Quarterbacks and 4th quarter comebacks

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

He's also axed the starting tailback, top receiving TE, and traded a 2nd rounder for a WR coming off an ACL tear. Guess he was just enamored with his other "weapons" on offense.

I'd say not. None of this is deniable, nor have I ever tried to deny it.

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Taco John

If you like stats, Elways first Superbowl win wasn't too remarkable either.

It didn't have to be. In fact big ben is in such an ideal situation(and was in his first year even more so) that he hardly ever has to throw more than 15-20 passes. Again, this shouldn't take away from him at all. But I think we've seen eye-to-eye on this in the past when we went over how almost everytime a qb throws under 24 passes he performs at a higher level of efficiency.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

As I recall your gameplan was positively ridiculous.

MY game plan?

Uh. What?

How about THE game plan.

Control the ball? Sustain drives? Score? Hello?

[Northman]

Originally Posted by -Slap-

Every time you guys bring Elway's name into this discussion, you makes fools of yourselves. Elway carried inferior teams from an inferior conference all the way to the Super Bowl. He got completely overmatched by far superior NFC talent, in a League without a salary cap.

If you believe Pittsburgh was far superior to the Broncos last year, you're just hopeless and willing to say anything to make excuses for Jake.

The funniest thing is, i was talking about comebacks Elway had. In the Super Bowl losses we were up at halftime in one, and out of the game in the other two. I guess O4L thinks Elway should have come back in those games too.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Yeah, I'm not the one who brought him up. My only question was with regards to Jake's comebacks in a Broncos uniform, because I dismiss everything he did in Arizona out of hand. I'm only interested in his accomplishments as a Bronco. And there are some really worthwhile ones to discuss. I don't know that his comeback ability is one of them.

Yep this sums up exactly what ive been trying to tell them. But NOOOOO, im just using it as a excuse to bash Jake. whatever.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Anubis

The funniest thing is, i was talking about comebacks Elway had. In the Super Bowl losses we were up at halftime in one, and out of the game in the other two. I guess O4L thinks Elway should have come back in those games too.

No more ridiculous than thinking Jake should have lead comebacks in the playoff blowouts he was a part of.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

No more ridiculous than thinking Jake should have lead comebacks in the playoff blowouts he was a part of.

I never mentioned the Indy games.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Taco John

MY game plan?

Uh. What?

How about THE game plan.

Control the ball? Sustain drives? Score? Hello?

Your extrapolations in the post to which you are referring were beyond ludicrous, and you have added to its absurdity by using the post as "proof" that you were right.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Your extrapolations in the post to which you are referring were beyond ludicrous, and you have added to its absurdity by using the post as "proof" that you were right.

No, actually they weren't. They were all drives that the Broncos had previously executed in similar situations during the season.

And again... The bottom line is that when you have the ball in your own offenses hands, Peyton Manning can't score. Just look what happened when Pittsburgh jumped out to a 14 point lead this year.

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Taco John

MY game plan?

Uh. What?

How about THE game plan.

Control the ball? Sustain drives? Score? Hello?

Remember when you were like "if THIS happens then THAT happens" for the whole dream-scenario, but showed no understanding of causality?

Hello?

and the 'proof' is hilarious.

COUNTERPROOF TIME!

My dream scenario...

Gameplan: only let indy score 14 points(other teams have done this! it can be done!)

hey wtf, they scored 19 TDs. You let us down D! FOLLOW THE GAMEPLAN!

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Taco John

No, actually they weren't. They were all drives that the Broncos had previously executed in similar situations during the season.

And again... The bottom line is that when you have the ball in your own offenses hands, Peyton Manning can't score. Just look what happened when Pittsburgh jumped out to a 14 point lead this year.

Peyton Manning took on average like 2 minutes to score against our porous D, so there goes point 2.

point 1 could be just as easily done if you replace the D with the O.

MLK had a dream, what you had was a delusion.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

Remember when you were like "if THIS happens then THAT happens" for the whole dream-scenario, but showed no understanding of causality?

Hello?

and the 'proof' is hilarious.

COUNTERPROOF TIME!

My dream scenario...

