PDA

View Full Version : QB Rankings


Drunk Monkey
05-18-2010, 11:06 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-qbrankings051810

Wow, I know Orton is no world beater but Ranked 29th.

Triplelefthook
05-18-2010, 11:09 AM
i think 23rd is a better ranking.... but it still is none too flattering

Paladin
05-18-2010, 11:12 AM
East Coast bias with a stong dash of regurgitatione what he has read elsewhere. Really, now. His writeups tend to be limited in real knowledge and full of crap. A real BS read.,.....

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 11:16 AM
I can't tell if he's ranking the entire QB corps for each team or just the starters. He seems to go back and forth from team to team depending on how it will best support his ranking.

When I read #17, it told me all I needed to know about how much time he really put into this:

As for Kolb, he has had three games with significant playing time. He got hammered in relief against Baltimore in 2008 and New Orleans in í09 during his first career start. He looked great against Kansas City in his second start, but thatís the Chiefs. Itís going to be awhile before the jury returns a verdict.

This guy is 10 slots ahead of Orton? C'mon Man.

BlaK-Argentina
05-18-2010, 11:18 AM
LMAO at that list.

TheReverend
05-18-2010, 11:25 AM
A little too low until Tebow and Quinn can show what they got, but it's a fairly respectable list.

Jags too high, Vikings in limbo, Bengals too low, Titans too high, etc

Jesterhole
05-18-2010, 11:30 AM
Sounds about right.

orangemonkey
05-18-2010, 11:33 AM
Pretty close ranking 4 Orton. Many NFL experts have ranked him as a borderline starter so no surprises with this chatter or McD's heavy activity at QB. Quinn, Tebow and Brandy have great upside so I'm excited.

Mr.Meanie
05-18-2010, 11:34 AM
That list is garbage. Orton missed one game due to injury and was one game shy of 4,000+ yards, while playing with a busted throwing finger and bum ankle for half the season. Whatever, haters gonna hate.

colonelbeef
05-18-2010, 11:37 AM
I think he's a few spots too low, but not that many.

Bottom line- Kyle Orton is a below average QB with a below average arm, way below average scrambling ability, and way way below average pocket awareness.

BlaK-Argentina
05-18-2010, 11:37 AM
We are at least on par with:

Sea, Jax, SF, Oak, KC, Mia, Tampa, St. Louis, Philly and Arizona. You could even make the case for Detroit and NYJ considering they have 2nd year guys that may or may not get better.

I don't know, to me this is a really crappy list.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-18-2010, 11:42 AM
3802 yards, 62 percent completion ratio, 21TD's/12 Ints, with an 86 rating is good for the 29th best QB situation? Alright then.

colonelbeef
05-18-2010, 11:49 AM
3802 yards, 62 percent completion ratio, 21TD's/12 Ints, with an 86 rating is good for the 29th best QB situation? Alright then.

stats are way overrated though.

How many of those yards came after the catch? Orton wasn't asked to do much other than hit short slants and comebacks, then watch as the receiver worked his ass off for more yardage.

When the game is on the line, Kyle Orton is about the 25th guy you want taking snaps.

Pseudofool
05-18-2010, 11:54 AM
3802 yards, 62 percent completion ratio, 21TD's/12 Ints, with an 86 rating is good for the 29th best QB situation? Alright then.Exactly. They are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent. You can't simply divorce the scheme and the coach when you talk about QB production, esp. given the above quoted statistics.

I think that list is pretty bad, save for like the top seven.

Kaylore
05-18-2010, 11:56 AM
stats are way overrated though.

How many of those yards came after the catch? Orton wasn't asked to do much other than hit short slants and comebacks, then watch as the receiver worked his ass off for more yardage.

When the game is on the line, Kyle Orton is about the 25th guy you want taking snaps.

Then Cutler's the 30th considering how many game-blowing ints he threw last season. Games where if he just takes three sacks and they kick a field goal they probably win. Games like the niners game where if he throws four ints instead of five they probably win. I'd rather take the guy who throws for less yards and less TD's than the guy who puts up gaudy numbers but gives the ball to the opponent non-stop, especially in the fourth quarter and in the redzone.

Turnovers, second only to points (obviously), is the most telling statistic in figuring who is going to win or lose.

colonelbeef
05-18-2010, 11:57 AM
Kyle Orton is going to be 3rd on the depth chart behind a rookie and a 1st round bust by the time the season rolls around, if he is still in Denver at all.

That is all you need to know to tell you that the list is accurate.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-18-2010, 11:57 AM
stats are way overrated though.

How many of those yards came after the catch? Orton wasn't asked to do much other than hit short slants and comebacks, then watch as the receiver worked his ass off for more yardage.

When the game is on the line, Kyle Orton is about the 25th guy you want taking snaps.

This is BS. The reason why people think Kyle Orton is only a back up is because of his time in Chicago. He's proven to be capable, he's hardly the worst starting QB in the league and can win if the situation is right. Im not saying he's a world beater or that he's the type of guy who can take over a game, but when the team is running well, he doesn't ruin it with stupidity. People are used to calling him a back up and its stuck.

Pseudofool
05-18-2010, 11:57 AM
stats are way overrated though.

How many of those yards came after the catch? Orton wasn't asked to do much other than hit short slants and comebacks, then watch as the receiver worked his ass off for more yardage.

When the game is on the line, Kyle Orton is about the 25th guy you want taking snaps.If stats are overrated should we go by winning percentage? How does Orton do there comparably?

The bottom line is the Broncos got well above 29th in QB production last year, and given the competition and a second with this regime, that production should get better.

colonelbeef
05-18-2010, 12:01 PM
Then Cutler's the 30th considering how many game-blowing ints he threw last season. Games where if he just takes three sacks and they kick a field goal they probably win. Games like the niners game where if he throws four ints instead of five they probably win. I'd rather take the guy who throws for less yards and less TD's than the guy who puts up gaudy numbers but gives the ball to the opponent non-stop, especially in the fourth quarter and in the redzone.

Turnovers, second only to points (obviously), is the most telling statistic in figuring who is going to win or lose.

The situations are not similar. Cutler was asked to carry an undermanned and undercoached offense in Chicago, and his ego coupled with inexperienced, untalented receivers, an awful defense missing it's best player, and a horrendous offensive line cost him.

Orton played behind what was the best O-line in the league coming out of 2008, with incredibly talented receivers, a #1 draft pick running back, and an offensively minded coach. Orton was never asked to carry the team.

It's the same reason that Kyle Orton will be a backup this year, and for the remainder of his career, while Cutler will have a bounce back year following an ego crushing experience in 2009.

TonyR
05-18-2010, 12:06 PM
The situations are not similar. Cutler was asked to carry an undermanned and undercoached offense in Chicago...

You mean the same situation Orton was in the prior year and won more games?

Pseudofool
05-18-2010, 12:09 PM
That is all you need to know to tell you that the list is accurate.If you catch yourself writing a sentence like this, you might not only be a moron, but you're probably also a douchebag.

Tombstone RJ
05-18-2010, 12:09 PM
Another dig on the Broncos. Basically, the writer is saying "McD doesn't have a clue." Orton alone gets the Broncos into the mid to late teens.

Whatever.

Inkana7
05-18-2010, 12:10 PM
You mean the same situation Orton was in the prior year and won more games?

lulz

bronco militia
05-18-2010, 12:14 PM
the broncos should be 16 or 17th.....sure orton sucks, but he's no worse than matt stafford, Jay cutler, Hasselback, Garrard, Alex smith, Jason Cambell, Chan Hene, Sand Cassel, Josh freeman, Aj Feeley, or Matt Leinart.

what a joke of a list

Dagmar
05-18-2010, 12:15 PM
You mean the same situation Orton was in the prior year and won more games?

