But.... I thought Tebow was the problem.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

He came here because he had experience running the no huddle and calling plays at the line. We have a QB that needs those things right? Before Manning signed Denver landed ONE FA, after Manning we landed 4 to 5 starters. Jets signed starters prior to trading for Tebow and signed no starters after. Translation no one wants to go to the circus anymore.

We put our entire offseason FA program on hold pending Manning's decision because we needed every nickel available to throw at the guy if we got in a bidding war. Manning tugged taffy while other teams signed FAs.

Additionally, FA is heavy on front end action. Manning is unique for a number of reasons, not least of which because he took so much time to make his decision. Most teams had gone through their big name targets in FA well before Manning made his decision and our decision to finalize a Tebow trade came subsequent to that. Again, how much or little this impacted the Jets' offseason strategy only you can say but the Jets did make moves after the Tebow trade, signing FAs.

4 of the top 25 FA signings of 2012 came on or after March 21, the date of the Tebow trade. The other 21 happened prior to that date. 7 of the next 25 came on or before March 21 so a total of 11 of the top 50 FA signings happened on or after the March 21 trade date of Tebow. Point, top FA signings typically happen early.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

We put our entire offseason FA program on hold pending Manning's decision because we needed every nickel available to throw at the guy if we got in a bidding war. Manning tugged taffy while other teams signed FAs.

Additionally, FA is heavy on front end action. Manning is unique for a number of reasons, not least of which because he took so much time to make his decision. Most teams had gone through their big name targets in FA well before Manning made his decision and our decision to finalize a Tebow trade came subsequent to that. Again, how much or little this impacted the Jets' offseason strategy only you can say but the Jets did make moves after the Tebow trade, signing FAs.

4 of the top 25 FA signings of 2012 came on or after March 21, the date of the Tebow trade. The other 21 happened prior to that date. 7 of the next 25 came on or before March 21 so a total of 11 of the top 50 FA signings happened on or after the March 21 trade date of Tebow. Point, top FA signings typically happen early.

Sorry waiting for the biggest FA in history messed crap up for us

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

Sorry waiting for the biggest FA in history messed crap up for us

You should try getting up off the floor and backing up your thesis.

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by errand

My point is that Manning alone has improved this team immensely...

This is the fallacy. Manning has improved the QB position, and the passing game immensely, but not the team. The no-huddle offense looks flashy and his numbers are great, but that style exposes a suspect defense to more time on the field and exposes the team's weaknesses.

We've gone from the #1 rushing offense in the NFL to #17. At 2-3 it's hardly possible to say that this TEAM is better than it was under Tebow who had an 8-5 record as a starter here. Tebow's ugly, slogging style was effective in protecting a weak defensive unit.

It's hard to judge the 2012 team at this point because they'll hopefully continue to improve, but at this point they're clearly not able to hang with the cream of the NFL crop. Yes the passing game is much better, but where we are right now you can't say this is a better team than last year's.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

You should try getting up off the floor and backing up your thesis.

lol You think I'm on the floor how cute. Proved your dumbass Saturday thing wrong. Showed you Denver landed starters after Manning signed. No one was coming to Denver with Tebow as the starting QB its a fact. It's amazing you think otherwise.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

lol You think I'm on the floor how cute. Proved your dumbass Saturday thing wrong. Showed you Denver landed starters after Manning signed. No one was coming to Denver with Tebow as the starting QB its a fact. It's amazing you think otherwise.

Yes, we signed players after signing Manning. That does not support your claim that we signed players BECAUSE of Manning. There's a distinct and important difference. In fact, the player Manning was supposed to land, Jeff Saturday, signed elsewhere for...wait for it...money which, along with the entire modern history of FA, supports my thesis that players don't pass on cash to play with certain players. Just doesn't happen. Your argument that players have signed with Denver after Manning means they came here because of Manning is ludicrous. Does every FA signing in perpetuity mean they came here because Manning signed here? That's the logical conclusion of your position and a wildly farcical one at that.

