Sundquist was Against Benching Plummer in 06 - The Orange Mane

kmonty · 07-10-2008, 10:49 AM

From Stefan Fatsis' just-released A Few Seconds of Panic:

I watch the [Seattle] game with Ted Sundquist and his staff, and it's clear to me they don't agree with the change. A few weeks earlier, Sundquist had told me he didn't feel Jake was the sole reason for the offense's poor play. On Cutler's first series, the Broncos run three plays and punt. "Same result," someone says. When Cutler fumbles a snap, Sundquist remarks, "He did that about three times in practice." Someone else replies, "I heard six." Then, as he is hit by a defensive lineman, Cutler wings the ball blindly into the air. It's intercepted and returned for a touchdown. Pens and binoculars fly in our box high above the field....

In the locker room afterward, Cutler tells Jake that the team would have won had he been playing.

-
Fatsis interviews Jake the next day, and Plummer is pretty candid about his feelings on the whole thing (he's beyond pissed off).

If you haven't gotten a copy yet, I highly recommend it. It's a great read in and of itself, but it's just got all these extra details Broncos fans will be appreciate. I'll be posting a full book review today on BroncoTalk and will also have a Q&A with the author a bit later.

SouthStndJunkie · 07-10-2008, 10:54 AM

I think it was dumb (from the team's perspective) to allow a reporter that much access to write a book. These are the salient details that teams do not like getting out to the public.

That said....I will be picking up a copy in the near future.

Northman · 07-10-2008, 10:55 AM

Guess Sundquist couldnt tell the difference between a 10 year vet making those mistakes and a rookie. No wonder he got canned.

broncofan2438 · 07-10-2008, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

I think it was dumb (from the team's perspective) to allow a reporter that much access to write a book. These are the salient details that teams do not like getting out to the public.

That said....I will be picking up a copy in the near future.

This is so true

TheReverend · 07-10-2008, 10:58 AM

They would've won that game with Jake playing.

We would've gone to the playoffs with Jake playing.

...but we'd be in a significantly worse situation TODAY had Jake finished that year.

kmonty · 07-10-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

I think it was dumb (from the team's perspective) to allow a reporter that much access to write a book. These are the salient details that teams do not like getting out to the public.

That said....I will be picking up a copy in the near future.

It was an eye opener to be sure. I wrote a little about that in the review I'm working on too.

bronco militia · 07-10-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

They would've won that game with Jake playing.

We would've gone to the playoffs with Jake playing.

...but we'd be in a significantly worse situation TODAY had Jake finished that year.

who knows for sure....as great as the defense started that year, they were no match against good offense's.

Kaylore · 07-10-2008, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

They would've won that game with Jake playing.

We would've gone to the playoffs with Jake playing.

...but we'd be in a significantly worse situation TODAY had Jake finished that year.

That's pretty much it. The Seattle game was Cutler's first and of course he looked like ass. I have no doubt they beat Seattle in that game if Jake plays. But so what? We wouldn't move forward as a franchise.

Two games later Jay's killing in Arizona, though. And the Charger game on the road was the first game where the safeties had to back out of the box that year because they actually were respecting passes over the middle of the field. Tatum freaking Bell racked up over 100 yards rushing in San Diego that year. He was the only back to do so and they played a healthy Sean Alexander, Larry Johnson, and several other elite backs that weren't able to make that happen.

Jay Cutler right now is a better QB than Jake ever was. Jake would have taken us to the playoffs where we would have been one and done like we are every year.

Taco John · 07-10-2008, 11:08 AM

enjolras · 07-10-2008, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

I think it was dumb (from the team's perspective) to allow a reporter that much access to write a book. These are the salient details that teams do not like getting out to the public.

That said....I will be picking up a copy in the near future.

Bah, its football not international espionage.... These things lend color, life, and insight to our team. Is it really surprising that Sundquist wasn't 100% in love with every decision made? That's true of 100% of businesses everywhere.

kmonty · 07-10-2008, 11:09 AM

Sundquist's opinion didn't bother me as much as him being open about it to other employees. How could it do anything but undermine Mike Shanahan?

Popps · 07-10-2008, 11:14 AM

Shanahan just should have either done it earlier or waited until we were out of playoff contention. He showed no conviction and that's why the team reacted poorly.

That said, even if Plummer was playing well... we didn't have a real defense. It wouldn't have mattered. Same as most years.

Taco John · 07-10-2008, 11:15 AM

Plummer was a good guy. Very likable.

He just wasn't a very good quarterback. True to his likable guy nature, he had his moments where he'd play outside his head and ability. That was fun to watch - at least at first.