Cutler's 8 games were more than Orton's 8 games? If you start saying, it was all the D, it was all Marshall, then start taking games away from Cutler to even it up, ie when he fumbled and lost us the game against SD but the ref screwed the call.

Tombstone RJ
05-18-2010, 12:18 PM
The situations are not similar. Cutler was asked to carry an undermanned and undercoached offense in Chicago, and his ego coupled with inexperienced, untalented receivers, an awful defense missing it's best player, and a horrendous offensive line cost him.

Orton played behind what was the best O-line in the league coming out of 2008, with incredibly talented receivers, a #1 draft pick running back, and an offensively minded coach. Orton was never asked to carry the team.

It's the same reason that Kyle Orton will be a backup this year, and for the remainder of his career, while Cutler will have a bounce back year following an ego crushing experience in 2009.

But Orton won with this lousy Chicago team, no?

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 12:19 PM
Cutler's 8 games were more than Orton's 8 games? If you start saying, it was all the D, it was all Marshall, then start taking games away from Cutler to even it up, ie when he fumbled and lost us the game against SD but the ref screwed the call.

Dagmar, he's talking about the 2008 Bears. They were 9-7 under Orton.

Tombstone RJ
05-18-2010, 12:19 PM
the broncos should be 16 or 17th.....sure orton sucks, but he's no worse than matt stafford, Jay cutler, Hasselback, Garrard, Alex smith, Jason Cambell, Chan Hene, Sand Cassel, Josh freeman, Aj Feeley, or Matt Leinart.

what a joke of a list

:rofl: :thanku:

Doggcow
05-18-2010, 12:20 PM
stats are way overrated though.

How many of those yards came after the catch? Orton wasn't asked to do much other than hit short slants and comebacks, then watch as the receiver worked his ass off for more yardage.

When the game is on the line, Kyle Orton is about the 25th guy you want taking snaps.

Right. No other teams' receivers worked their asses off for yards. Andre Johnson, Larry Fitz are asked to just fall down after they catch it.

Dagmar
05-18-2010, 12:24 PM
Dagmar, he's talking about the 2008 Bears. They were 9-7 under Orton.

A then I will just shut my big fat mouth.

Bronco Boy
05-18-2010, 12:26 PM
Who cares.

Pick Six
05-18-2010, 12:34 PM
Orton played behind what was the best O-line in the league coming out of 2008

...and he was winning with that line intact. When Ryan Harris went down with an injury, the bottom dropped out...

Hamrob
05-18-2010, 12:44 PM
I can't stand Orton! I hate guys who are too afraid to make plays... Now, is that Orton or was that McDaniels...I think a little of both.

That being said, he's better than 29 by a long ways. I'd put him in the 10-15 range myself. He can run an offense with limited mistakes and he is efficient. I kind of link him to a guy like Pennington. Not great...but, it could be worse.

Steve Sewell
05-18-2010, 12:45 PM
I think he's a few spots too low, but not that many.

Bottom line- Kyle Orton is a below average QB with a below average arm, way below average scrambling ability, and way way below average pocket awareness.

Bottom line- Kyle Orton produces above average results and has proven it throughout his career.

That "ranking" is just hack journalism at its finest. Orton is no world beater by any stretch, but he outplayed many of the QB's listed ahead of him last year in a sub-optimal situation.

Kaylore
05-18-2010, 12:46 PM
The situations are not similar. Cutler was asked to carry an undermanned and undercoached offense in Chicago, and his ego coupled with inexperienced, untalented receivers, an awful defense missing it's best player, and a horrendous offensive line cost him.

Orton played behind what was the best O-line in the league coming out of 2008, with incredibly talented receivers, a #1 draft pick running back, and an offensively minded coach. Orton was never asked to carry the team.

It's the same reason that Kyle Orton will be a backup this year, and for the remainder of his career, while Cutler will have a bounce back year following an ego crushing experience in 2009.

You're wrong. The Chicago offense was better under Orton. Also most of Cutler's ints had nothing to do with is receivers. Factor in the crappy depth behind him and I would argue we're better off as a whole than Chi-town is.

JJJ
05-18-2010, 12:53 PM
From my perspective that is far too harsh of rating for Orton. As a Bolt fan I felt more nervous that Orton would deliver a win than when Cutler was in there. Orton turned out to be much, much better than I thought he would for you guys. He should be in the 15-20 range. 29 is nonsense.

Dedhed
05-18-2010, 12:54 PM
LMAO at that list.

Yup. Vince Young at 14?:rofl:

jhns
05-18-2010, 12:57 PM
It is funny how much people here defend Orton. No one, outside of the extreme homer Bronco fan, thinks that Orton is a good QB. I have been saying this for a long time now. Even McDaniels doesn't consider him a starting quality QB. If he did, he wouldn't have traded for one QB and then drafted another in the first.

jhns
05-18-2010, 01:03 PM
Then Cutler's the 30th considering how many game-blowing ints he threw last season. Games where if he just takes three sacks and they kick a field goal they probably win. Games like the niners game where if he throws four ints instead of five they probably win. I'd rather take the guy who throws for less yards and less TD's than the guy who puts up gaudy numbers but gives the ball to the opponent non-stop, especially in the fourth quarter and in the redzone.

Turnovers, second only to points (obviously), is the most telling statistic in figuring who is going to win or lose.

LOL

Then there are guys like this. You claim Cutler is horrible and blah, blah, blah... Why can't you get over him then? Why are you always turning stuff into "well Cutler blah blah blahed"... Sure, you really believe what you say. That is why you are always trying to convince yourself. This thread didn't even mention Cutler before you came along. The argument for Orton being 25th in QBs you want starting is really that Cutler is 30? What exactly does that have to do with anything? I don't see how your post at all relates to what you quoted.

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 01:04 PM
It is funny how much people here defend Orton. No one, outside of the extreme homer Bronco fan, thinks that Orton is a good QB. I have been saying this for a long time now. Even McDaniels doesn't consider him a starting quality QB. If he did, he wouldn't have traded for one QB and then drafted another in the first.

ummmm....

From my perspective that is far too harsh of rating for Orton. As a Bolt fan I felt more nervous that Orton would deliver a win than when Cutler was in there. Orton turned out to be much, much better than I thought he would for you guys. He should be in the 15-20 range. 29 is nonsense.

jhns
05-18-2010, 01:07 PM
ummmm....

Closet Bronco homers are not excluded. Anyways, I don't see him saying Orton is good. He said he was better than he expected. I guess if having the 15-20th best QB is a good thing....

HAT
05-18-2010, 01:12 PM
Can't wait to see old numer 8 running the offense this year. 4,200 yards and 30 TD's easy. No way in hell Quinn or Tebow beats him out (legitimately).

Josh is no dummy.

:strong:

Steve Sewell
05-18-2010, 01:12 PM
LOL

Then there are guys like this. You claim Cutler is horrible and blah, blah, blah... Why can't you get over him then? Why are you always turning stuff into "well Cutler blah blah blahed"... Sure, you really believe what you say. That is why you are always trying to convince yourself. This thread didn't even mention Cutler before you came along. The argument for Orton being 25th in QBs you want starting is really that Cutler is 30? What exactly does that have to do with anything? I don't see how your post at all relates to what you quoted.

Cutler's White Knight to the rescue!!!

Broncos4tw
05-18-2010, 01:26 PM
TThere is more to being a QB than #'s.. or even regular season wins imo. Kyle "Turfmagnet" Orton doesn't have the playmaking ability needed to progress far into the playoffs. Every QB that has those abilities, usually make fans (or even non-fans) ooh and aah over even a few of their plays each game. Or their scrambles out of bad situations, or throwing an accurate pass with someone in their face. Orton has never made me ooh or aah over anything he has done since arriving. He is very average, and average QBs rarely win SBs, that's just a fact.

