PDA

View Full Version : Rams releasing effective, popular player because he doesn't fit into McDaniels' offense


montrose
02-08-2011, 06:44 PM
I had to... :afro:

Adam Schefter
Rams are releasing FB Mike Karney. New offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels plans to use a lot of a no-fullback, spread offense.
http://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter

------------------------------------------------------

FYI, the Broncos would be wise to take a look at this guy since they're going back to a more traditional-set offense.

Missouribronc
02-08-2011, 06:46 PM
Oh my.

HAT
02-08-2011, 06:48 PM
Did he hit on his wife?

Dedhed
02-08-2011, 06:50 PM
Is he white?

Dr. Broncenstein
02-08-2011, 06:51 PM
McD is tearing that team apart.

Kaylore
02-08-2011, 06:52 PM
LOL All three responses are awesome.

Jetmeck
02-08-2011, 06:52 PM
and it begins....................f......ing idiot will screw up what little the Rams have gained.................

Archer81
02-08-2011, 06:59 PM
See?

McDaniels is learning already. Why dick around for a year? get rid of potential wife/white rhino/fullback or halfback issues early.

:Broncos:

go_broncos
02-08-2011, 07:13 PM
ROFL!

Greatspirits
02-08-2011, 07:13 PM
Go get him!!

Broncobiv
02-08-2011, 07:13 PM
CIDTA!

vancejohnson82
02-08-2011, 07:17 PM
why would we pick this guy up? Isn't he about 75 years old?

HAT
02-08-2011, 07:22 PM
and it begins....................f......ing idiot will screw up what little the Rams have gained.................

The Rams will run away with the NFCW next year.

schaaf
02-08-2011, 07:29 PM
why would we pick this guy up? Isn't he about 75 years old?

I believe he turned 60 last fall.

theAPAOps5
02-08-2011, 07:36 PM
The train wreck begins. So when does he listen to the trade proposal swapping Tebow for Bradford?

FantomForce
02-08-2011, 07:38 PM
Chuck it to Llyod?

Garcia Bronco
02-08-2011, 08:26 PM
get him lol

Boomhauer
02-08-2011, 08:39 PM
Orton for two 1st-Rnd picks?

epicSocialism4tw
02-08-2011, 08:50 PM
We all know how this plays out...

Bradford's next. ;D

epicSocialism4tw
02-08-2011, 08:52 PM
Really though...

I mentioned before this past draft that I thought that Bradford would be an absolutely perfect QB for McD. Bradford is smart, motivated, super accurate, and mobile. He makes all the throws.

Bradford and McD will make a great combo. Bradford will be a league leading QB for years. I can see MVP's in his future with McD.

Broncobiv
02-08-2011, 09:04 PM
Chuck it to Llyod?

CIDTA!

Chuck it deep to Amendola!

Jetmeck
02-08-2011, 09:06 PM
The Rams will run away with the NFCW next year.

Please, that division is anyones.............

Pony Boy
02-08-2011, 09:08 PM
I bet he's too stupid to learn the offence

listopencil
02-08-2011, 09:09 PM
Mike Karney

Height: 5-11 Weight: 260 Age: 29
Born: 7/6/1981 San Jose , CA
College: Arizona State
Experience: 7th season
High School: Kentwood HS [Kent, WA]


http://www.nfl.com/players/mikekarney/profile?id=KAR346071


Looks like he started about half the games over his seven year career.

listopencil
02-08-2011, 09:11 PM
Too bad he's being cut though. We could have traded Quinn for him.

Baba Booey
02-08-2011, 09:18 PM
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/2251/ohboyf.jpg

uplink
02-08-2011, 09:20 PM
and it begins....................f......ing idiot will screw up what little the Rams have gained.................

For the sake of league parity, Goodell ruled out McD working in the AFC this time around. That is why he only interviewed with the Vikes, 9ers, and Rams.

broncocalijohn
02-08-2011, 09:35 PM
Did he hit on his wife?

Is he white?

McD is tearing that team apart.



I think it is time for a classic movie clip post to go along with this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3vHbOilhpc

Swingers and Pink Dot. Watch the whole thing to understand.

NUB
02-08-2011, 09:48 PM
Not that big of a deal other than it may be a tip off that McDaniels will inherit Steven Jackson and do ****all with him.

jutang
02-08-2011, 10:25 PM
Really though...

I mentioned before this past draft that I thought that Bradford would be an absolutely perfect QB for McD. Bradford is smart, motivated, super accurate, and mobile. He makes all the throws.