Support your claim that players explicitly came to Denver because of Manning or sit down and STFU about it.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Dedhed

This is the fallacy. Manning has improved the QB position, and the passing game immensely, but not the team. The no-huddle offense looks flashy and his numbers are great, but that style exposes a suspect defense to more time on the field and exposes the team's weaknesses.

Not being able to get off the field on 3rd and 15+ are what exposes a suspect defense to more time on the field and exposes the team's weaknesses. It's their own fault they're on the field so much. Not Manning's.

Originally Posted by Dedhed

We've gone from the #1 rushing offense in the NFL to #17.......Tebow's ugly, slogging style was effective in protecting a weak defensive unit.

I couldn't disagree more. Our time of possession sucked under Tebow (we were ranked 23rd last year). Why? Because, while running the ball normally eats the clock, you have to get first downs. We didn't. The number of three and outs we had last year negated any advantage running the ball may have given us.

[DBroncos4life]

Also you keep ignoring the fact that Manning has made guys thought to be worthless and the worst starters in the NFL under Tebow into high quality starters. Manning saved 5 starters careers that would have been ended under Tebow. What is that worth to you?

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I couldn't disagree more.

You couldn't disagree more with the fact that we've gone from #1 to #17 in rushing YPG?

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

Yes, we signed players after signing Manning. That does not support your claim that we signed players BECAUSE of Manning. There's a distinct and important difference. In fact, the player Manning was supposed to land, Jeff Saturday, signed elsewhere for...wait for it...money which, along with the entire modern history of FA, supports my thesis that players don't pass on cash to play with certain players. Just doesn't happen. Your argument that players have signed with Denver after Manning means they came here because of Manning is ludicrous. Does every FA signing in perpetuity mean they came here because Manning signed here? That's the logical conclusion of your position and a wildly farcical one at that.

Support your claim that players explicitly came to Denver because of Manning or sit down and STFU about it.

Saturday signed for MONEY no way?!?! Is this a new thing? Saturday himself said Denver didn't WANT him but you keep on keeping on with dumb claims that have been DISPROVED by Saturday HIMSELF. You are the only one that seems to think that Manning being here didn't help land people.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Dedhed

You couldn't disagree more with the fact that we've gone from #1 to #17 in rushing YPG?

No. I couldn't disagree more with the belief that Tebow's style of offense protected our defense more. Unless you think it's a good thing for your offense to be ranked #23 in time of possession.

[errand]

We also went from 32nd best passing team to what? I'm sure we're. in top 5-7.

[DBroncos4life]

I'm going to go a head and demand proof that Denver offered Saturday less money then the Packers otherwise your thesis is bunk.

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

No. I couldn't disagree more with the belief that Tebow's style of offense protected our defense more. Unless you think it's a good thing for your offense to be ranked #23 in time of possession.

Is it better to be ranked 24th like we are currently?

That 23rd ranking also includes Orton, btw.

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by errand

We also went from 32nd best passing team to what? I'm sure we're. in top 5-7.

Who's arguing that?

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

No. I couldn't disagree more with the belief that Tebow's style of offense protected our defense more. Unless you think it's a good thing for your offense to be ranked #23 in time of possession.

Numbers to chew on.

5th – Denver’s NFL standing in time of possession since Tebow became the starter this season
30th – Denver’s rank in time of possession before Tebow became the starter

http://frontrow.espn.go.com/2011/11/...lie-tim-tebow/

[Jay3]

I can't blame Denver at all for bringing in Peyton and making a run at a championship during his short time remaining. I suggest it myself, before anyone else.

It's just a shame that it cost them the chance to develop Tebow. I still believe he will a winning, championship contending starter in this league. And Denver will always be the "Tampa-Bay" in the "Steve Young" story of Tim Tebow, if his career stretches on and on.

But if Tebow washes out, it will look like even more of a genius move than it already was.

But aside from all that -- I just think there was and is way too much scapegoating of Tebow. This team had its limitations in every area of the roster, and it held Tebow back. He could have had better stats on a better team. He could have developed his skills more with a veteran receiving corps that was precise and reliable. He suffered because of McCoy's playcalling ability (which still stinks). He could have done better with a more consistent pass protection (3 of the line were very young and green). He could have used a great set of pass catching tight ends like the team has now. He could have used Stokely. McGahee had some untimely fumbles when Tebow was starting, too. Just as McCoy needs to put Peyton in a free-wheeling no huddle early in games, he should have found ways to get Tebow going in his comfort zone, early in games.

