lose that game for them. Orton could've done what he did. Brady was similar. He did nothing special his first year at the helm. He lucked out in even getting to the SB and when he did get there, he had one decent drive that he'll be remembered for (against a team with a very suspect defense) and that's it. And he did nothing in that drive that Orton hasn't done at least a dozen times or more this season.

BroncoMan4ever
01-11-2010, 02:42 PM
However, his defenses have been ordinary at best...and this was his 4th. How many of the Olineman do you think other teams would be dieing for?

i'm not talking about Indy having a line built of All Pros or anything like that. however the Indy line is without weaknesses. all 5 on the line are good starters and form a really good unit. they aren't flashy but they get the job done. individually none of them are great, but together they form a formidable line.

and when you have a really great offense, you can win with a decent defense. you don't need a top 3 defense when you have an offense like Indy does.

yavoon
01-11-2010, 03:10 PM
in a related story, elite defense easier to find than historically great qb.

Lolad
01-11-2010, 04:37 PM
Build the team up and give any QB a chance to succeed.

How much did Flacco have to do to win that playoff game yesterday?

Baltimore's Defense of old showed itself yesterday. Which the article referred to our defense was good, I think our Offense put them in a lot of bad situations.

Orton would be serviceable if he could turn a broken play into something positive. He can't even walk for 2 yards to pick up a 1st down.

Popps
01-11-2010, 04:46 PM
Orton would be serviceable if he could turn a broken play into something positive. He can't even walk for 2 yards to pick up a 1st down.

Orton is a discount version of Kurt Warner. That's how you have to look at him. He's just rarely (if ever) going to make plays with his feet. Though, give him some slack... he did play with a ****ed up ankle this year, and ankles take months to heal... when stationary.

So, thinking of him as a poor man's Kurt Warner, the first thing you have to do is protect him. We did a so-so job of that. You've also got to take some pressure off him and run the ball.

Then, you've got to install a system that fits his skill-set, which I think we're doing.

So, again... I have no idea if he's a long-term solution or a SB quarterback, but... if you want to win with him, you have to treat him the way you'd treat Kurt Warner.

He's got a strong enough arm to make the throws he needs to make, and goes through his reads much better than people give him credit for. He's also a fairly young guy, still.

I recognize his weaknesses, but I'm not distraught about having him as our starter, either. I like a lot of things about his game.... and his teammates like playing for him. We could do much worse as we rebuild this thing.

extralife
01-11-2010, 04:58 PM
What about Kyle Orton tells you that he is above average? If anything he is completely average, if not slightly below.

For our system, for what we ask him to do, I think he's slightly above average. He's pretty smart, he rarely does something terrible, he's got good accuracy and the people on the team seem to like him. Those things count for something. He has below average arm strength, mobility and pocket awareness, obviously. He's not going to win games for you.

extralife
01-11-2010, 05:01 PM
Orton is a discount version of Kurt Warner. That's how you have to look at him. He's just rarely (if ever) going to make plays with his feet. Though, give him some slack... he did play with a ****ed up ankle this year, and ankles take months to heal... when stationary.

So, thinking of him as a poor man's Kurt Warner, the first thing you have to do is protect him. We did a so-so job of that. You've also got to take some pressure off him and run the ball.

Then, you've got to install a system that fits his skill-set, which I think we're doing.

So, again... I have no idea if he's a long-term solution or a SB quarterback, but... if you want to win with him, you have to treat him the way you'd treat Kurt Warner.

He's got a strong enough arm to make the throws he needs to make, and goes through his reads much better than people give him credit for. He's also a fairly young guy, still.

I recognize his weaknesses, but I'm not distraught about having him as our starter, either. I like a lot of things about his game.... and his teammates like playing for him. We could do much worse as we rebuild this thing.

Warner won a Super Bowl and got to another with Mike "I get my QBs killed" Martz as his offensive coordinator. He has the quickest release in the NFL and is second only to Peyton in reading a defense and finding soft spots in the coverage.

broncosteven
01-11-2010, 06:52 PM
I prefer the best player on the field to be my QB.