Bradford and McD will make a great combo. Bradford will be a league leading QB for years. I can see MVP's in his future with McD.

McD's going to trade him for Cassel or Orton.

Taco John
02-09-2011, 12:24 AM
If I was Stephen Jackson, I'd be asking for a trade now and get myself as far away from this one dimensional wonderdung as quick as possible.

epicSocialism4tw
02-09-2011, 12:28 AM
If I was Stephen Jackson, I'd be asking for a trade now and get myself as far away from this one dimensional wonderdung as quick as possible.

Jackson can catch passes too. He's a freight train on screens. He'll see alot of the ball with McD.

Taco John
02-09-2011, 12:43 AM
Jackson can catch passes too. He's a freight train on screens. He'll see alot of the ball with McD.

At least enough for a 58 yard per game average.

epicSocialism4tw
02-09-2011, 01:12 AM
At least enough for a 58 yard per game average.

That's pretty regular for a back. Thats alot of touches out of the backfield.

LRtagger
02-09-2011, 04:28 AM
My guess is Jackson won't care if they start winning.

DrFate
02-09-2011, 05:22 AM
If I was Stephen Jackson, I'd be asking for a trade now and get myself as far away from this one dimensional wonderdung as quick as possible.

this ^

Kaylore
02-09-2011, 05:29 AM
My guess is Jackson won't care if they start winning.

Actually, probably this.

vancejohnson82
02-09-2011, 05:35 AM
i hope the guys in my fantasy football league feel the same way about McD and Jackson...would love to get him early 2nd round

DrFate
02-09-2011, 05:37 AM
i hope the guys in my fantasy football league feel the same way about McD and Jackson...would love to get him early 2nd round

I won't take him before the 10th round. All the guys in my league kept asking me last year 'you taking Moreno next, right?' (knowing I'm a 25+ year Bronco fan)

I kept passing... I'll do the same with Jackson (who is a really good player and going into a really bad system for backs) (and no, I don't think McD can screen his way into keeping Jackson a solid fantasy option)

vancejohnson82
02-09-2011, 05:44 AM
I won't take him before the 10th round. All the guys in my league kept asking me last year 'you taking Moreno next, right?' (knowing I'm a 25+ year Bronco fan)

I kept passing... I'll do the same with Jackson (who is a really good player and going into a really bad system for backs) (and no, I don't think McD can screen his way into keeping Jackson a solid fantasy option)

the only Bronco I bit on last year was LLoyd...and I severely overpaid for him because everyone in my league knew I was going to bid (we do a blind bidding for free agents)...he was good for me but it left me kinda broke down the stretch

i also ended up with Moreno through a trade....he had a bunch of stinkers and my buddy gave him to me for next to nothing...

well, if you're waiting for Jackson in the 10th, don't hold your breath. In PPR leagues he's a beast

DrFate
02-09-2011, 05:48 AM
the only Bronco I bit on last year was LLoyd...and I severely overpaid for him because everyone in my league knew I was going to bid (we do a blind bidding for free agents)...he was good for me but it left me kinda broke down the stretch

i also ended up with Moreno through a trade....he had a bunch of stinkers and my buddy gave him to me for next to nothing...

well, if you're waiting for Jackson in the 10th, don't hold your breath. In PPR leagues he's a beast

I like Jackson as a player, I've drafted him twice in the past. I just think the Pats/McDaniels system is really bad for RB numbers. Moreno hasn't done much as a first round pick, Maroney was a first round pick, etc. I'd rather draft a mediocre back from a run-first system than a talented back in a pass-happy system.

strafen
02-09-2011, 06:03 AM
Actually, probably this.Come on dude! ROFL!
Seriously? Ha!

Ray Finkle
02-09-2011, 06:33 AM
If I was Stephen Jackson, I'd be asking for a trade now and get myself as far away from this one dimensional wonderdung as quick as possible.

oh come on, if it wasn't for Doom's injury, Denver would have gone 19-0 last year.

Beantown Bronco
02-09-2011, 06:43 AM
Jackson's literally been worked worse than a rented mule since his freshman year of college. To be honest, the guy's body could probably use the break. A lot less wear and tear catching the ball outside the numbers than pounding it up the middle constantly.

Why would he want out?

jhns
02-09-2011, 06:48 AM
Now we just need to wait for Bradford and Jackson to hit the market. McDaniels may really help our rebuild after all.