BlaK-Argentina
05-18-2010, 01:28 PM
I can't believe there's still people defending Cutler and especially his performance last year. I mean come on.

Kaylore
05-18-2010, 01:28 PM
Cutler's White Knight to the rescue!!!

:~ohyah!:He and Colonelbeef are too easy, though Jhiz is the easiest. It's like they have "annoy me" buttons on their foreheads. I bet he was picked on a lot in his school days.

jhns
05-18-2010, 01:33 PM
:~ohyah!:He and Colonelbeef are too easy, though Jhiz is the easiest. It's like they have "annoy me" buttons on their foreheads. I bet he was picked on a lot in his school days.

Who says I am annoyed? I just like laughing at stupidity. Why else would I continue to come here and do it?

As for the picked on part. I played sports and got women. People like me never got picked on like you nerds.

Rabb
05-18-2010, 01:37 PM
TThere is more to being a QB than #'s.. or even regular season wins imo. Kyle "Turfmagnet" Orton doesn't have the playmaking ability needed to progress far into the playoffs. Every QB that has those abilities, usually make fans (or even non-fans) ooh and aah over even a few of their plays each game. Or their scrambles out of bad situations, or throwing an accurate pass with someone in their face. Orton has never made me ooh or aah over anything he has done since arriving. He is very average, and average QBs rarely win SBs, that's just a fact.

this is right up there with the dumbest post possible

so forget numbers and wins...there is more than that, if you don't "ooh and ahh" me, you're crap

Cutler ooh'ed and ahh'ed people, how'd that work out

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 01:38 PM
As for the picked on part. I played sports and got women. People like me never got picked on like you nerds.

You do realize that

(1) playing women's sports
and
(2) playing sports and getting women

are two very different things.....don't you?

jhns
05-18-2010, 01:42 PM
You do realize that

(1) playing women's sports
and
(2) playing sports and getting women

are two very different things.....don't you?

My mistake.

Kaylore
05-18-2010, 01:49 PM
My mistake.

Oh, we know.

boltaneer
05-18-2010, 01:52 PM
From my perspective that is far too harsh of rating for Orton. As a Bolt fan I felt more nervous that Orton would deliver a win than when Cutler was in there. Orton turned out to be much, much better than I thought he would for you guys. He should be in the 15-20 range. 29 is nonsense.

I agree with this. I'd put him around 20.

Someone compared him to Pennington and that's about the perfect comparison. He'd be a backup on most teams, a decent starter on some and a good band-aid quarterback on a team developing a young QB.

orangemonkey
05-18-2010, 02:08 PM
I agree with this. I'd put him around 20.

Someone compared him to Pennington and that's about the perfect comparison. He'd be a backup on most teams, a decent starter on some and a good band-aid quarterback on a team developing a young QB.

1. I agree with 20 or worst. Either way, he's average and was one of the biggest weaknesses on the Broncos last year
2. Yep, agree, he would be a backup on most teams
3. Unless Quinn AND Tebow get hurt in the preseason, Orton will be a backup for the Broncos or shown the door.

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 02:12 PM
1. I agree with 20 or worst. Either way, he's average and was one of the biggest weaknesses on the Broncos last year


By definition, if one of the biggest weaknesses on our team was "average", then they should've won the SB last year. Or at least gone deep in the playoffs. 8-8 teams by definition cannot have rosters full of above average and great players.

3. Unless Quinn AND Tebow get hurt in the preseason, Orton will be a backup for the Broncos or shown the door.

Big time reach here. What has Quinn shown in his time in the NFL to indicate he is even close to as good an NFL starter as Orton? Must've been his last outing of the year against KC where he went a whole 10 for 17 for 66 yds 0 TDs and 2 INTs.

orangemonkey
05-18-2010, 02:18 PM
By definition, if one of the biggest weaknesses on our team was "average", then they should've won the SB last year. Or at least gone deep in the playoffs. 8-8 teams by definition cannot have rosters full of above average and great players.




Big time reach here. What has Quinn shown in his time in the NFL to indicate he is even close to as good an NFL starter as Orton? Must've been his last outing of the year against KC where he went a whole 10 for 17 for 66 yds 0 TDs and 2 INTs.


Simple: he's the QB which means his play has a bigger impact on the direction of the team. And, I meant to say he was below average.

The fact that Quinn and Tebow were brought in with contracts heavy in playing incentives is enough for me to believe they will eat Orton's lunch. Those two true athletes will destroy him this preseason. Just watch.

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 02:27 PM
Simple: he's the QB which means his play has a bigger impact on the direction of the team. And, I meant to say he was below average.

There is literally no objective individual or team statistic by which one can come to that conclusion.

The fact that Quinn and Tebow were brought in with contracts heavy in playing incentives is enough for me to believe they will eat Orton's lunch. Those two true athletes will destroy him this preseason. Just watch.

Quinn has been playing under such a contract since day one in the NFL. Result? Two decent games against Denver in 08 when they were the worst defense in the league and against Detroit in 09 when they were the worst defense in the league. Other than that? Simple. Supreme suckage against pretty much every defense not ranked #32 in the league.

jebures
05-18-2010, 02:36 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-qbrankings051810

Wow, I know Orton is no world beater but Ranked 29th.

I was going to click on the link until I saw your picture there......and I forgot what the thread was about..

baja
05-18-2010, 02:39 PM
lulz

OK I gotta ask what does lulz mean?

Popps
05-18-2010, 03:03 PM
Orton is a middle of the pack talent as far as stats/ability. I do think he brings some elements to his game that helped us win last season. Those elements aren't always overtly visible, so the average QB talent "evaluator" like the bozo in this article is going to miss the boat.

There are also a number of factors that go into these things. Orton is a good QB in our system with McD coaching him. He probably won't do so well in Buffalo, for example.

It's a message board, so people feel like the have to use rhetoric. But, the truth is... Orton isn't that great, but he isn't that bad, either.

Popps
05-18-2010, 03:05 PM
OK I gotta ask what does lulz mean?

It's like this....

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/funnypics/images/l/lol_cat-12926.jpg

Only it's so much so, it turns into this....

http://adagiago.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/hahaha-lulz.jpg

ScottXray
05-18-2010, 03:19 PM
There is literally no objective individual or team statistic by which one can come to that conclusion.



Quinn has been playing under such a contract since day one in the NFL. Result? Two decent games against Denver in 08 when they were the worst defense in the league and against Detroit in 09 when they were the worst defense in the league. Other than that? Simple. Supreme suckage against pretty much every defense not ranked #32 in the league.

I Have to agree. Quinn and Tebow were given incentive laden contracts that only kick in if they take X% of all snaps in a season. Unless they are SO clearly superior to what the team can achieve with Orton under center they will not reach many of those incentives, at least not this year.

Incentive contracts are for two reasons.
1. It can be used to motivate the player to achieve.
2. It can give a player a high contract number which the team has no intention
of actually paying. For press purposes the players can say I got an X( insert rediculous # here) million dollar contract. His real payout is substantially lower because he can't hit the incentives unless the team wants him to and he is playing that well.

As far as Orton...he signed a 3 mill tender for this year. He will be starting unless he is Clearly outplayed, by a lot.

Quinn will get somewhere around 7 mill if he takes 70% of the snaps (I could be wrong, but it's in that neighborhood) but worse , the REST of his contract also
is raised to a much higher number. He is going to have to perform MUCH higher than his previous outings in order for the Broncos to want to give up that much jack. And with Tebow in the wings, and even Brandstater also , I really can't see Quinn getting much time this year. If anyone is traded it is likely to be next year, or Quinn this year. We won't get anything real for Brandstater and might not be able to keep him on the PS, and we are not trading Tebow (the future?). Orton knows our system and barring injury will start. Quinn is the one that is going to have to prove himself, unless Brandstater craps out.