No other player handles the ball as much as the QB, out side of the center of course.

Montrose said the best thing about McD's TC this year in a recent post. He said ( I am paraphrasing here) that the O was coached not to make mistakes and that made it hard for them to go out and play for fear of making a mistake. He said it better and he was right.

Get the best athlete you can at QB, build the Lines on both sides and hope you find a couple playmakers on both sides of the ball.

I don't think you need a 10 ten to win the NFL postseason, it didn't help the Packers. It boils down to coaches devising a system to utilize all their players on the rosters strengths. Not trying to pound a round peg into a square hole which happened a good 6 games this year.

Not playing to a players strength is the biggest issue I have with McD.

broncofan7
01-11-2010, 06:59 PM
Colt McCoy in the 3rd round........

Atwater His Ass
01-11-2010, 07:20 PM
Comparing a 5x pro bowl, 2x MVP winner, 2x All-Pro selection, Super Bowl MVP/winning QB to Kyle Orton. Wow. It's just beyond words really.

Not to mention what he's accomplished in Arizona. ARIZONA.

"Hey Kurt, I know you used to bag grocieres and ****, but man you know you're really nothing more than an upgraded version of Kyle Orton."

I don't think I could come up with a better insult.

The Mane delivers. Once again.

atomicbloke
01-11-2010, 07:26 PM
Orton is a discount version of Kurt Warner. That's how you have to look at him. He's just rarely (if ever) going to make plays with his feet.

Did you just compare Kyle Orton to Kurt Warner?

broncosteven
01-11-2010, 07:30 PM
Did you just compare Kyle Orton to Kurt Warner?

Kyle just wins.

2KBack
01-11-2010, 07:36 PM
Did you just compare Kyle Orton to Kurt Warner?

From a mobility standpoint it is probably accurate.

As for the rest of the accomplishments...Kurt Warner couldn't even crack the starting lineup of an NFL team until he was 28. Kyle Orton is 27. Expecting Orton to perfrom as well from here on is a bit ridiculous, but Warner is a good example of a guy that wasn't expected to even start having an amazing career. It's one of the reason why I wish people would learn patience when it comes to player development.

Atwater His Ass
01-11-2010, 07:48 PM
From a mobility standpoint it is probably accurate.

As for the rest of the accomplishments...Kurt Warner couldn't even crack the starting lineup of an NFL team until he was 28. Kyle Orton is 27. Expecting Orton to perfrom as well from here on is a bit ridiculous, but Warner is a good example of a guy that wasn't expected to even start having an amazing career. It's one of the reason why I wish people would learn patience when it comes to player development.

Yeah, you know, because it's pretty common for a 28 year old QB, who was never drafted and went to second tier college, to come into the league and tear it up after bagging groceries for minimum wage.

We should also be monitoring Tatum Bell. After selling cell phones, he'll probably be the next Walter Payton.

Totally the same as a draft pick that takes a few years to develop. Totally.

Hamrob
01-11-2010, 09:01 PM
Does Orton have the vision to go through his reads and find the open receiver...and then the gonads to deliver the ball between two defenders? I'm not asking for all the time...just some flippin time?

eh...No!

Atwater His Ass
01-11-2010, 09:23 PM
Does Orton have the vision to go through his reads and find the open receiver...and then the gonads to deliver the ball between two defenders? I'm not asking for all the time...just some flippin time?

eh...No!

but he's basically just kurt warner lite. Hilarious!

MaloCS
01-11-2010, 09:33 PM
This whole argument that one can't compare average QBs to stellar QBs is bogus. If QBs like Warner, Brady, Manning, Brees and Rivers set the standard then how else can you gauge the skill set and/or progress of "our" guy? One HAS to compare "our" guy to those guys so goals can be implemented.

In fact, I want "our" guy to compare himself to those guys. Why? Because that says he knows what stellar QB play is and he wants to achieve that type of success. The last thing I want is a QB that is satisfied with being average.