Pony Boy
02-09-2011, 07:13 AM
I wonder if Bradford can take out a McDaniels insurance policy?

gyldenlove
02-09-2011, 07:15 AM
My guess is Jackson won't care if they start winning.

That is a big ****ing if.

LRtagger
02-09-2011, 07:27 AM
That is a big ****ing if.

Yea I guess...but there's no justification for him requesting a trade or release. Most feel the team is headed in the right direction.

Pony Boy
02-09-2011, 07:56 AM
Jackson can catch passes too. He's a freight train on screens. He'll see alot of the ball with McD.

But what's his Wonderlic score?

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2011, 08:03 AM
I had to... :afro:

Adam Schefter
Rams are releasing FB Mike Karney. New offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels plans to use a lot of a no-fullback, spread offense.
http://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter

------------------------------------------------------

FYI, the Broncos would be wise to take a look at this guy since they're going back to a more traditional-set offense.

But the Rams are a powerhouse team (just like Shanny's Broncos)!! What's McD doing?? McD is destroying a marqui franchise, the pride of the midwest, a team that won a SB baaaaaaack in 1999!!!

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2011, 08:05 AM
bring him in and move Larsen back to MLB. Allows DJ to go to his natural WLB and Haggan can handle the SLB.

Kaylore
02-09-2011, 08:07 AM
Come on dude! ROFL!
Seriously? Ha!

First let me get this out of the way since it's the thing you assume anytime anyone says something you don't agree with no matter what topic is being discussed: No, I don't love McDaniels.

Jackson has played for a crap team and put up bad numbers because everything around him was garbage for years and he's stayed there for an extension. Why is it so hard to believe he would be ok with being used less and winning more and being paid the same? I mean if this was TO or some other player who whines when they don't get the ball, that's one thing. However there is no evidence to suggest Jackson is that guy.

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2011, 08:07 AM
Anyone who thinks Cutler is as good of a QB as Bradford needs the fuggen head examined.

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2011, 08:09 AM
Anyone who thinks Cutler is as good of a QB as Bradford needs the fuggen head examined.

anyone who thinks Cutler is better than Orton needs an MRI and anyone who thinks Cutler is better than Bradford may be retarded

oubronco
02-09-2011, 08:14 AM
The train wreck begins. So when does he listen to the trade proposal swapping Tebow for Bradford?

Oh I would jizz in my shorts

jhns
02-09-2011, 08:19 AM
anyone who thinks Cutler is better than Orton

LOL

The results sure show this!

strafen
02-09-2011, 08:54 AM
First let me get this out of the way since it's the thing you assume anytime anyone says something you don't agree with no matter what topic is being discussed: No, I don't love McDaniels.

Jackson has played for a crap team and put up bad numbers because everything around him was garbage for years and he's stayed there for an extension. Why is it so hard to believe he would be ok with being used less and winning more and being paid the same? I mean if this was TO or some other player who whines when they don't get the ball, that's one thing. However there is no evidence to suggest Jackson is that guy.Jackson, or any RB or player for that matter has goals when they make it to the NFL.
I haven't known of a player who says he doesn't have any professional goals just as long as he wins.
Sure, winning is the ultimate goal. Everybody loves to win, but players love to achieve personal goals, too. This is their livelihood. They also play for a paycheck. The better they perform, the more they get paid. That's just how it is.
While I'm not aware of what Jackson's numbers are, I would go out on a limb and say he will have career lows in production running the ball just by virtue of playing in Mcdaniels' system...

jhns
02-09-2011, 08:58 AM
I don't think this Jackson thing will be a big deal. While McDaniels hates the run game and they will most likely run less than before, I highly doubt a defensive minded coach like Spags is going to let him go away from it the way he did here.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-09-2011, 09:22 AM
I think the Pats still ran the ball something like 40% of the time when McD was their OC in '08. So "hating" the run game doesn't really add up.

Jackson probably saw the writing on the wall when the Rams drafted Bradford to begin with. You don't pick a QB number one overall and then continue to run the ball 65% of the time.

Taco John
02-09-2011, 09:24 AM
First let me get this out of the way since it's the thing you assume anytime anyone says something you don't agree with no matter what topic is being discussed: No, I don't love McDaniels.

Jackson has played for a crap team and put up bad numbers because everything around him was garbage for years and he's stayed there for an extension. Why is it so hard to believe he would be ok with being used less and winning more and being paid the same? I mean if this was TO or some other player who whines when they don't get the ball, that's one thing. However there is no evidence to suggest Jackson is that guy.