But at the end of the day, he wasn't getting it done. No matter what Sundquist (or anyone else) thinks about the move to bench him at the time that it happened, the fact is that he wasn't getting it done. Maybe there *are* other fingers to point. But that doesn't change the fact that Plummer was a problem.

SouthStndJunkie · 07-10-2008, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjolras

Bah, its football not international espionage.... These things lend color, life, and insight to our team. Is it really surprising that Sundquist wasn't 100% in love with every decision made? That's true of 100% of businesses everywhere.

Considering that Shanny keeps a tight lid on things, I am very surprised he allowed this level of access.

If he had known how freely people would have been talking to the reporter, I doubt he would have ever allowed this.

Heck, he won't even throw the Denver Post or RMN a bone these days.

Beantown Bronco · 07-10-2008, 11:17 AM

As was alluded to in the other thread, there is a reason why good old Ted is still unemployed.....there is no way Shanny stays unemployed for 4 days, much less 4 months if he were ever canned.

theAPAOps5 · 07-10-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kmonty

Sundquist's opinion didn't bother me as much as him being open about it to other employees. How could it do anything but undermine Mike Shanahan?

Well I think any undermining that may have occurred was quickly erased when Shanny fired Sundquist. Sounds to me like Sundquist was the bad apple. Wabbit has eluded to as much and he is an unbiased party. He has said Sundquist should have went way before this off season.

Northman · 07-10-2008, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Plummer was a good guy. Very likable.

He just wasn't a very good quarterback. True to his likable guy nature, he had his moments where he'd play outside his head and ability. That was fun to watch - at least at first.

But at the end of the day, he wasn't getting it done. No matter what Sundquist (or anyone else) thinks about the move to bench him at the time that it happened, the fact is that he wasn't getting it done. Maybe there *are* other fingers to point. But that doesn't change the fact that Plummer was a problem.

Exactly.

theAPAOps5 · 07-10-2008, 11:26 AM

You know Popps and TJ both posted in this thread. That hasn't happened for a long time. This might revive the classic Popps vs TJ death matches!

Hotrod · 07-10-2008, 11:27 AM

IMHO Jake should still be starting in Denver.

Northman · 07-10-2008, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hotrod

IMHO Jake should still be starting in Denver.

He probably would have if he had any heart left to play. Once his heart wasnt in it, game over.

bronco militia · 07-10-2008, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hotrod

IMHO Jake should still be starting in Denver.

somebody ban this fool!

broncosteven · 07-10-2008, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

They would've won that game with Jake playing.

We would've gone to the playoffs with Jake playing.

...but we'd be in a significantly worse situation TODAY had Jake finished that year.

We could have made the Playoffs if Jake does not go into the San Fran game in relief and put up a 0.0 Qb rating.

I am beginning to blame Shanny for even putting Jake in that game. I know hindsight is 20-20 but Jake had no motivation to play he proved it by his terrible play, they get the one FG after Bell has the best run of his career and Shanny has to call a QB sneak to protect the ball and kick the FG.

Not sure if they had a #3 QB active that game but they would have been better off that day with a practice squad guy than a disgruntled Jake.

Can we start some Griese threads? I am tired about making the same points over and over about Jake

Hotrod · 07-10-2008, 11:37 AM

Jake was a leader and we've yet to see that from Jay. One has to wonder if we dont spend so many picks on Jay what our team would look like today (and last year) if instead those picks were on the D side of the ball. I'm thinking a Vegas odds to win it all.

Kaylore · 07-10-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broncosteven

We could have made the Playoffs if Jake does not go into the San Fran game in relief and put up a 0.0 Qb rating.

I am beginning to blame Shanny for even putting Jake in that game. I know hindsight is 20-20 but Jake had no motivation to play he proved it by his terrible play, they get the one FG after Bell has the best run of his career and Shanny has to call a QB sneak to protect the ball and kick the FG.

Not sure if they had a #3 QB active that game but they would have been better off that day with a practice squad guy than a disgruntled Jake.

Can we start some Griese threads? I am tired about making the same points over and over about Jake

Cutler had a concussion. They decided after watching Jake play that a concussed Cutler was a better option.

Northman · 07-10-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hotrod

Jake was a leader and we've yet to see that from Jay. One has to wonder if we dont spend so many picks on Jay what our team would look like today (and last year) if instead those picks were on the D side of the ball. I'm thinking a Vegas odds to win it all.

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted then used against you.