Atwater His Ass
01-12-2010, 01:31 AM
This whole argument that one can't compare average QBs to stellar QBs is bogus. If QBs like Warner, Brady, Manning, Brees and Rivers set the standard then how else can you gauge the skill set and/or progress of "our" guy? One HAS to compare "our" guy to those guys so goals can be implemented.

In fact, I want "our" guy to compare himself to those guys. Why? Because that says he knows what stellar QB play is and he wants to achieve that type of success. The last thing I want is a QB that is satisfied with being average.

No one really has a problem with the comparison so to speak.

But the innuendo that a guy like Warner is only a "step above" a guy like Orton is where the lulz come in.

But hell, if you want to do the comparison, go ahead and compare Orton's first 4 years in the leauge with Warners'. Let us know how that works out.

watermock
01-12-2010, 02:08 AM
Warner gets alot of crap and keeps proving he's a HOF QB.

His wo-MAN might not be swedish, but I bet he's been faithfull.

Warner is awesome, period.

Favre is a mercinary. That's cool too, just the facts, he's wanted to play for Childress or awhile.

Favre is "the fix", but again, he followd his old OC. That can't be underestimated.

The Boy's have always had the Vikings number and they are on a roll.

Favre needs to play well, i.e. just 1 pick.

bloodsunday
01-12-2010, 10:29 AM
So even our pro-bowlers are over rated... and people call me negative.

FWIW, I already said we needed a Gaurd and Canter and a couple of wide bodies along the Dline. But that doesn't mean were talentless.

I don't want to say that they are overrated per se. Our secondary may have been the best part of our team this year, and was certainly the most improved.

What I am saying is I would trade 1 pro bowl player at the line of scrimmage for 2 that play "skill positions". It's just flat out easier to win that way.

bloodsunday
01-12-2010, 10:34 AM
Build the team up and give any QB a chance to succeed.

How much did Flacco have to do to win that playoff game yesterday?

I think the Jets are an even better example because they are actually winning despite their rookie QB. This is an example of how you can transition a young guy to the NFL without asking him to do too much and still grow at the same time. Frankly, a luxury we didn't give Jay Cutler (not sure it would have mattered).

Hamrob
01-12-2010, 03:02 PM
I think the Jets are an even better example because they are actually winning despite their rookie QB. This is an example of how you can transition a young guy to the NFL without asking him to do too much and still grow at the same time. Frankly, a luxury we didn't give Jay Cutler (not sure it would have mattered).I'd trade Orton for Sanchez in a New York minute!

Tombstone RJ
01-12-2010, 03:45 PM
Statistically, Eli Manning had his best season ever in 2009:

Best completion percentage: 62.3%

Most passing yards: 4021 passing yards

Most passing TDs: 27 TDs

Most yards per attempt: 7.9 yards per attempt

Oh the irony! Eli has his best year statistically yet they gmen have a very disappointing season with no playoffs.

Just goes to show you that sometimes a mistake free QB who has a running game and a great defense (and gets on a roll at the right time) can beat an excellent Pats team in the SB.

But, take away that running game and great defense (yet keep the great QB numbers) and no playoffs.

Strange, no?

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 04:31 PM
Warner's 1999 season and 2001 season could be the two best seasons ever by a QB in the modern era. The rules didn't change to help the QB's and WR's till 2004 either. Steve Young's 1998 season and 1994 season are amazing as well. Then there is Marino's 1984 season. Still Young, Manning and Warner are about the three most accurate QB's I have ever seen. Outside of both being human I don't think you can compare what Warner does on the football field with Orton. Orton played well this year but lets not his success devalue just how good Warner is throwing the football.

Popps
01-12-2010, 04:42 PM
Did you just compare Kyle Orton to Kurt Warner?

I compared him to a discount version of Kurt Warner.

Why did you leave that part out of your question? I made it abundantly clear what I was saying and didn't remotely imply they were in the same class.

Yet, you left out a critical part of the sentence.

I wonder why?

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 04:49 PM
I compared him to a discount version of Kurt Warner.

Why did you leave that part out of your question? I made it abundantly clear what I was saying and didn't remotely imply they were in the same class.