I don't know where Jackson is in his current contract, but he's maybe got one more long term deal coming his way. If he's used less, his next contract will likely be less. And that's not mentioning the legacy he leaves the league with. I personally think that Stephen Jackson is every bit as talented as Ladanian Tomlinson - both of these players have Hall of Fame level of talent and potential. But they need to win to realize that potential. Looking at the micro picture (Why is it so hard to believe he would be ok with being used less... while being paid the same), you ignore the macro picture (I only have limited opportunity in this league, and I need to seize it for maximum earning potential).

Whether or not having Josh McDaniels will translate into winning more in St. Louis is still up for question. If I were Jackson's agent, and I examined how runningbacks in McDaniel's systems fared over both the short and the long term, I would be very alarmed.

TonyR
02-09-2011, 09:36 AM
If I was Stephen Jackson, I'd be asking for a trade now and get myself as far away from this one dimensional wonderdung as quick as possible.

Yep, I suppose Green Bay's RBs will all be looking to get out now too since they had a 56/44 pass/run ratio this season...

Hamrob
02-09-2011, 09:36 AM
Orton for Bradford and Jackson!

Missouribronc
02-09-2011, 09:37 AM
I think the Pats still ran the ball something like 40% of the time when McD was their OC in '08. So "hating" the run game doesn't really add up.

Jackson probably saw the writing on the wall when the Rams drafted Bradford to begin with. You don't pick a QB number one overall and then continue to run the ball 65% of the time.

53-47 percent...but yeah...

LRtagger
02-09-2011, 09:44 AM
I don't know where Jackson is in his current contract, but he's maybe got one more long term deal coming his way. If he's used less, his next contract will likely be less. And that's not mentioning the legacy he leaves the league with. I personally think that Stephen Jackson is every bit as talented as Ladanian Tomlinson - both of these players have Hall of Fame level of talent and potential. But they need to win to realize that potential. Looking at the micro picture (Why is it so hard to believe he would be ok with being used less... while being paid the same), you ignore the macro picture (I only have limited opportunity in this league, and I need to seize it for maximum earning potential).

Whether or not having Josh McDaniels will translate into winning more in St. Louis is still up for question. If I were Jackson's agent, and I examined how runningbacks in McDaniel's systems fared over both the short and the long term, I would be very alarmed.

I'd be willing to bet LT would trade some of his records for some rings.

If Jackson and/or his agent believe McDaniels can help the team score points and win game, I doubt they will be too concerned with a slight decline in numbers...considering Jackson has been losing in StL his entire NFL career.

If they think McDaniels will hurt their chances of winning and at the same time negatively affect Jackson's career, then he has legitimate cause for concern.

BUT I highly doubt you will see any fuss from him while he's still under contract. He seems like a class act.

underrated29
02-09-2011, 09:53 AM
Do the Rams have a tight end? I am sure they will be trading him off.

Kaylore
02-09-2011, 10:35 AM
Jackson, or any RB or player for that matter has goals when they make it to the NFL.
I haven't known of a player who says he doesn't have any professional goals just as long as he wins.
Sure, winning is the ultimate goal. Everybody loves to win, but players love to achieve personal goals, too. This is their livelihood. They also play for a paycheck.
Exactly. Money >>>>>> "Personal goals." Sure, he might have some personal goals and they are important, but at the end of the day this is about business and if Jackson keeps getting paid a lot, I'm sure he'll have no trouble having to block a bit more - especially if they are winning.

Pony Boy
02-09-2011, 10:43 AM
Trust me, it won't be up to McDaniels on who to trade on bring in........it will be a cold day in hell before they give him the keys to the bus in St Louis.

DrFate
02-09-2011, 10:46 AM
I think the Pats still ran the ball something like 40% of the time when McD was their OC in '08. So "hating" the run game doesn't really add up.


Isn't that value among the lowest in the league? I know from a fantasy perspective (which is where this thread went) I can't remember the last Patriots back that was highly valued. Maroney went as a high fantasy pick once drafted, but he put up almost nothing in terms of numbers.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-09-2011, 10:50 AM
Isn't that value among the lowest in the league? I know from a fantasy perspective (which is where this thread went) I can't remember the last Patriots back that was highly valued. Maroney went as a high fantasy pick once drafted, but he put up almost nothing in terms of numbers.

True, but I believe McDaniels was only his OC in New England for one year, maybe two.