Quinn was brought in to backup Orton, and maybe, eventually, replace him. We still have that need, but Tebow is now the QBOTF. Coupled with his contract , depite how much McD wanted him, the only trade bait is Quinn. I think he will be moved before anyone else.

UberBroncoMan
05-18-2010, 03:33 PM
Exactly. They are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent. You can't simply divorce the scheme and the coach when you talk about QB production, esp. given the above quoted statistics.

I think that list is pretty bad, save for like the top seven.

Then why is KC ahead of us by multiple spots, and Oakland beating both of us.

Orton has won more than any QB on both rosters and we have superior depth.

DHallblows
05-18-2010, 03:48 PM
Then why is KC ahead of us by multiple spots, and Oakland beating both of us.


Because the writer is an idiot ???

Mr.Meanie
05-18-2010, 04:48 PM
Because the writer is an idiot ???

No, because that was The Official List. It's more credible than actual yards, completion %, QB rating, TD/INT ratio, and/or wins.

orangemonkey
05-18-2010, 05:00 PM
I Have to agree. Quinn and Tebow were given incentive laden contracts that only kick in if they take X% of all snaps in a season. Unless they are SO clearly superior to what the team can achieve with Orton under center they will not reach many of those incentives, at least not this year.

Incentive contracts are for two reasons.
1. It can be used to motivate the player to achieve.
2. It can give a player a high contract number which the team has no intention
of actually paying. For press purposes the players can say I got an X( insert rediculous # here) million dollar contract. His real payout is substantially lower because he can't hit the incentives unless the team wants him to and he is playing that well.

As far as Orton...he signed a 3 mill tender for this year. He will be starting unless he is Clearly outplayed, by a lot.

Quinn will get somewhere around 7 mill if he takes 70% of the snaps (I could be wrong, but it's in that neighborhood) but worse , the REST of his contract also
is raised to a much higher number. He is going to have to perform MUCH higher than his previous outings in order for the Broncos to want to give up that much jack. And with Tebow in the wings, and even Brandstater also , I really can't see Quinn getting much time this year. If anyone is traded it is likely to be next year, or Quinn this year. We won't get anything real for Brandstater and might not be able to keep him on the PS, and we are not trading Tebow (the future?). Orton knows our system and barring injury will start. Quinn is the one that is going to have to prove himself, unless Brandstater craps out.

Quinn was brought in to backup Orton, and maybe, eventually, replace him. We still have that need, but Tebow is now the QBOTF. Coupled with his contract , depite how much McD wanted him, the only trade bait is Quinn. I think he will be moved before anyone else.



I think these comments are a stretch.
"SO clearly superior"
"perform MUCH higher"
"Clearly outplayed"

McD will play the QB that gives us the best chance to win more than 50% of our games and take us to the playoffs regardless of the margin of "superiority". This may be a make or break year for McD (who knows) and making the playoffs is paramount. That said, I still think Quinn or Tebow will "perform MUCH higher" than Orton this pre-season because they have big time starting contract incentives motivating them and superior athletic talent. Orton has never had a starting QB contract or starting QB incentives; he's always fought for the starting position and paid like the backup.

Say what you will about Quinn, but he's had crap for coaching and team support to-date. If McD can turn Cassell into a world beater, what do you think he can do with Quinn or Tebow for that matter? WHEN Orton gets beat this pre-season, the Broncos will be better off.

DHallblows
05-18-2010, 05:03 PM
No, because that was The Official List. It's more credible than actual yards, completion %, QB rating, TD/INT ratio, and/or wins.

Touche :giggle:

KipCorrington25
05-18-2010, 05:35 PM
This is pretty accurate, Orton is terrible, just go rewatch the KC game, the guy flat out choked when we needed him the most. Pathetic.

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 06:38 PM
I still think Quinn or Tebow will "perform MUCH higher" than Orton this pre-season because they have big time starting contract incentives motivating them

Yet you keep ignoring that Orton is in a contract year this year as well. Why wouldn't he be equally motivated to perform well for us this year?

Beantown Bronco
05-18-2010, 06:39 PM
This is pretty accurate, Orton is terrible, just go rewatch the KC game, the guy flat out choked when we needed him the most. Pathetic.

He did throw for around 450 yds and a TD in that game without his top 3 receivers and half his starting oline out. Unreal.

Should I re-post Quinn's stats from his outing against KC last year?

Ugly Duck
05-18-2010, 10:50 PM
Pseudofool: They are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent.

UberBroncoMan: Then why is KC ahead of us by multiple spots, and Oakland beating both of us?

Because they are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent.

ZONA
05-18-2010, 10:53 PM
Sounds about right.

agreed

colonelbeef
05-18-2010, 11:54 PM
:~ohyah!:He and Colonelbeef are too easy, though Jhiz is the easiest. It's like they have "annoy me" buttons on their foreheads. I bet he was picked on a lot in his school days.

Read back through the thread. I didn't bring up Cutler- you did. He was used as an argument against my position on Orton, so I summarized the differences.

Don't let facts get in your way though, you never seem to anyway.

Baba Booey
05-18-2010, 11:59 PM
Most lists around this time last year had him at 16-20 or so, and following a career year, he drops to 29?

Monday Night Countdown voice: "C'MON MAAAAANNNN!"

FireFly
05-19-2010, 01:12 AM
Pretty harsh list from a bronco perspective - Orton did OK last year

But it's probably only a few spots off.

Ugly Duck
05-19-2010, 05:47 AM
Most lists around this time last year had him at 16-20 or so, and following a career year, he drops to 29?



Maybe they are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent... and they perceive that the Bronco situation has deteriorated.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 06:14 AM
Maybe they are evaluating the team's QB situation not the QB talent... and they perceive that the Bronco situation has deteriorated.

When you are returning your starter, who performed well in his first year in an all new system.....plus bringing in competition in the form of a better #2 QB than last year's #2 QB plus a first round pick....how could one ever come to the conclusion that this year's outlook at QB is any worse than last year's? It just doesn't make sense.

jhns
05-19-2010, 07:02 AM
When you are returning your starter, who performed well in his first year in an all new system.....

When will you realize that Orton didn't play good? McDaniels is trying to find a replacement. How can anyone claim their starter is performing well as they try replacing them? That doesn't even make sense. I also like how you use Quinn as a way of saying our QB situation is better. Every other one of your posts about Quinn is how he sucked and did terrible against KC. The first round pick argument could be valid but the majority of reporters seem to think Tebow won't be a good pro. I don't have an opinion of Tebow but it makes sense that some reporters don't think he makes our QB situation better when they don't think he is good.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 07:06 AM
When will you realize that Orton didn't play good? McDaniels is trying to find a replacement. How can anyone claim their starter is performing well as they try replacing them? That doesn't even make sense.

There's always room for improvement. I have never denied this. Unless you are the #1 QB in the league, then you can be replaced. I have never claimed that Orton is the #1 QB in the league.

I also like how you use Quinn as a way of saying our QB situation is better. Every other one of your posts about Quinn is how he sucked and did terrible against KC.

My argument is consistent. I think he's been pretty crappy so far. But as crappy as I think he is, I think it's pretty clear that he cannot be anything but an upgrade over Simms last year. Do you disagree?

The first round pick argument could be valid but the majority of reporters seem to think Tebow won't be a good pro. I don't have an opinion of Tebow but it makes sense that some reporters don't think he makes our QB situation better when they don't think he is good.

Regardless of what you think of Tebow, our #3 last year was Brandy. We still have him and he can only get better in theory. And if he's replaced by Tebow, that means Tebow is better and has improved the #3 position. By definition, we have just clearly upgraded here as well and when combined with my statements above, means we have potentially upgraded at all three QB positions over last year.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 07:15 AM
Yet you keep ignoring that Orton is in a contract year this year as well. Why wouldn't he be equally motivated to perform well for us this year?'