Yet, you left out a critical part of the sentence.

I wonder why?
Why didn't you just say he was a discount version of Matt Cassel?

Popps
01-12-2010, 04:53 PM
Why didn't you just say he was a discount version of Matt Cassel?

Because Cassel is much more mobile. It's not an apt analogy.


Look, I'm sorry to throw such a curve-ball by you Mopey Mafia types. I'll keep it nice and dumbed down for you in the future.

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 05:02 PM
Because Cassel is much more mobile. It's not an apt analogy.


Look, I'm sorry to throw such a curve-ball by you Mopey Mafia types. I'll keep it nice and dumbed down for you in the future.

Yeah lets compare the mobility of a 38 year old to a 27 year old. Warner was still sacked less without a Pro Bowl left tackle. Only a golden loads member would think that having a 27 year old QB as mobile as a 38 year old is a OK thing.

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 05:08 PM
Popps I would worry less about your "curve balls" and try and throw a strike. The dude is 11 years older then Orton. Hilarious!

Popps
01-12-2010, 05:14 PM
Yeah lets compare the mobility of a 38 year old to a 27 year old. Warner was still sacked less without a Pro Bowl left tackle. Only a golden loads member would think that having a 27 year old QB as mobile as a 38 year old is a OK thing.

I'm guessing you weren't around during the SB years, but we had a guy named John Elway who was pretty mobile into his late 30s.

The comparison was simply that if you want to win with Orton, you've got to provide him maximum protection to allow him to go through his reads. When he has time, he's very efficient. I'm not saying he's the answer, but it's what we have right now. So, if we want to win playoff games, we've got to use a model that allows for a less-mobile QB to scan his options.

Oh, and Warner was never mobile.

Do you watch football?

Honestly?

Circle Orange
01-12-2010, 05:15 PM
"Elite" and "Great" are words thrown around like candy these days. No one knows ahead of time who's going to be 'elite'. Peyton Manning was considered a shadow to Ryan Leaf...now everyone acts like he drops bricks of gold. The Super Bowl factor is overblown. The one superbowl Favre won, Desmond Howard was the MVP, for crying out loud. Vick was supposed to be some new 'revolution' of qb (because we've never seen anyone who could run/throw before). Marino isn't even spoken of anymore, except in excerpts about passers. Romo continues to be overhyped and overblown, despite having done nothing of importance for a 'great' qb pushing 30. Aikman gets little credit for his three Super Bowls, Brady gets all the credit for his. Montana was once declared the greatest of all time because of four rings, yet Bradshaw was along for the ride for his four. On and on...people are tools and idiots when it comes to this. And yes, a great D will 'pop up' every few years and get you a bowl, but to consistently be in contention you need the qb and a top ten defense. How many Super Bowl winners have had a top three defense, or a dominating one? Precious few. It's as false a premise as the 'cold weather' thing, since the Super Bowl isn't played in weather at all. But it's a big deal to 'tough it out' in cold climes to get there. Right.

hambone13
01-12-2010, 05:22 PM
again, WHEN THEY WON THE SB, tehy were not elite. big ben nearly cost them the first sb, if it wasnt for defense. eli had a good 3 game run but is far from elite, tom brady was a 6th round rookie in his first SB year if i remember right, was he elite then? no

He had elite talent at the time. That is the point jackass.

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 05:32 PM
I'm guessing you weren't around during the SB years, but we had a guy named John Elway who was pretty mobile into his late 30s.

The comparison was simply that if you want to win with Orton, you've got to provide him maximum protection to allow him to go through his reads. When he has time, he's very efficient. I'm not saying he's the answer, but it's what we have right now. So, if we want to win playoff games, we've got to use a model that allows for a less-mobile QB to scan his options.

Oh, and Warner was never mobile.

Do you watch football?

Honestly?

Do you think that Warner requires anywhere near the same amount of protection as Orton does to get through the same amount of reads?

2KBack
01-12-2010, 06:08 PM
Yeah, you know, because it's pretty common for a 28 year old QB, who was never drafted and went to second tier college, to come into the league and tear it up after bagging groceries for minimum wage.

