Poll: Start Jay if we drop the game in Pitt? - The Orange Mane

watermock · 11-01-2006, 05:12 PM

Hate to do this, I haven't posted a QB thread but I have a bone to chew.

Popps commented that it was a minority akin to Religious Right Wing Fanatic with tunnel vision that wanted a change.

First, this place is as akin to religious fanatisism as a food fight in a correctional institution.

ludo21 · 11-01-2006, 05:14 PM

I was just about to post a QB thread, lord knows we needed one to discuss the position.

Taco John · 11-01-2006, 05:15 PM

Popps says a lot of things Mock. If he says them enough times in a convincing enough way, he can get the people who want the same thing to believe it as the truth.

He's very good at that.

watermock · 11-01-2006, 05:17 PM

Popps made such an increble accusation full of insults I felt compelled. I just want to see if the people wanting a change are in the minority like Right Wing Religious Fanatics with no clue that we have a pass rush problem.

BroncoFanCam · 11-01-2006, 05:19 PM

Pitt + Loss = Jake's benching.

We need to win big games, regardless of Pitt's record, this is a big game. If Jake can't get it done this week, what makes anyone think he will do it in the Playoffs?

watermock · 11-01-2006, 05:19 PM

I left out pass rush on purpose, because it's completely mutually exclusive.

long beach bronco · 11-01-2006, 05:24 PM

Put Cutler In.

Wes Mantooth · 11-01-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watermock

I left out pass rush on purpose, because it's completely mutually exclusive.

but its the reason why the poll exists. Jake had a good game against Indy. Why can't we bench the d line or Coyer?

watermock · 11-01-2006, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yoakum3

but its the reason why the poll exists. Jake had a good game against Indy. Why can't we bench the d line or Coyer?

Start your own poll then. It's mutually exclusive so I didn't give weasels a way out.

I'm not going to allow apologists to blame the pass rush or lack thereof an out.

Why don't I just say it was Ernster's fault? The question is very straight forward. Want me to make a poll "should Denver draft or get a free agent pass rusher to get to Manning? I wonder how that one would turn out.

Read the poll question again. He allready had a horrible game last game against Pitt.

bombquixote · 11-01-2006, 06:56 PM

I voted yes, but I'll add this caveate: The loss must be because of Jake's mistakes. If, like last week, the offense puts up good points but the defense gets toasted, then no, you don't bench Jake.

Popps · 11-01-2006, 07:09 PM

[QUOTE=watermock;1338807Popps commented that it was a minority akin to Religious Right Wing Fanatic with tunnel vision that wanted a change.[/QUOTE]

Wrong.

That's not remotely the context in which I made the statement.

My comment was made SPECIFICALLY in regards to SUNDAY'S LOSS to Indy, in that a few misguided people are going to try to pin that loss on the QB, even though the rest of the free world saw our defense collapse.

So, your premise for this poll is absolutely and completely false.

Have fun, though.

Popps · 11-01-2006, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Popps says a lot of things Mock. If he says them enough times in a convincing enough way, he can get the people who want the same thing to believe it as the truth.

He's very good at that.

No, what might confuse you is that I say the SAME things enough times... whereas you simply change your stance every time the wind blows.

My statements were in direct relation to how people were blaming Plummer for the Indy loss, NOT in an overall sense of those who want Jay to start.

I believe there are very rational, logical, objective people that want Jay to start and base that on fair analysis...

you're just not one of them.

Rigs11 · 11-01-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoFanCam

Pitt + Loss = Jake's benching.

We need to win big games, regardless of Pitt's record, this is a big game. If Jake can't get it done this week, what makes anyone think he will do it in the Playoffs?

What makes you think the defense can handle the playoffs?Especially if it's manning. Hey if the defense stinks it up again can we bench them?

Popps · 11-01-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watermock

I left out pass rush on purpose, because it's completely mutually exclusive.

Really?

Our d-line's performance is exclusive from our QB.

Veerrrrrrrrrry interesting.

Taco, your thoughts?

Popps · 11-01-2006, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yoakum3

but its the reason why the poll exists. Jake had a good game against Indy. Why can't we bench the d line or Coyer?

Because that wouldn't jive with those who have agendas to meet and post only for the sake of their "argument," not for what's truly a problem with the team.

See, it can ONLY be the QB. It can't be both, it definitely can't just be the defense, it's got to ONLY be the QB.

Stick around, kid. You'll learn something around here.

bronco militia · 11-01-2006, 07:29 PM

there was yet another opportunity for Jake to be the Hero........but the pass fell short.

Jake's auditioning for his next employer and I'm ready to move on....

RhymesayersDU · 11-01-2006, 07:29 PM

This just in -- football is a team sport.

Look, I'm not trying to spin for Jake Plummer. Hell, I'm not even trying to defend him per se. I'm just as excited for the Cutler era to start as the next guy. But simply stating "if we lose, should he be benched" is a dumb question.

If Jake goes out and lays an egg, throws INTs, etc, and you want to call for Cutler, I'll hear that argument. I'll disagree because I believe he should start in 2007, but I will understand where it's coming from.