Orton is not happy with his current contract or that he has been paid like a backup since he entered the league. He's made that very clear. I expect the current QB situation is very disappointing to Orton. Motivated, sure, but not like Quinn and Tebow.

jhns
05-19-2010, 07:16 AM
My argument is consistent. I think he's been pretty crappy so far. But as crappy as I think he is, I think it's pretty clear that he cannot be anything but an upgrade over Simms last year. Do you disagree?


Show it then. What has Quinn done that shows he is better than Simms. It sure looks like they are taking the exact same path to me. They both seem to have sucked to this point. You have even pointed this out many times now.

As for "we don't have the best QB"... Well duh. The point is that he wasn't good for us last year. Coaches do not trade QBs after one year if they have shown any potential at all. This isn't just that we don't have the best QB in the league. Orton is not good and needs replaced.

Your Tebow and Branstater arguments are dumb. Who says Tebow beats Branstater? Who says Branstater has to get better? At any rate, even if he is rating the teams situation, why would the 3rd and 4th string mean anything? How many 3rd and 4th string QBs have you seen make a difference in this league?

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 07:27 AM
Show it then. What has Quinn done that shows he is better than Simms.

So long as he can hand the ball off without dropping it and can kneel the ball down successfully, he's an improvement over what Simms brought to the table last year.

As for "we don't have the best QB"... Well duh. The point is that he wasn't good for us last year. Coaches do not trade QBs after one year if they have shown any potential at all.

When did he trade Orton?

Your Tebow and Branstater arguments are dumb. Who says Tebow beats Branstater?

I'm not saying he has. I'm saying if he does beat him out, then by definition he's a better #3 this year than our #3 was last year. It's simple deductive reasoning.

Who says Branstater has to get better?

I said potentially. I know it's a big word and probably confused you.

At any rate, even if he is rating the teams situation, why would the 3rd and 4th string mean anything? How many 3rd and 4th string QBs have you seen make a difference in this league?

By definition, they are part of the QB rotation, so if you are grading an entire team's QB situation, they have to be included. It doesn't matter how often they actually see the field when you are doing a pre-season ranking. Hell, half the guys he is ranking in this article either won't see the field as much as he thinks this year or didn't see it very much last year. This is all just essentially guess work.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 07:28 AM
'

Orton is not happy with his current contract or that he has been paid like a backup since he entered the league. He's made that very clear. I expect the current QB situation is very disappointing to Orton. Motivated, sure, but not like Quinn and Tebow.

Yup, that's right. Quinn's not equally, or even more, disappointed than Orton is given the drafting of Tebow immediately after he was brought in.

jhns
05-19-2010, 07:32 AM
When did he trade Orton?


Sorry, meant replace.

As for the rest, it's funny how potentially getting better and some maybes are your reasons for us being ranked to low. Great argument. The number 3 QB argument is just funny. "I know they don't have any impact but how can you not say they make the team better?!?"

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 07:36 AM
As for the rest, it's funny how potentially getting better and some maybes are your reasons for us being ranked to low. Great argument.

Ummm, what? Look at the article. The whole thing by definition is either grading teams based off last year's QB performance or predicting their performance in 2010. Which of those two do you think it is?

Clearly, it's not option #1. Why? There are about 10 teams on there whose QBs either didn't even start for their teams or they were clearly worse than Orton.

It has to be option #2 - predicting the potential of guys this year. So, if that's the entire premise of the article, why is it laughable when I use the same criteria to make my case.

The number 3 QB argument is just funny. "I know they don't have any impact but how can you not say they make the team better?!?"

If Tebow is our #3 QB this year, you can bet he'll see the field and he'll make an impact in some way.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 07:43 AM
Yup, that's right. Quinn's not equally, or even more, disappointed than Orton is given the drafting of Tebow immediately after he was brought in.

Tebow is still a rookie who doesn't know our offense. Quinn knows this offense. Quinn walked into a great situation to beat Mr Below Average (with or without) Tebow and he knows it.

jhns
05-19-2010, 07:45 AM
why is it laughable when I use the same criteria to make my case.

If Tebow is our #3 QB this year, you can bet he'll see the field and he'll make an impact in some way.

It is laughable when you use it because you have no reasons other than "they can only get better", "a guy who has played the same as Simms when starting is better for us than Simms!". I'm not claiming the article has good reasons for all of this but I can't exactly ask the guy for his reasoning. I can laugh at your reasons though.

Again, the majority of media doesn't think Tebow will ever be a good pro QB. Why would they rate us higher based on a QB they think is no good?

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 07:52 AM
Again, the majority of media doesn't think Tebow will ever be a good pro QB. Why would they rate us higher based on a QB they think is no good?

They should rate us higher based on the fact that there is simply no way in hell we had the 29th best QB play last year or will have the 29th best QB play this year. There are a lot of crappy QBs starting out there right now that Orton could step right in and replace from day one if contracts weren't an issue.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 08:16 AM
When will you realize that Orton didn't play good? McDaniels is trying to find a replacement. How can anyone claim their starter is performing well as they try replacing them? That doesn't even make sense. I also like how you use Quinn as a way of saying our QB situation is better. Every other one of your posts about Quinn is how he sucked and did terrible against KC. The first round pick argument could be valid but the majority of reporters seem to think Tebow won't be a good pro. I don't have an opinion of Tebow but it makes sense that some reporters don't think he makes our QB situation better when they don't think he is good.

You sound like a broken record. The point is Orton was not so bad that he drops the Broncos QB ranking to 29. I understand that you think he's not a very good QB, but the numbers say otherwise. He is a winning QB in the NFL whether you like him or not. Given the fact that he was with a new team that was transitioning to a new offense last year, and the fact that this year will be his second year in this offense, it's reasonable to assume that Orton will be better. Add in the fact that the Broncos have Quinn and Tebow and it's just very dense to say the Broncos rank #29 at the QB position.

MaloCS
05-19-2010, 08:26 AM
That list is garbage. Orton missed one game due to injury and was one game shy of 4,000+ yards, while playing with a busted throwing finger and bum ankle for half the season. Whatever, haters gonna hate.

You fantasy footballers crack me up. It's all about numbers to you guys. :spit:

Never mind the fact that watching Orton play was like watching grass grow. Never mind the fact that Orton couldn't pull a play out of his ass to save his life. Never mind the fact that Orton could not and never will be able to carry a team on his shoulders. Never mind the fact that without B-Marsh those numbers are a lot more pedestrian.

Orton is at best, an average QB. The Broncos will never get to or much less win a Super Bowl with Orton taking the snaps. Just because McD praised the kid after the Cutler fiasco doesn't mean he REALLY believes Orton has the goods. It was lip service to calm the upset fans; it was damage control.

Never mind all of that because Orton has a bunch of yards. ???

Kaylore
05-19-2010, 08:33 AM
Show it then. What has Quinn done that shows he is better than Simms. It sure looks like they are taking the exact same path to me.

Did you see Chris Simms play last year? Are you just trolling now?

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 08:39 AM
Never mind the fact that Orton couldn't pull a play out of his ass to save his life. Never mind the fact that Orton could not and never will be able to carry a team on his shoulders.

It's really too bad you missed the New England game last year. It was pretty sweet.

Never mind the fact that without B-Marsh those numbers are a lot more pedestrian.

Is this really your argument. Take away any team's #1 WR and you could say that very same thing about all but maybe two or three QBs in the entire league.

Though he did manage to throw for 450 yds in week 17 without BMarsh, Royal or Scheffler to throw to.

Orton is at best, an average QB.

Or at worst.

The Broncos will never get to or much less win a Super Bowl with Orton taking the snaps.