So while the move to Peyton was an improvement, and one you can't blame them for trying -- the notion that this team is ready for a Super Bowl seems like a stretch to me. Tebow was not holding this team back last year -- if anything he was one of several bright spots.

[Dedhed]

Originally Posted by Jay3

So while the move to Peyton was an improvement, and one you can't blame them for trying -- the notion that this team is ready for a Super Bowl seems like a stretch to me. Tebow was not holding this team back last year -- if anything he was one of several bright spots.

Exactly right.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

Saturday signed for MONEY no way?!?! Is this a new thing? Saturday himself said Denver didn't WANT him but you keep on keeping on with dumb claims that have been DISPROVED by Saturday HIMSELF. You are the only one that seems to think that Manning being here didn't help land people.

That's been my point all along. Congratulations on agreeing with me. What people did Manning help land? Seriously? Which FA has stated but for Manning he would have gone elsewhere? Which of the guys we signed would have refused the Broncos and signed elsewhere for less money if we didn't have Manning? Which of our guys refused more money to sign with the Broncos because of Manning?

[edog24]

Originally Posted by Dedhed

This is the fallacy. Manning has improved the QB position, and the passing game immensely, but not the team. The no-huddle offense looks flashy and his numbers are great, but that style exposes a suspect defense to more time on the field and exposes the team's weaknesses.

We've gone from the #1 rushing offense in the NFL to #17. At 2-3 it's hardly possible to say that this TEAM is better than it was under Tebow who had an 8-5 record as a starter here. Tebow's ugly, slogging style was effective in protecting a weak defensive unit.

It's hard to judge the 2012 team at this point because they'll hopefully continue to improve, but at this point they're clearly not able to hang with the cream of the NFL crop. Yes the passing game is much better, but where we are right now you can't say this is a better team than last year's.

Very good summary, these are my thoughts exactly as well. I think overall the defense is a bit worse off with the drunk in suspension, losing Dawkins and others, but this unit is definitely not up to the task of the style that Manning plays. We have such little talent on the defensive side of the ball, Tebow's style hid the defensive deficiencies we had last year.

I think what most people don't get here is that it's not a Manning versus Tebow debate, it's that the FO pretty much ignored most other needs this team has had for the last five years and sold the farm for a big name FA.

Where this season ends is anyone's guess, but it's starting to look like a push from last year which is disappointing.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

That's been my point all along. Congratulations on agreeing with me. What people did Manning help land? Seriously? Which FA has stated but for Manning he would have gone elsewhere? Which of the guys we signed would have refused the Broncos and signed elsewhere for less money if we didn't have Manning? Which of our guys refused more money to sign with the Broncos because of Manning?

Link to Denver offering Saturday a contract.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

Also you keep ignoring the fact that Manning has made guys thought to be worthless and the worst starters in the NFL under Tebow into high quality starters. Manning saved 5 starters careers that would have been ended under Tebow. What is that worth to you?

bump for Raider to ignore again.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Dedhed

Numbers to chew on.

5th – Denver’s NFL standing in time of possession since Tebow became the starter this season
30th – Denver’s rank in time of possession before Tebow became the starter

http://frontrow.espn.go.com/2011/11/...lie-tim-tebow/

November

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Dedhed

Is it better to be ranked 24th like we are currently?

That 23rd ranking also includes Orton, btw.

Our current ranking is skewed by our defense not being able to get off the field consistently.

Our offense is doing the job. We are currently running 68 plays per game on offense as opposed to last year's 63. That's good for 6th best in the league. It may not sound like a lot but if you take away those 5 plays per game, it would drop us down from 6th to 17th.

[houghtam]

7 pages.

Usual suspects, usual arguments, usual hate.

Tebow wasn't the problem, Manning didn't solve the problem.

Hope you all are enjoying 2-3. I know I'm not.