We also have to consider the idea that Maroney just isn't very good at football. Which makes me upset when I think that we traded for him, but happy we didn't spend a first on him when he was drafted (rumor at the time was that Shanny had a hard on for him).

2KBack
02-09-2011, 10:51 AM
True, but I believe McDaniels was only his OC in New England for one year, maybe two.

We also have to consider the idea that Maroney just isn't very good at football. Which makes me upset when I think that we traded for him, but happy we didn't spend a first on him when he was drafted (rumor at the time was that Shanny had a hard on for him).

Supposedly McD was the defacto OC since Weis left. At least that's what Belichik had said...for all that's worth

DrFate
02-09-2011, 10:53 AM
True, but I believe McDaniels was only his OC in New England for one year, maybe two.

We also have to consider the idea that Maroney just isn't very good at football. Which makes me upset when I think that we traded for him, but happy we didn't spend a first on him when he was drafted (rumor at the time was that Shanny had a hard on for him).

Agree on the Maroney trade. I guess I'm just of the opinon that McDaniels was supposed to be this offensive genius and yet his backs did nothing in NE and nothing in Denver. Even guys who were high value draft picks (Maroney, Moreno) never produced. His QBs put up nice numbers, but that was it.

I think that Jackson is a better player than the other backs in this discussion, but I still think his numbers suffer in a McDaniels system.

Missouribronc
02-09-2011, 11:03 AM
Agree on the Maroney trade. I guess I'm just of the opinon that McDaniels was supposed to be this offensive genius and yet his backs did nothing in NE and nothing in Denver. Even guys who were high value draft picks (Maroney, Moreno) never produced. His QBs put up nice numbers, but that was it.

I think that Jackson is a better player than the other backs in this discussion, but I still think his numbers suffer in a McDaniels system.

Why?

2006, 6th in rushing att, 12th in yardage and 4th in rushing TDs.
2007, 9th in rushing att., 13th in yardage and 6th in rushing TDs.
2008, 4th in rushing att., 6th in yardage and 4th in rushing TDs.

This idea that McDaniels hates the run is absurd. In 2008 when he was fully named OC in New England, his team ran it 48.99 percent of the time and threw it 51.002 percent of the time.

DrFate
02-09-2011, 11:09 AM
2006, 6th in rushing att, 12th in yardage and 4th in rushing TDs.
2007, 9th in rushing att., 13th in yardage and 6th in rushing TDs.
2008, 4th in rushing att., 6th in yardage and 4th in rushing TDs.

This idea that McDaniels hates the run is absurd. In 2008 when he was fully named OC in New England, his team ran it 48.99 percent of the time and threw it 51.002 percent of the time.

Your numbers are fairly persuasive, from a team perspective. I still can't think of any single RB under a McDaniels regime that put up solid fantasy numbers.

TonyR
02-09-2011, 11:11 AM
This idea that McDaniels hates the run is absurd.

You just beat me to it. Was going to post pretty much the same thing. The only thing people are saying that is true is that he doesn't tend to have backs that have monster years but that's because he spreads the ball around, not because he doesn't run the football.

Beantown Bronco
02-09-2011, 11:11 AM
I still can't think of any single RB under a McDaniels regime that put up solid fantasy numbers.

Same can be said for over half the teams anymore. RBBC has all but killed the "first round fantasy stud RBs". Really, how many are there any more?

DrFate
02-09-2011, 11:12 AM
Same can be said for over half the teams anymore. RBBC has all but killed the "first round fantasy stud RBs". Really, how many are there any more?

Steven Jackson used to be one

ROFL!

I'll stand by my statement - I'm not drafting Jackson, solely because of McDaniels. Assuming they play ball in 2011, we'll see if I'm right.

Missouribronc
02-09-2011, 11:16 AM
Your numbers are fairly persuasive, from a team perspective. I still can't think of any single RB under a McDaniels regime that put up solid fantasy numbers.

Oh, fantasy numbers, I didn't catch that part. I would say immediately, Jackson's draft value goes down, but McDaniels has never worked with a proven workhorse back, either.

In 2008, when the Pats had 513 carries and Cassel was the QB, five guys had more than 70 carries: Cassel 73, Green-Ellis 74, LaMont Jordan 80, Kevin Faulk 83 and Sammy Morris 156.

Steven Jackson has had more than 250 carries 5 of his 7 years of his career, and more than 300 three times. I would think an OC that saw he had a guy who could carry it 250 times would be ecstatic, but who knows.