Impossible to predict such a thing when worse QBs have made it to SBs and considering we beat playoff teams with Orton last year.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 08:51 AM
These teams have about the same or worse situations at the QB position:

Titans (VY can go south quickly, 'nuff said)
Philly (Kolb has not proven one thing)
Jacksonville (I like Garrard, but he has real limitations)
San Fran (Alex Smith is still a work in progress)
Chokeland (Campbell is not better than Orton, sorry)
Miami (Chad Henne might be the real deal, but that is yet to be determined)
KC (Sand Cassel might be a huge mistake with a huge contract)
Tampa (Josh Freeman has done nothing and TB sucks)
St. Louis (Bradford has great potential, but that's all he has right now)
Arizona (Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart are better than Orton & Co., seriously? Why?)

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 08:56 AM
You fantasy footballers crack me up. It's all about numbers to you guys. :spit:

Never mind the fact that watching Orton play was like watching grass grow. Never mind the fact that Orton couldn't pull a play out of his ass to save his life. Never mind the fact that Orton could not and never will be able to carry a team on his shoulders. Never mind the fact that without B-Marsh those numbers are a lot more pedestrian.

Orton is at best, an average QB. The Broncos will never get to or much less win a Super Bowl with Orton taking the snaps. Just because McD praised the kid after the Cutler fiasco doesn't mean he REALLY believes Orton has the goods. It was lip service to calm the upset fans; it was damage control.

Never mind all of that because Orton has a bunch of yards. ???

Bingo. All I saw the first 6 games last year was a solid Broncos supporting cast that made Orton look average. When they ran out of gas, he was exposed as below average. I'm so excited for him to be gone. Go Quinn, Tebow, Brandstater!

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 08:56 AM
These teams have about the same or worse situations at the QB position:

Titans (VY can go south quickly, 'nuff said)
Philly (Kolb has not proven one thing)
Jacksonville (I like Garrard, but he has real limitations)
San Fran (Alex Smith is still a work in progress)
Chokeland (Campbell is not better than Orton, sorry)
Miami (Chad Henne might be the real deal, but that is yet to be determined)
KC (Sand Cassel might be a huge mistake with a huge contract)
Tampa (Josh Freeman has done nothing and TB sucks)
St. Louis (Bradford has great potential, but that's all he has right now)
Arizona (Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart are better than Orton & Co., seriously? Why?)

Don't forget Buffalo, Cleveland, and Minnesota, if Favre retires.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 09:00 AM
These teams have about the same or worse situations at the QB position:

Titans (VY can go south quickly, 'nuff said)
Philly (Kolb has not proven one thing)
Jacksonville (I like Garrard, but he has real limitations)
San Fran (Alex Smith is still a work in progress)
Chokeland (Campbell is not better than Orton, sorry)
Miami (Chad Henne might be the real deal, but that is yet to be determined)
KC (Sand Cassel might be a huge mistake with a huge contract)
Tampa (Josh Freeman has done nothing and TB sucks)
St. Louis (Bradford has great potential, but that's all he has right now)
Arizona (Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart are better than Orton & Co., seriously? Why?)

Really? Ha. All of the above QB's have more upside than Orton regardless of what they've proven. I'd trade any of one of them outright for Orton in a nanosecond.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 09:21 AM
upside is just another word for "haven't actually done it".

And obviously McD disagrees with you on most of those guys, because he could've had quite a few of them instead of Orton and/or Quinn if he really wanted them.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 09:26 AM
upside is just another word for "haven't actually done it".

And obviously McD disagrees with you on most of those guys, because he could've had quite a few of them instead of Orton and/or Quinn if he really wanted them.

Love how you threw Quinn in there. No sir, I did not say Quinn.

And you can't say that McD had a chance for an outright trade of Orton for those guys. None of their NFL head coaches would be that stupid.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 09:39 AM
And you can't say that McD had a chance for an outright trade of Orton for those guys.

I never said that. I said he could've had most of those guys instead of taking Orton. OR he could've picked them up in the last few months instead of taking Quinn. Obviously, he doesn't think any of those guys are better than Orton or he would've made a move for them either in the draft or in FA. A few of those guys could've been had cheaply and he didn't make a move for them. That's telling.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 09:43 AM
I never said that. I said he could've had most of those guys instead of taking Orton. OR he could've picked them up in the last few months instead of taking Quinn. Obviously, he doesn't think any of those guys are better than Orton or he would've made a move for them either in the draft or in FA. A few of those guys could've been had cheaply and he didn't make a move for them. That's telling.

If anything this tells you that McD thinks Quinn, Brandstater and Tebow are better options than the above guys - maybe. Doesn't tell me anything about Orton's value compared to them.

Dagmar
05-19-2010, 09:50 AM
Did you see Chris Simms play last year? Are you just trolling now?

Now?
NOW?
He's continuing to troll, not starting!

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 10:05 AM
If anything this tells you that McD thinks Quinn, Brandstater and Tebow are better options than the above guys - maybe. Doesn't tell me anything about Orton's value compared to them.

So, if our backups are better than all those team's starters....and this link is supposed to rank entire units, not just the starters....then it makes the #29 ranking even worse.

colonelbeef
05-19-2010, 10:15 AM
You fantasy footballers crack me up. It's all about numbers to you guys. :spit:

Never mind the fact that watching Orton play was like watching grass grow. Never mind the fact that Orton couldn't pull a play out of his ass to save his life. Never mind the fact that Orton could not and never will be able to carry a team on his shoulders. Never mind the fact that without B-Marsh those numbers are a lot more pedestrian.

Orton is at best, an average QB. The Broncos will never get to or much less win a Super Bowl with Orton taking the snaps. Just because McD praised the kid after the Cutler fiasco doesn't mean he REALLY believes Orton has the goods. It was lip service to calm the upset fans; it was damage control.

Never mind all of that because Orton has a bunch of yards. ???

bingo, post more.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 10:33 AM
Really? Ha. All of the above QB's have more upside than Orton regardless of what they've proven. I'd trade any of one of them outright for Orton in a nanosecond.

Correct me if I'm wrong because the article is a bit confusing. I said "situations at QB" which meant the entire roster of QBs. My main point being that aside from the starting QBs (or projected starting QBs) the Broncos have as much depth behind Orton as any of those teams, and Orton is on par with many of those QBs.

So, you'd trade Campbell for Orton? Ok, but McD had a chance to get Campbell last year and he took Orton instead. Perhaps your smarter than McD, but I doubt it.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 10:40 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong because the article is a bit confusing. I said "situations at QB" which meant the entire roster of QBs. My main point being that aside from the starting QBs (or projected starting QBs) the Broncos have as much depth behind Orton as any of those teams, and Orton is on par with many of those QBs.

So, you'd trade Campbell for Orton? Ok, but McD had a chance to get Campbell last year and he took Orton instead. Perhaps your smarter than McD, but I doubt it.

You make it sound like the packages both the Bears and Washington offered us were exactly the same and it came down to Orton v Campbell. Who knows exactly the nuances of the Washington package? Come on - Orton was a throw-in. I also find it very interesting how you focus on one of the weaker QB's in YOUR list. But yes, I still think Campbell is a better QB than Orton. Better scrambler, better arm, better footwork, etc.

I also think Orton was a one year stop-gap QB for McD. Unfortunately for him, his one year is up.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 10:52 AM
You make it sound like the packages both the Bears and Washington offered us were exactly the same and it came down to Orton v Campbell. Who knows exactly the nuances of the Washington package? Come on - Orton was a throw-in. I also find it very interesting how you focus on one of the weaker QB's in YOUR list. But yes, I still think Campbell is a better QB than Orton. Better scrambler, better arm, better footwork, etc.

I also think Orton was a one year stop-gap QB for McD. Unfortunately for him, his one year is up.