Gameplan: only let indy score 14 points(other teams have done this! it can be done!)

hey wtf, they scored 19 TDs. You let us down D! FOLLOW THE GAMEPLAN!

You can hold Indy to 14 points by controlling the ball. San Diego and Pitt both proved that you can do it. Lets also remember that Indy had two shots to win the game towards the end but failed to do so. The game didnt get out of hand until Jake started turning the ball over. Hell, i would of settled for us punting the ball but when you just GIVE it a way like that it takes the air out of your defense. You guys act like it was a blowout from the beginning when that wasnt even the case. Sure, the Defense could have played better but thats why they call it a team effort. If one faction is not performing well the other faction has to step up and the offense didnt. And yes, the offense is led by your Quarterback which means it starts with him. And if he is turning the ball over it doesnt give the rest of the offense a chance to do anything.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

Peyton Manning took on average like 2 minutes to score against our porous D, so there goes point 2.

point 1 could be just as easily done if you replace the D with the O.

MLK had a dream, what you had was a delusion.

Yeah, Peyton Manning set the league TD record that season. The league had just changed the rules to make it easier for him to do such things. Even Plummer benefitted from it, by throwing for a club record for TDs. Imagine how much better he'd have been if he was able to take 1/3 of his interceptions that year and converted for TDs as well...

Nevertheless, the only thing you can do is call me names. What you can't do is prove that giving the other team (the one with the record holder for TDs in a season) more time to score helps us any. Conversely, I CAN prove that giving the other team less time and opportunity to score while putting our own points on the board would lead to a much closer outcome. So how again am I the delusional one?

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Yeah, Peyton Manning set the league TD record that season. The league had just changed the rules to make it easier for him to do such things. Even Plummer benefitted from it, by throwing for a club record for TDs. Imagine how much better he'd have been if he was able to take 1/3 of his interceptions that year and converted for TDs as well...

Nevertheless, the only thing you can do is call me names. What you can't do is prove that giving the other team (the one with the record holder for TDs in a season) more time to score helps us any. Conversely, I CAN prove that giving the other team less time and opportunity to score while putting our own points on the board would lead to a much closer outcome. So how again am I the delusional one?

This is deja vu. And saying you had a 'delusion' is not nec. calling you 'delusional'. So ixnay on the name-calling slag.

The point is not that one SHOULD give peyton more time to work with, it's that T.O.P. means zilch.

I'll be happy to drag up for you the instances where peyton lost T.O.P. and still had a qb rating over 100...ON AVERAGE. Or you're welcome to look for it yourself in one of those old threads. Or trust me: there's basically nothing that suggests controlling the clock diminishes his abilities, however nice that theory sounds coming out of a senile-ridden John Madden's mouth.

Seriously, it's all in that old thread and it'd be hard to see how each of your points weren't completely debunked.

Maybe provide a link to it in your next post.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

The point is not that one SHOULD give peyton more time to work with, it's that T.O.P. means zilch.

It appears that we're going to have a fundamental drift here and will have to agree to disagree. Apparently we have a fundamental disagreement about TOP and the role it plays in the Broncos offensive game plan.

I'll be happy to drag up for you the instances where peyton lost T.O.P. and still had a qb rating over 100...ON AVERAGE. Or you're welcome to look for it yourself in one of those old threads. Or trust me: there's basically nothing that suggests controlling the clock diminishes his abilities, however nice that theory sounds coming out of a senile-ridden John Madden's mouth.

TOP is only part of the equation. Scoring is the other part. Again, look at how Peyton performed when the Steelers got up on him 14-0.

Seriously, it's all in that old thread and it'd be hard to see how each of your points weren't completely debunked.

To my knowledge, they were merely blanketly dismissed by Plummer homers unwilling to consider the fact that if he had executed the game plan, ate up clock time, AND SCORED, we'd have taken away scoring opportunities from Peyton Manning. I don't even think we need to go through all the trouble of rehashing that old thread to see that this point is pretty much impossible to debunk. How hard is it to consider that taking scoring opportunities away from the other team while putting your own points on the board is going to change the outcome of the game? This isn't rocket science.