But if Jake throws 3 TDs, no INTs, plays well, and we still lose, well then it would be asinine to call for his benching "because we lost." Now granted, we probably won't lose if he plays like that, but you get my point.

So, it depends. If Jake is playing terribly and Shanahan decides to go Parcells and sit Jake down, so be it.

Florida_Bronco · 11-01-2006, 07:32 PM

Like others have said, it's not as simple as if we win or lose, it will depend on how Jake plays.

elsid13 · 11-01-2006, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Because that wouldn't jive with those who have agendas to meet and post only for the sake of their "argument," not for what's truly a problem with the team.

See, it can ONLY be the QB. It can't be both, it definitely can't just be the defense, it's got to ONLY be the QB.

Stick around, kid. You'll learn something around here.

Popps

We have a 6 games proving that the defense is pretty good this season, we have about 1 game of decent QB play. And before you go off about sacking Manning, that doesn't happen a heck of lot in this league. He was taken down 17 time last year and only 7 times this year. Team win against the colts when the limit their rushing yards on the early downs and put Manning
3rd and long situation and rush up the middle making Manning throw to his check downs and tackling those guys. Denver Defense failed on doing any of those 3 things on Sunday.

The colts game went south when Rhodes/Addia started craving up the defense for 5 to 6 yard especial in the second half. That was caused by Warren absence. From the Denver Post this morning:

"It's not the scheme," said Ebenezer Ekuban, the Broncos' defensive end who starts ahead of Dumervil. "Our previous two games against Oakland and Cleveland, we were getting pressure with just the front four guys. Give credit to Indy's offensive linemen. They did a good job of containing us and our pass rush. We just had a bad day, man. We just had a bad day."

The Broncos should be helped this week by the expected return of defensive tackle Gerard Warren. Without "Big Money" clogging the middle because of a sprained big toe, the Colts' Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes not only ran the ball effectively in the first half, they set up those rush-hesitating, play-action passes throughout.

"Yeah, Gerard is always a big plus," Lang said. "You can't cry over spilled milk. He wasn't playing against Indianapolis, and you have to step up and overcome that. But he would have helped."

troya900 · 11-01-2006, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Like others have said, it's not as simple as if we win or lose, it will depend on how Jake plays.

I find it kind of funny how you can say it isn't as simple as if we win or lose when most of the plummer supporters on here keep giving him a pass week after week after week of dog crap performances just because the defense goes out and wins the game. Yet if we lose we have to look at all the stats and decide then if plummer should be relieved of his duties.

Florida_Bronco · 11-01-2006, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troya900

I find it kind of funny how you can say it isn't as simple as if we win or lose when most of the plummer supporters on here keep giving him a pass week after week after week of dog crap performances just because the defense goes out and wins the game. Yet if we lose we have to look at all the stats and decide then if plummer should be relieved of his duties.

What does that have to do with the actual football respect of it? What the Jake supports or haters do here have zero bearing on what happens out on that football field or the coaching decisions that go along with it.

Shanny and Co will decide if Jake gets pulled if we lose this game, and you can bet they will look at HIS performance to decide.

BroncoFanCam · 11-01-2006, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

What does that have to do with the actual football respect of it? What the Jake supports or haters do here have zero bearing on what happens out on that football field or the coaching decisions that go along with it.

Shanny and Co will decide if Jake gets pulled if we lose this game, and you can bet they will look at HIS performance to decide.

You can make excuses all you want, but ask yourself this...

When wa sthe last time you saw Shanny doing his signature "half-fist-pump", and yelling his signature "All-Right!" On the sideline?

You haven't seen it, because he isn't doing it. Instead you get to see images of him hiding his face in the playbook, saying "OH NO!" and "AWWW MAN!"

Don't sit here and try and hide behind the fact a change hasn't been made already, because it's a brewin'... You are the king of Homerdom if you can't see it on Shanny's face week in and week out.

Man-Goblin · 11-01-2006, 08:06 PM

5-3 and in serious danger of missing the playoffs? I'm down for getting the kid some time at that point.

troya900 · 11-01-2006, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

What does that have to do with the actual football respect of it? What the Jake supports or haters do here have zero bearing on what happens out on that football field or the coaching decisions that go along with it.

Shanny and Co will decide if Jake gets pulled if we lose this game, and you can bet they will look at HIS performance to decide.

I never said that it really mattered to shanny, I'm just saying it's kind of ironic that plummer supporters will give plummer a pass week after week after week of crap performances just cause the defense wins it, yet when we lose they want to look at his stats.

And to your reply I agree with you and as a person that wants to see Cutler it makes me sad. I see no reason why Shanahan would pull Plummer because of a crappy performance in Pittsburgh (even if we lose) when plummer has come out week after week before the Indy game and stunk up the field yet keeps his job.

Florida_Bronco · 11-01-2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoFanCam

You can make excuses all you want, but ask yourself this...

When wa sthe last time you saw Shanny doing his signature "half-fist-pump", and yelling his signature "All-Right!" On the sideline?

You haven't seen it, because he isn't doing it. Instead you get to see images of him hiding his face in the playbook, saying "OH NO!" and "AWWW MAN!"