You said you'd trade Orton for any of those QBs because they have more "upside" right? How about Garrard then? How about Alex Smith? If you want to brush those two aside because you have no argument and go with Sam Bradford then I understand. However, if Bradford plays very little because he has a glass shoulder, then how can you justify him being better than Orton or Quinn if he never sees the field? At this point, Bradford is all about potential (and yes, I too love the kid's potential) but he does have injury concerns, no?

Rashomon
05-19-2010, 10:53 AM
The fact that Quinn and Tebow were brought in with contracts heavy in playing incentives is enough for me to believe they will eat Orton's lunch.


Did I miss the fact that Tebow has signed a contract already? Tell us what kind of incentives he has in his contract. Also, Quinn had a lot of playing incentives in Cleveland and couldn't stay healthy/beat out Anderson to reach those.

jhns
05-19-2010, 10:58 AM
Did you see Chris Simms play last year? Are you just trolling now?

Last time I saw Quinn play he wasn't any better. Again, what has he done to prove he is better than Simms? Both have been horrible when given their chance. I'm not sure why you guys think some reporter would think Quinn is better based on what each has done.

jhns
05-19-2010, 11:10 AM
You sound like a broken record. The point is Orton was not so bad that he drops the Broncos QB ranking to 29. I understand that you think he's not a very good QB, but the numbers say otherwise. He is a winning QB in the NFL whether you like him or not. Given the fact that he was with a new team that was transitioning to a new offense last year, and the fact that this year will be his second year in this offense, it's reasonable to assume that Orton will be better. Add in the fact that the Broncos have Quinn and Tebow and it's just very dense to say the Broncos rank #29 at the QB position.

You might want to explain all of this to the coach that is trying to replace Orton. He doesn't seem to agree with all of you that Orton is good.

Again, Quinn has only shown bad play in the NFL. I'm not sure why he should raise the QB ranking. Most reporters think Tebow won't make it in the NFL. Why would they rate us higher for having him? I can't really argue with them on that point because I haven't watched Tebow play other than in some highlights. Maybe I will have beef with the ranking after watching him take some snaps.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:19 AM
You said you'd trade Orton for any of those QBs because they have more "upside" right? How about Garrard then? How about Alex Smith? If you want to brush those two aside because you have no argument and go with Sam Bradford then I understand. However, if Bradford plays very little because he has a glass shoulder, then how can you justify him being better than Orton or Quinn if he never sees the field? At this point, Bradford is all about potential (and yes, I too love the kid's potential) but he does have injury concerns, no?

I think you are asking if I'd take Garrard or Alex over Orton, right? Damn straight I would. And "injury if's" included, I'd take Bradford in a heartbeat too.

Dagmar
05-19-2010, 11:25 AM
Alex Smith over Orton?? Are you just fishing?

This guy
http://i47.tinypic.com/lk6qd.png

over this guy?
http://i45.tinypic.com/esvs5l.png

Ok. Ok.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:26 AM
Did I miss the fact that Tebow has signed a contract already? Tell us what kind of incentives he has in his contract. Also, Quinn had a lot of playing incentives in Cleveland and couldn't stay healthy/beat out Anderson to reach those.

My bad, definitely assumption on my part. I figured it wasn't a stretch since he was drafted in the first round.....I mean he'll probably get $20M at least, boat load of guaranteed monies and strong playing incentives. Orton probably hasn't even dreamed about this type of contract. ;-)

As for Quinn, he played for a team where QB's go to die so no need to argue with you on that one. If you can't see the difference between Quinn's situation there and here, what's the point?

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 11:27 AM
Alex Smith over Orton?? Are you just fishing?

This guy
http://i47.tinypic.com/lk6qd.png

over this guy?
http://i45.tinypic.com/esvs5l.png

Ok. Ok.

But, but....it's not about the numbers.....or the wins.....

It's how I feeeeeel when I watch him play.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:29 AM
Alex Smith over Orton?? Are you just fishing?

This guy
http://i47.tinypic.com/lk6qd.png

over this guy?
http://i45.tinypic.com/esvs5l.png

Ok. Ok.

For you, I'll refer back to MaloCS's statmonkey post. These stats mean nothing to me as it pertains to Orton. The majority of his success last year can be attested to the system around him. Seriously, he wasn't asked to do crap last year because he wasn't capable.

And yes, I think Alex Smith has much better tools to be successful in McD's system.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:30 AM
But, but....it's not about the numbers.....or the wins.....

It's how I feeeeeel when I watch him play.

Bingo. But it's about the way they lead the team to victory especially during the second half of the year. Something Orton clearly didn't do as a Bronco.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 11:37 AM
Bingo. But it's about the way they lead the team to victory especially during the second half of the year. Something Orton clearly didn't do as a Bronco.

And these guys did?!?

Philly (Kolb has not proven one thing)
Jacksonville (I like Garrard, but he has real limitations)
San Fran (Alex Smith is still a work in progress)
Chokeland (Campbell is not better than Orton, sorry)
Miami (Chad Henne might be the real deal, but that is yet to be determined)
KC (Sand Cassel might be a huge mistake with a huge contract)
Tampa (Josh Freeman has done nothing and TB sucks)
St. Louis (Bradford has great potential, but that's all he has right now)
Arizona (Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart

Rabb
05-19-2010, 11:38 AM
Bingo. But it's about the way they lead the team to victory especially during the second half of the year. Something Orton clearly didn't do as a Bronco.

never mind the late season defensive collapse and offensive line problems

Orton isn't a world beater, but he was not our problem last year despite what everyone seems to believe

as a matter of fact there is only one game (The Chefs at home) I can think of where he was a major contributor to the loss and even if you take away the 14 points he threw to the other team, we still lose 30-24

we don't have to like the guy, but he wasn't the reason we lost games...and I challenge anyone to show me otherwise

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:40 AM
never mind the late season defensive collapse and offensive line problems

Orton isn't a world beater, but he was not our problem last year despite what everyone seems to believe

as a matter of fact there is only one game (The Chefs at home) I can think of where he was a major contributor to the loss and even if you take away the 14 points he threw to the other team, we still lose 30-24

we don't have to like the guy, but he wasn't the reason we lost games...and I challenge anyone to show me otherwise

i argue that he wasn't the reason we won games either. That's pretty sad for the quintessential leader of the team. We need a QB who can will a win. Period.

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:43 AM
And these guys did?!?

Philly (Kolb has not proven one thing)
Jacksonville (I like Garrard, but he has real limitations)
San Fran (Alex Smith is still a work in progress)
Chokeland (Campbell is not better than Orton, sorry)
Miami (Chad Henne might be the real deal, but that is yet to be determined)
KC (Sand Cassel might be a huge mistake with a huge contract)
Tampa (Josh Freeman has done nothing and TB sucks)
St. Louis (Bradford has great potential, but that's all he has right now)
Arizona (Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart

haha. Too lazy to look it up but i'm pretty sure most of them did better than Orton. Didn't we set a record for the biggest meltdown in history?

orangemonkey
05-19-2010, 11:47 AM
of course I'm talking about the QBs in your list that actually started. Even JeMarcus Russell won more games in the 2nd half of the year than Orton.

Beantown Bronco
05-19-2010, 11:59 AM
Even JeMarcus Russell won more games in the 2nd half of the year than Orton.

WRONG. Where do you even come up with this stuff?

The Raiders won 1 game in the 2nd half of last season with Russell playing QB. Sadly, we all remember which one that was.

http://www.nfl.com/players/jamarcusrussell/gamelogs?id=RUS539462

Dagmar
05-19-2010, 12:06 PM
haha. Too lazy to look it up but i'm pretty sure most of them did better than Orton. Didn't we set a record for the biggest meltdown in history?

Yes, in 2008. With Cutler at the helm. The Vikings had been 6 & 0 and missed the playoffs before last year.