[Northman]

Originally Posted by Taco John

It appears that we're going to have a fundamental drift here and will have to agree to disagree. Apparently we have a fundamental disagreement about TOP and the role it plays in the Broncos offensive game plan.




TOP is only part of the equation. Scoring is the other part. Again, look at how Peyton performed when the Steelers got up on him 14-0.





To my knowledge, they were merely blanketly dismissed by Plummer homers unwilling to consider the fact that if he had executed the game plan, ate up clock time, AND SCORED, we'd have taken away scoring opportunities from Peyton Manning. I don't even think we need to go through all the trouble of rehashing that old thread to see that this point is pretty much impossible to debunk. How hard is it to consider that taking scoring opportunities away from the other team while putting your own points on the board is going to change the outcome of the game? This isn't rocket science.

Didnt we do the exact thing you mentioned in Indy with Mighty Mouse a couple of years ago when we blitzed Indy at home?

[-Slap-]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

The thing is is that it wasn't even that remarkable of a performance by Big Ben. A lot of those conversions were obvious and easy reads/throws. That's not faulting him--he took what they gave him, and they gave him the game.

He's in my top 3 nfl players(heap and walter being the others), yes, but that doesn't cloud my vision.

Yeah, its a quite easy to go 21-29 for 275 yards, two TDs and no interceptions, on the road, in the Conference Championship Game.

[Taco John]

Ok... I've got work to do. I'm going to have to tag out.

Someone else is going to have to explain that scoring your own points while taking opportunities away from Peyton Manning is going to do nothing but help our chances to win games, and that it's a much more sound strategy than losing the field position battle, turning the ball over, failing to convert third downs, and expecting your defense to do the heavy lifting.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Taco John

No, actually they weren't. They were all drives that the Broncos had previously executed in similar situations during the season.

Against different teams with far less fire power on offense. We could have just as easily scored a TD, then Manning struts back on the field and scores again in 2 minutes. Remember, they called off the dogs in the second half. They could have scored 70 if they had wanted.

Originally Posted by Taco John

And again... The bottom line is that when you have the ball in your own offenses hands, Peyton Manning can't score.

When he only needs 2 minutes to score, it really doesn't matter.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Ok... I've got work to do. I'm going to have to tag out.

Someone else is going to have to explain that scoring your own points while taking opportunities away from Peyton Manning is going to do nothing but help our chances to win games, and that it's a much more sound strategy than losing the field position battle, turning the ball over, failing to convert third downs, and expecting your defense to do the heavy lifting.

And you will continue to ignore the fact that Manning was scoring at will and quickly, regardless of field position or anything else. They called the dogs off in the second half. If they had wanted to score 70 points, they could have, easily.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

The Colts were scoring at will the next week against KC, but they only scored 38, not 70. They never let up, either.

Gee, wonder why?

[Northman]

Originally Posted by Bob's your Information Minister

The Colts were scoring at will the next week against KC, but they only scored 38, not 70. They never let up, either.

Gee, wonder why?

Excellent Point there.

[Taco John]

Jake Homer: But you Jake Haters are only attacking one guy. Whata bout the defense? What about the running game? What about the wide receivers?

Response: We're only attacking one guy, because he's the only one being afforded any excuses for his role in the debacles.


/seriously... back to work.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Jake Homer: But you Jake Haters are only attacking one guy. Whata bout the defense? What about the running game? What about the wide receivers?

Response: We're only attacking one guy, because he's the only one being afforded any excuses for his role in the debacles.


/seriously... back to work.

Because bashers like you fail to recognize the relationship between what the QB does when his supporting cast gives him help versus when they don't. No understanding whatsoever, which leads to woefully shallow analysis that pins everything on one guy.

[Champ4prez]

a whole rack of you mugs were on plummers nutsack last season when he was winning games.. and after one bad game against pitt, you guys bash him and say he needs to go and put cutler on this year...buncha turncoats..jake is gettin us further every year..most of you now jock cutlers nuts and half of you guys havent even watched him play at vanderbilt...most of you just saw him at the combine....

when jake leads us to the superbowl, all the naysayers on this site will be like, yea i told u so,, plummers our answer..cockroaches