Plummer content in his own private Idaho

[TDmvp]

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10003772


Jay is a stud and all and will be for a decade but Jake being 39-15 was pretty damn good ...

[kmonty]

Loved the hint about Kubiak. Read this a few days ago, nice read. Love ya, Jake!

[Wes Mantooth]

I admire a guy who can hang it up while he still has his health. He has a real good grip on reality. Nice read.

[broncogary]

Originally Posted by kmonty

Loved the hint about Kubiak. Read this a few days ago, nice read. Love ya, Jake!

Not that I didn't admire Jake's heart, but what a fluff piece. Houston has two QB's better than Plummer.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

"No. I had a good talk with a friend the other night, and to my family and friends, in their eyes, I'm the best quarterback they know. That's enough for me. I don't need to validate to some writers, or some GM by coming back. I played a good, solid 10 years. My body feels great. I can go out and run 3 1/2 miles and not even have pain afterwards."

Geeeezus, I'd hope so, it's not like you are in your 60s or anything.

And as far as that best QB stuff..........OK.

[s0phr0syne]

I think the point is that people like Favre and Elway can't.

[cutthemdown]

Originally Posted by TDmvp

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10003772


Jay is a stud and all and will be for a decade but Jake being 39-15 was pretty damn good ...

it's wasn't bad but it seemed like he rarely won the big games.

[Killericon]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

it's wasn't bad but it seemed like he rarely won the big games.

39-15 is "Not bad."

[wolf754life]

enough of this guy, lets move on, he sucked, he choked, he was a fake. leave him alone to rot in idaho..................

[cutthemdown]

Originally Posted by killericon

39-15 is "Not bad."

I guess it's because I watched the games lol. I know you did also and we both know those Bronco teams lacked the ability to score at will like our superbowl teams. They had to rely on boots and good running to get it done.

Plummer wasn't a bad qb and his record is good, but he was an average QB

[That One Guy]

I love how folks like to quote the win stats to completely justify a QB...

And Big Ben was the reason the Steelers won the SB too.

[TDmvp]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

I guess it's because I watched the games lol. I know you did also and we both know those Bronco teams lacked the ability to score at will like our superbowl teams. They had to rely on boots and good running to get it done.

Plummer wasn't a bad qb and his record is good, but he was an average QB

totally agree , and he is a good guy ...

[Northman]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

I guess it's because I watched the games lol. I know you did also and we both know those Bronco teams lacked the ability to score at will like our superbowl teams. They had to rely on boots and good running to get it done.

Plummer wasn't a bad qb and his record is good, but he was an average QB

Agreed. His overall record as a Qb proves that 73-77.

[Triplelefthook]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

I guess it's because I watched the games lol. I know you did also and we both know those Bronco teams lacked the ability to score at will like our superbowl teams. They had to rely on boots and good running to get it done.

Plummer wasn't a bad qb and his record is good, but he was an average QB

agreed we won many games in spite of plummer, not because of him

[cutthemdown]

no reason to hate plummer though he played hard for us, when Broncos said they were done, he said cool I'm out see ya all later. Seems totally fair to me. Also it says a lot about plummer he is a man of his word. I give him that he wasn't posturing he was really seriously through.

[That One Guy]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

no reason to hate plummer though he played hard for us, when Broncos said they were done, he said cool I'm out see ya all later. Seems totally fair to me. Also it says a lot about plummer he is a man of his word. I give him that he wasn't posturing he was really seriously through.

I do recall some efforts to force his way to Houston, I think, but that could've been more a media creation. Don't really know. I think that was why not many expected him to actually retire though.

[That One Guy]

I finally got the article to load, it mentioned what I said about Houston. So he had a smidgeon of drama, not much though.

I find this part hillarious though. Biased fact presentation seems to be crucial to getting the full effect out of fluff pieces:

And for those who think the Broncos had more talent in Plummer's day, ask this: Which is the better set of receivers — Smith, Ashley Lelie and Charlie Adams of 2005, or Javon Walker, Brandon Marshall and Brandon Stokley of 2007?
Granted, Plummer was backed by a defense that ranked second against the run in 2005 (still think the Browncos were a bust?), while Cutler spent way too much time watching his 30th-ranked run defense from the sideline.

Sure, if they'd been healthy, Brandon Marshall, Javon, and Stokely would've been the better trio. Only Marshall stayed healthy the whole season though, Stokely for most of it. They admit that Jay's the better passer yet want to crown Jake better overall and dismiss their stat about 2nd ranked run D vs 30th. I've long gotten over Plummer but the writer is a putz.

[Rock Chalk]

Originally Posted by TDmvp

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10003772


Jay will be stud and all and will be for a decade but Jake being 39-15 was pretty damn good ...

Fixed it for you.