Don't sit here and try and hide behind the fact a change hasn't been made already, because it's a brewin'... You are the king of Homerdom if you can't see it on Shanny's face week in and week out.

What the **** are you talking about? Did you even read my post? I didn't make any excuses about anything.

Wow, that was really one of the strangest posts I've ever read.

View Poll Results: Should we make a change at QB if Jake struggles again against Pitt?
Yes, we will have seen enough at that point	53	35.10%
Jake is it SuperBowl or Bust	23	15.23%
If we drop the Oakland game	14	9.27%
Only if we drop out of the playoff race.	37	24.50%
Jay should sit another year like Rivers did	14	9.27%
other	10	6.62%
Voters: 151. You may not vote on this poll

11-01-2006, 05:12 PM	#1
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Poll: Start Jay if we drop the game in Pitt? Hate to do this, I haven't posted a QB thread but I have a bone to chew. Popps commented that it was a minority akin to Religious Right Wing Fanatic with tunnel vision that wanted a change. First, this place is as akin to religious fanatisism as a food fight in a correctional institution.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-01-2006, 05:14 PM	#2
ludo21 RIP Darrent Williams Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Glendale, AZ Posts: 17,973 Adopt-a-Bronco: Paul Ernster	I was just about to post a QB thread, lord knows we needed one to discuss the position.

11-01-2006, 05:15 PM	#3
Taco John 24/7 Broncos In Elway I Trust Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 49,742 Adopt-a-Bronco: Peyton Manning	Popps says a lot of things Mock. If he says them enough times in a convincing enough way, he can get the people who want the same thing to believe it as the truth. He's very good at that.

11-01-2006, 05:17 PM	#4
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Popps made such an increble accusation full of insults I felt compelled. I just want to see if the people wanting a change are in the minority like Right Wing Religious Fanatics with no clue that we have a pass rush problem.

11-01-2006, 05:19 PM	#5
BroncoFanCam 110% Raider Hater RAIDERS SUCK! Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: 27 29 S / 153 8 E Posts: 345 Adopt-a-Bronco: Cecil Sapp	Pitt + Loss = Jake's benching. We need to win big games, regardless of Pitt's record, this is a big game. If Jake can't get it done this week, what makes anyone think he will do it in the Playoffs?

11-01-2006, 05:24 PM	#7
long beach bronco Registered User "I'm your Huckleberry" Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Long Beach Posts: 1,017 Adopt-a-Bronco: Peyton Manning	Put Cutler In.

11-01-2006, 06:56 PM	#10
bombquixote Ring of Famer 11-5 in 2009 Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Perineum Posts: 1,098	I voted yes, but I'll add this caveate: The loss must be because of Jake's mistakes. If, like last week, the offense puts up good points but the defense gets toasted, then no, you don't bench Jake.

11-01-2006, 07:09 PM	#11
Popps TEAM FIRST. Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 29,792	[QUOTE=watermock;1338807Popps commented that it was a minority akin to Religious Right Wing Fanatic with tunnel vision that wanted a change.[/QUOTE] Wrong. That's not remotely the context in which I made the statement. My comment was made SPECIFICALLY in regards to SUNDAY'S LOSS to Indy, in that a few misguided people are going to try to pin that loss on the QB, even though the rest of the free world saw our defense collapse. So, your premise for this poll is absolutely and completely false. Have fun, though.

11-01-2006, 07:29 PM	#16
bronco militia Ring of Famer THE GREATEST Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: colorado springs, co Posts: 22,704	there was yet another opportunity for Jake to be the Hero........but the pass fell short. Jake's auditioning for his next employer and I'm ready to move on....

11-01-2006, 07:29 PM	#17
RhymesayersDU Go Broncos, Nuggets, Rox GANGNAM STYLE Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Back In The 303! Posts: 14,845 Adopt-a-Bronco: Ty Lawson	This just in -- football is a team sport. Look, I'm not trying to spin for Jake Plummer. Hell, I'm not even trying to defend him per se. I'm just as excited for the Cutler era to start as the next guy. But simply stating "if we lose, should he be benched" is a dumb question. If Jake goes out and lays an egg, throws INTs, etc, and you want to call for Cutler, I'll hear that argument. I'll disagree because I believe he should start in 2007, but I will understand where it's coming from. But if Jake throws 3 TDs, no INTs, plays well, and we still lose, well then it would be asinine to call for his benching "because we lost." Now granted, we probably won't lose if he plays like that, but you get my point. So, it depends. If Jake is playing terribly and Shanahan decides to go Parcells and sit Jake down, so be it.

11-01-2006, 07:32 PM	#18
Florida_Bronco Got trolls? Welcome to Mile High, Brady! Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Tampa Bay Posts: 13,810 Adopt-a-Bronco: Brady Quinn	Like others have said, it's not as simple as if we win or lose, it will depend on how Jake plays.

11-01-2006, 08:06 PM	#23
Man-Goblin Giving You The Business Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Huntersville, NC Posts: 5,601 Adopt-a-Bronco: Woodyard	5-3 and in serious danger of missing the playoffs? I'm down for getting the kid some time at that point.