Dagmar
05-19-2010, 12:09 PM
Maybe you should be aware of the facts before posting? Or do you just go by feelings? How many games will we win this year? Here, use this - http://www.paranormalknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/ouija-board.jpg

colonelbeef
05-19-2010, 01:25 PM
Last time I saw Quinn play he wasn't any better. Again, what has he done to prove he is better than Simms? Both have been horrible when given their chance. I'm not sure why you guys think some reporter would think Quinn is better based on what each has done.

Quinn is definitely more talented than Simms at his point. Quinn definitely suffered as a result of poor coaching and personnel in Cleveland, it will be interesting to see what he is able to do in Denver.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 02:15 PM
You might want to explain all of this to the coach that is trying to replace Orton. He doesn't seem to agree with all of you that Orton is good.

Again, Quinn has only shown bad play in the NFL. I'm not sure why he should raise the QB ranking. Most reporters think Tebow won't make it in the NFL. Why would they rate us higher for having him? I can't really argue with them on that point because I haven't watched Tebow play other than in some highlights. Maybe I will have beef with the ranking after watching him take some snaps.

That is your opinion of the situation and nothing more. McD has increased the competition at the QB position by bringing in 3 young guys to compete with a QB who himself is only 26-27 years old. Quinn raises the ranking because he adds depth and is still young and still has upside.

Name one other team that has the same depth at QB as the Broncos now have. I know there are teams that have fantastic starting QBs like Manning and Brady, but the #2 and #3 QBs behind them probably bring nothing to the table.

Orton is a proven winner, period. Whether you like him or not. Add into the mix Quinn who may or may not be good but was a first round pick (we will have to see) and Tebow (who knows at this point but he's got all the intangibles) and Brandman and I think the Broncos QB situation is closer to being ranked #19 than #29. That is my point.

Tombstone RJ
05-19-2010, 02:17 PM
I think you are asking if I'd take Garrard or Alex over Orton, right? Damn straight I would. And "injury if's" included, I'd take Bradford in a heartbeat too.

All I can say is thank God you're not in the Bronco's front office. 'Nuff said. LOL

Shoemaker
05-19-2010, 02:25 PM
For you, I'll refer back to MaloCS's statmonkey post. These stats mean nothing to me as it pertains to Orton. The majority of his success last year can be attested to the system around him. Seriously, he wasn't asked to do crap last year because he wasn't capable.

And yes, I think Alex Smith has much better tools to be successful in McD's system.

You can't possibly be serious here, can you?

So what you're saying is: it doesn't matter to you what Orton actually DID last year (incidentially, he put up the 14th best QB numbers in the league), because you KNOW he's a bad QB...just from watching him?

And you mock people who actually present hard data, and try to show you Orton's results last year, which tell you how he actually played (again, 14th best) as "statheads," like they're somehow stupid for using actual INFORMATION in this discussion, as opposed to "feelings" when watching him play?

How can you dismiss the statistics of what actually happened last year, simply because they don't fit your argument that Orton is a "terrible" quarterback?

Rabb
05-19-2010, 04:49 PM
You can't possibly be serious here, can you?

So what you're saying is: it doesn't matter to you what Orton actually DID last year (incidentially, he put up the 14th best QB numbers in the league), because you KNOW he's a bad QB...just from watching him?

And you mock people who actually present hard data, and try to show you Orton's results last year, which tell you how he actually played (again, 14th best) as "statheads," like they're somehow stupid for using actual INFORMATION in this discussion, as opposed to "feelings" when watching him play?

How can you dismiss the statistics of what actually happened last year, simply because they don't fit your argument that Orton is a "terrible" quarterback?

it's brilliant isn't it?

I don't remember who but someone else said basically the same thing but said Orton didn't make him "ohhh and ahhh" when he watched him, so he must be bad

it really takes a special sort of stupid to come up with this stuff, I love it

bronco militia
05-21-2010, 01:13 PM
Krieger: Throwing Cole on QB fire
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
Posted: 05/21/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT


An open competition to play starting quarterback in the NFL is a rare treat for fans, sportswriters and radio talk shows, like a rogue version of "American Idol" that actually produces something useful.

The more contenders the merrier, we say. The only way to improve it would be to get them to live in the same house and broadcast 2 4/7, like "The Truman Show."

So I mention Jason Cole's opinion at Yahoo! Sports not to provoke hate mail for either him or me, although in especially orange quarters it probably will. I mention it to offer a counterweight to the local exuberance of the various campaigns.

Cole writes from a national perspective for Yahoo. The other day, he ranked all 32 teams by their quarterbacks. The big news was the Steelers slipped from top four to seventh because of Ben Roethlisberger's suspension.

The Broncos? Cole had them 29th.

"What do you get when you combine Kyle Orton, Brady Quinn and Tim Tebow?" he asked. "A backup, a flop and a prayer."

I'm ducking for cover already. Even Cole admitted he might have taken a little literary license. "Yeah, that's harsh, but let's face reality," he went on.

"Orton has always been exposed as a take-no-chances passer. Quinn didn't get a fair shake in Cleveland, but he didn't help himself, either. As for Tebow, it's hard to root or bet against him, but he was a reach in the first round when you consider how much work he has to do to make it in the NFL. Great kid, great work ethic, but first round? Oy . . ."

Personal opinion aside, there's not a lot of logic to the ranking. Orton was a middle-of-the-pack quarterback last season — 14th in passer rating. So unless you assume Broncos coach Josh McDaniels is about to replace him with someone substantially worse — a light goes on — the Broncos should still be somewhere in the middle of the pack. How Matt Leinart, Matt Cassel and Matt Stafford end up ahead of them I don't know, unless Cole has a son named Matt.

But one reason for some of the more jaundiced views from afar is that uncertainty at quarterback is almost always bad. Think about teams that aren't sure who their starters are. Carolina. Arizona. Buffalo. Not real promising situations, no matter how much you like Ryan Fitzpatrick's Wonderlic score.

Uncertainty doesn't matter this time of year, but it's going to start to matter here pretty soon, so it seems worth wondering how it gets resolved.

When I asked McDaniels the other day whether four quarterbacks — we mustn't forget Tom Brandstater, quarterback of the future a year ago — are too many, he acknowledged it will work for only so long:

"I've had four before at one point. During passing camp and the early parts of training camp, when you have 80 guys, or in this case 86 or 87 guys, you can get enough work because you've got a lot of reps. I think we had 35, 36 reps of 7-on-7 (Monday), so they all got, I think, somewhere in the neighborhood of nine or 10 plays apiece. There's not too many things that they're not getting an opportunity to rep out there. So that's the most important thing, is they're getting an opportunity to do that.

"Ideally, would you like to have an opportunity to give everybody more reps? Sure. But we're going to let that situation play out, and the competition will sort itself out and we'll end up with the right number."

So what's the plan?

Does McDaniels stick with the status quo, the incumbent Orton, design a few plays for Tebow, and let wins, losses and injuries sort it out once the season begins?

Does he look to trade Orton, his only proven commodity, to open the door for Tebow, with Quinn as his insurance policy? This would be a high-risk play that might raise the ceiling on the Broncos' quarterback play, but also lower the floor.

Does he simply drop Brandstater when reps get precious and host a three-way free-for-all right through the preseason?

Your guess is as good as mine. McDaniels has suggested several times that Tebow could be ready long before outsiders expect him to be, so a dramatic, possibly premature handoff seems possible.

The other worrisome scenario I imagine is Tebow as a part-time signal-caller, sent on to run certain plays in certain situations, then withdrawing to let Orton run the rest of the offense. I've never seen co-quarterbacks work at the pro level.

But frankly, the longer McDaniels takes to decide, the better for my racket. We can argue about this stuff endlessly, as we have only just begun to demonstrate. Come Monday, we'll be out there counting reps.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_15130828