[TDmvp]

Originally Posted by Alec

Fixed it for you.

i can live with that Alec

[BroncoMan4ever]

Originally Posted by Anubis

Agreed. His overall record as a Qb proves that 73-77.

you can't hold a QB's record against him. Cutler is only 9-12 through his career so far and is putting up really good numbers that are entering the level of the top QB's in the game, and he will get the record straightened out soon. I mean look at Arizona and tell me, do you think any QB in the league could turn that craphole into a winner? I am not saying Jake is the greatest QB that ever played the game, but he certainly was not the worst by far, and he led a winner onto the field for 3 straight years.

[tnedator]

Originally Posted by Anubis

Agreed. His overall record as a Qb proves that 73-77.

Just as many have pointed out that playing for the Broncos helped Jake's record, it would be hard to argue that playing in AZ didn't hurt his record.

For the six years prior to Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .354
The six years with Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .354
The five years after Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .350

In Denver.

The four years before Plummer, the Broncos winning percentage was: .531
The four years with Plummer (less 5 games Cutler took over), the Broncos winning percentage was: .678
The 21 games since Cutler took over, the winning percentage was: .429

So, what does the above mean? Who knows. But, my point is that it isn't as simple as saying that the Broncos won in spite of Plummer, because the Broncos were a great organization, or that Jake's overall record 'proves' he was average and the great winning percentage/record while with the Broncos had nothing to do with Jake, when the Broncos winning percentage took a major leap when Jake took over, and took a major noise dive (below Griese levels) when Cutler took over.

My only real point is that people need to be careful with relying as stats as 'proof', because it works both ways. If you simply look at winning percentages, you would conclude two things:

First, that AZ was and is simply a horrendous team that is beyond the point where a single player (QB or otherwise) can make an impact on.

Second, that Plummer was the only QB since Elway that was able to routinely lead the Broncos to wins.

Those of us that have followed the Broncos for many years knows that it isn't quite that simple, but in the same way, the Plummer evaluation isn't as simple as saying that his losing career record (most of which with the horrible AZ Cardinals) 'proves' anything.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by tnedator

Just as many have pointed out that playing for the Broncos helped Jake's record, it would be hard to argue that playing in AZ didn't hurt his record.

For the six years prior to Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .354
The six years with Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .354
The five years after Plummer, AZ winning percentage was: .350

In Denver.

The four years before Plummer, the Broncos winning percentage was: .531
The four years with Plummer (less 5 games Cutler took over), the Broncos winning percentage was: .678
The 21 games since Cutler took over, the winning percentage was: .429

So, what does the above mean? Who knows. But, my point is that it isn't as simple as saying that the Broncos won in spite of Plummer, because the Broncos were a great organization, or that Jake's overall record 'proves' he was average and the great winning percentage/record while with the Broncos had nothing to do with Jake, when the Broncos winning percentage took a major leap when Jake took over, and took a major noise dive (below Griese levels) when Cutler took over.

My only real point is that people need to be careful with relying as stats as 'proof', because it works both ways. If you simply look at winning percentages, you would conclude two things:

First, that AZ was and is simply a horrendous team that is beyond the point where a single player (QB or otherwise) can make an impact on.

Second, that Plummer was the only QB since Elway that was able to routinely lead the Broncos to wins.

Those of us that have followed the Broncos for many years knows that it isn't quite that simple, but in the same way, the Plummer evaluation isn't as simple as saying that his losing career record (most of which with the horrible AZ Cardinals) 'proves' anything.

And there you have explained my point. Thank you. So many people want to gloat about how great he was in Denver yet ignore how much of a impact coming to Denver really was for him. Is Arizona a horrible franchise or one of the worst ones? Oh yea. But as you said, Jake's stats in Arizona was partly due to a bad organization whereas coming to Denver helped him immensely because of a better coach, players, and organization around him.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by BroncoMan4ever

you can't hold a QB's record against him. Cutler is only 9-12 through his career so far and is putting up really good numbers that are entering the level of the top QB's in the game, and he will get the record straightened out soon. I mean look at Arizona and tell me, do you think any QB in the league could turn that craphole into a winner? I am not saying Jake is the greatest QB that ever played the game, but he certainly was not the worst by far, and he led a winner onto the field for 3 straight years.

See above.

[Rock Chalk]

Originally Posted by Anubis

And there you have explained my point. Thank you. So many people want to gloat about how great he was in Denver yet ignore how much of a impact coming to Denver really was for him. Is Arizona a horrible franchise or one of the worst ones? Oh yea. But as you said, Jake's stats in Arizona was partly due to a bad organization whereas coming to Denver helped him immensely because of a better coach, players, and organization around him.

Hello Captain Obvious.

What you cant say is that Denver won in SPITE of Plummer.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by Alec

Hello Captain Obvious.

What you cant say is that Denver won in SPITE of Plummer.

Well, there were a few games in '06, like the Ravens, where that was true.

but yes, Jake did a lot of great things for us to help us win games.