Missouribronc
02-09-2011, 11:35 AM
Run-Pass ratios really aren't too much above 55-45 going either way run or pass for most teams.

Even Andy Reid has a 57-43 pass-run ratio in his 11 years in Philadelphia. Now, from 2004 on, he's 59-41, and even in 2005 he was 63-37.

Most teams don't even get close to 57-43 ratio, let alone 63-37.

If you look on the flip side in 2004, that year that Atlanta just ran like crazy, they were 57-43 run-pass.

Going past 55-45 either way just isn't that regular of an occurrence. Hell, John Fox, who we all see as a conservative, run-oriented control the clock style of coaching. 51 percent passing, 49 percent passing in 8 seasons in Carolina. The most lopsided season was 2008 when he ran it 55, threw it 45, and 2004 when he threw it 56 and ran it 44.

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2011, 12:24 PM
LOL

The results sure show this!

give Orton guys like Peppers Forte and Hester and a defense like the Bears and Orton outplays Cutler. also he doesn't bitch out in the middle of a Championship game.

broncosteven
02-09-2011, 12:31 PM
I heard on the lightrail in St Louis that mCd sent Billy Devaney out for pizza and tried to trade the Rams 4th round pick to NE for the rights to Corey Dillion.

jhns
02-09-2011, 12:59 PM
give Orton guys like Peppers Forte and Hester and a defense like the Bears and Orton outplays Cutler. also he doesn't b**** out in the middle of a Championship game.

Whatever you say homegirl. Elway, Shanahan, and many others don't agree with you but I'm sure you know more than them about QBs.

It doesn't matter anyways. Neither will be here next season. The man responsible for the horrible trade of Cutler is gone and the man that is now in charge of this organization has made it clear that he recognizes that mistake. It won't happen again. Tebow is the future.

Now let's move on before the McDaniel fans cry.

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2011, 01:16 PM
Whatever you say homegirl. Elway, Shanahan, and many others don't agree with you but I'm sure you know more than them about QBs.

It doesn't matter anyways. Neither will be here next season. The man responsible for the horrible trade of Cutler is gone and the man that is now in charge of this organization has made it clear that he recognizes that mistake. It won't happen again. Tebow is the future.

Now let's move on before the McDaniel fans cry.

when has Elway ever said he thinks highly of Cutler. i seem to recall him saying he has a shot to become a good QB, never said he was already a good QB.

Shanahan is gone because of idiotic personnel moves like packaging 2 1st round draft picks to move up and get Cutler in the 2006 draft instead of adding to the talent pool of a team 1 game away and a RB and defensive playmaker away from being a super bowl team the previous year.

I honestly have no idea what will come of Tebow, or Orton, or even Cutler, but right now, based solely on attitude, heart, leadership ability and brains, I would take both Tebow and Orton over Cutler.

Cutler has a cannon for an arm, but mechanics so bad that is often negated, poor field vision, a crappy attitude on field, poor body language, no desire to work to improve his game, terrible leadership ability, and seemingly is incapable of playing when he is in any amount of discomfort.

Give me a guy like Orton who doesn't have the greatest athletic ability, but the heart, intelligence and leadership ability to get his teammates to work their ass off for him.

Give me Tebow a raw QB with mechanics that are still being shaped with all the intangibles that will make any coach drool but will do everything possible to make himself the best QB he can be

The Bears can keep Cutler.

jhns
02-09-2011, 01:24 PM
That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I will continue to agree with Elway, the guy running this team. I'm not into the whole drama that you guys create. This is NFL football...

Anyways, Orton sucks. Tebow is the future. People need to realize this and move on.

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2011, 01:28 PM
That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I will continue to agree with Elway, the guy running this team. I'm not into the whole drama that you guys create. This is NFL football...

Anyways, Orton sucks. Tebow is the future. People need to realize this and move on.

everyone realizes tebow is the future and Orton is gone. you're the one living in the Cutler past

jhns
02-09-2011, 01:35 PM
everyone realizes tebow is the future and Orton is gone. you're the one living in the Cutler past

If we are going to hijack a thread to talk about Cutler, I recommend we move to the one started by Moose.

I'm living in the past? I have been on the Tebow wagon for a long time. That doesn't mean I have gone retarded and need to claim past failures were good things for this organization. Again, I am just agreeing with what Elway said a few weeks ago.

Anyways, if we are going to hijack a thread for yet another Cutler argument, can we at least make it fun and do it in mooses thread?