07-10-2008, 10:49 AM	#1
kmonty BT Blogger Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Flagstaff, AZ Posts: 1,113 Adopt-a-Bronco: Sweet Feet	Sundquist was Against Benching Plummer in 06 From Stefan Fatsis' just-released A Few Seconds of Panic: I watch the [Seattle] game with Ted Sundquist and his staff, and it's clear to me they don't agree with the change. A few weeks earlier, Sundquist had told me he didn't feel Jake was the sole reason for the offense's poor play. On Cutler's first series, the Broncos run three plays and punt. "Same result," someone says. When Cutler fumbles a snap, Sundquist remarks, "He did that about three times in practice." Someone else replies, "I heard six." Then, as he is hit by a defensive lineman, Cutler wings the ball blindly into the air. It's intercepted and returned for a touchdown. Pens and binoculars fly in our box high above the field.... In the locker room afterward, Cutler tells Jake that the team would have won had he been playing. - Fatsis interviews Jake the next day, and Plummer is pretty candid about his feelings on the whole thing (he's beyond pissed off). If you haven't gotten a copy yet, I highly recommend it. It's a great read in and of itself, but it's just got all these extra details Broncos fans will be appreciate. I'll be posting a full book review today on BroncoTalk and will also have a Q&A with the author a bit later.

07-10-2008, 11:08 AM	#9
Taco John 24/7 Broncos In Elway I Trust Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 49,706 Adopt-a-Bronco: Peyton Manning	Attached Images

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

07-10-2008, 10:54 AM	#2
SouthStndJunkie Ring of Famer Shannon Says: Listen to The Junkman Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 15,260	I think it was dumb (from the team's perspective) to allow a reporter that much access to write a book. These are the salient details that teams do not like getting out to the public. That said....I will be picking up a copy in the near future.

07-10-2008, 10:55 AM	#3
Northman The Enigma Prognosis Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 17,925 Adopt-a-Bronco: Bryci	Guess Sundquist couldnt tell the difference between a 10 year vet making those mistakes and a rookie. No wonder he got canned.

07-10-2008, 10:58 AM	#5
TheReverend www.PatrickTurley.org ^ buy this... twice Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 33,019 Adopt-a-Bronco: Mike Shanahan	They would've won that game with Jake playing. We would've gone to the playoffs with Jake playing. ...but we'd be in a significantly worse situation TODAY had Jake finished that year.

07-10-2008, 11:09 AM	#11
kmonty BT Blogger Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Flagstaff, AZ Posts: 1,113 Adopt-a-Bronco: Sweet Feet	Sundquist's opinion didn't bother me as much as him being open about it to other employees. How could it do anything but undermine Mike Shanahan?

07-10-2008, 11:14 AM	#12
Popps TEAM FIRST. Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 29,785	Shanahan just should have either done it earlier or waited until we were out of playoff contention. He showed no conviction and that's why the team reacted poorly. That said, even if Plummer was playing well... we didn't have a real defense. It wouldn't have mattered. Same as most years.

07-10-2008, 11:15 AM	#13
Taco John 24/7 Broncos In Elway I Trust Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 49,706 Adopt-a-Bronco: Peyton Manning	Plummer was a good guy. Very likable. He just wasn't a very good quarterback. True to his likable guy nature, he had his moments where he'd play outside his head and ability. That was fun to watch - at least at first. But at the end of the day, he wasn't getting it done. No matter what Sundquist (or anyone else) thinks about the move to bench him at the time that it happened, the fact is that he wasn't getting it done. Maybe there are other fingers to point. But that doesn't change the fact that Plummer was a problem.

07-10-2008, 11:17 AM	#15
Beantown Bronco Athletic Supporter Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Mass Posts: 19,043 Adopt-a-Bronco: Matt Prater	As was alluded to in the other thread, there is a reason why good old Ted is still unemployed.....there is no way Shanny stays unemployed for 4 days, much less 4 months if he were ever canned.

07-10-2008, 11:26 AM	#18
theAPAOps5 A new beginning! Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 26,058 Adopt-a-Bronco: Watermock - RIP	You know Popps and TJ both posted in this thread. That hasn't happened for a long time. This might revive the classic Popps vs TJ death matches!

07-10-2008, 11:27 AM	#19
Hotrod Self Appointed Expert aka Dortoh Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 25,136 Adopt-a-Bronco: Miss I	IMHO Jake should still be starting in Denver.

07-10-2008, 11:37 AM	#23
Hotrod Self Appointed Expert aka Dortoh Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 25,136 Adopt-a-Bronco: Miss I	Jake was a leader and we've yet to see that from Jay. One has to wonder if we dont spend so many picks on Jay what our team would look like today (and last year) if instead those picks were on the D side of the ball. I'm thinking a Vegas odds to win it all.