We should also be monitoring Tatum Bell. After selling cell phones, he'll probably be the next Walter Payton.

Totally the same as a draft pick that takes a few years to develop. Totally.

What is you point? I think Warner is the most underrated QB of his generation, and a sure fire Hall of Famer. His story is unique. What isnt unique are players needing time to develop. Warner is an example of what is possible through preserverence and the ability to work to get better. Warner was signed as an undrafted free agent out of college (by Green Bay), he was cut. He succeeded enough in the AFL to get another look, that look got him a back up job to Trent Green. That magical superbowl season wasn't even going to happen because people, football people, didn't think he was as good as Trent Green.

It's very convenient to say that a Player A could never be compared to Player B, at the end of ones career and the beginning of another. Think about how idiotic it would have been to say that Kurt Warner will never lead a team to a superbowl when he was playing in NFL Europe.

It isn't a direct example, it is one more example of a player that didn't break out in their first damn season. It's people like you that cut the Kurt Warners, and trade the Brett Farves and Steve Youngs.

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:14 PM
Do you think that Warner requires anywhere near the same amount of protection as Orton does to get through the same amount of reads?

No, likely not. Warner is a better QB. I hope at this point in the conversation, you can at least follow that much.

That said, here are his highlights from last week...

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fyduZ0_PNgA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fyduZ0_PNgA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Passes
1 - Primary read
2 - Primary read
3 - Primary read
4 - fle flicker (failed due to pressure)
5 - play-action, primary read
6 - 2-3 seconds in pocket, primary read (Announcer: "They do a good job giving warner time
7 - 2-3 seconds - looks off one receiver - secondary read - short gain
8 - blitz - hot read - quick pass
9 - play-action - steps up (rare burst of foot movement) compete pass
10 - primary read
11 - TD pass - secondary option. Announcer "Warner with all kinds of time."
12 - primary read - dump pass
13 - primary read - jump ball pass
14 - secondary read - looks off one receiver - nice throw **


So, of those 14 completions... 9 went to his primary read. His job was simply to step back and fire it.

He went to a secondary read on 2-4 of those, arguably.


Pass #14 would be an example of a throw he can make that most QBs (including Orton) can't.

Beyond that, the majority of what he was asked to do here was to simply drop back and fire the ball to an area. (Which he's always been adept at doing.)

On the few occasions where he was able to find his secondary receivers, the announcers even clearly stated that he had plenty of time to do so.


Now, here is Kyle Orton against New England...

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kxvaoC5oO7k&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kxvaoC5oO7k&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Passes

1 - Play-action - primary read
2 - secondary read (between 2-3 seconds)
3 - Play-action - pump fake to primary, hits secondary (about 2 seconds)
4 - secondary option (2 seconds)
5 - jump ball TD throw - primary
6 - Play-action - primary read - no hesitation
7 - bad throw - but tipped and caught (2nd half of the season would have been INT!)
8 - primary read - quick pass
9 - secondary read (given nice time, nice result)
10 - secondary read - eludes rusher
11 - hot read - blitz
12 - secondary read (?) if not, he sells a pass over the middle before going left


So, in watching both of these videos back to back, a few things strike me...

1. My analogy of them being similar in STYLE (not skill, but style) seems to hold up.
2. Kurt Warner not only throws to his primary read most of the time, but the plays seemed designed to get the ball out of his hands more quickly.
3. Orton (at least in these examples) threw to more secondary options
4. Orton used more pumps and look-offs for misdirection purposes
5. Neither QB is mobile, but both made plays with their feet in this game.


So, again... I'll stick by my theory that Kyle isn't as physically gifted as Warner, of course. But, THE APPROACH that you'd want to use to win with either one of these QBs would be similar.

BroncoMan4ever
01-12-2010, 08:54 PM
Do you think that Warner requires anywhere near the same amount of protection as Orton does to get through the same amount of reads?

Warner is a freak when it comes to making reads though. he has probably the quickest release in football and makes the quickest reads of anyone in the league. that comes from his time in Arena League.