The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-18-2009, 03:03 AM   #76
RubberDuckie24
The One and Only
 
RubberDuckie24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Placerville, CA
Posts: 77

Adopt-a-Bronco:
John Elway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
Do I really have to spell this out for you? You suggested I referenced the Bears #1 ranked defense with the 2008 version...I clearly indicated it was Orton's 2005 season when they ranked #1 in scoring...and 2nd in yards BTW...when he went 10-5 as a starter. Translation...Orton's won/lost record with Chicago was built on the back of a superior defense, one vastly superior to the one Cutler worked with. Even the 16th ranked version was so far ahead of us it's absurd not to factor this in as the overwhelming variable in support of Orton winning games.
Actually, you really weren't referencing to 2005 in the quote that I replied to, case in point:

"I think you're going to find that Orton playing on a team with the #1 ranked defense in the NFL versus playing on this one will tend to force him to do what Jay did...try to score every time downfield. If so...this will be a brand new experience for him."

And trust me, the quote you were referencing to was referring to the 2008 season, don't kid yourself. Regardless, lets just drop this, it's retarded to keep arguing about it if your just going to beat around the bush.

You're right, I'll concede... Orton was kept afloat during 2005 by his defense alone his ROOKIE SEASON. Jesus, i'm not arguing that Orton was any good his rookie season, I'm referring strictly to his 2008 season, where his defense didn't carry him much and he had a 91 passer rating before he got severely injured in the 8th game. Oh wait, did I just bring that up?
RubberDuckie24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:05 AM   #77
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elsid13 View Post
OK there is no proof for that statement at all. In fact the media reported multiply times that reason that Cutler was good fit for Shanahan was that had the football intelligence to understand very complex playbook and was able to master offense game plan that was the hardest in the NFL,week in and week in the NFL.
Both players scored a 26 on the Wonderlic and last time I checked, Vanderbilt's one of the toughest academic institutions in the country, which is why they've generally come up on the short end of the SEC for decades. Cutler's tendency to try to squeeze the ball into tight places is a combination of the defense being unable to stop anyone and him having a bit to much confidence in his arm, both things that were fixable had we kept him.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:09 AM   #78
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RubberDuckie24 View Post
Actually, you really weren't referencing to 2005 in the quote that I replied to, case in point:

"I think you're going to find that Orton playing on a team with the #1 ranked defense in the NFL versus playing on this one will tend to force him to do what Jay did...try to score every time downfield. If so...this will be a brand new experience for him."

And trust me, the quote you were referencing to was referring to the 2008 season, don't kid yourself.
I don't need you to tell me what I was referring to, and in fact I referenced BOTH years in that post, so you're simply wrong.
Quote:
Regardless, lets just drop this, it's retarded to keep arguing about it if your just going to beat around the bush.
I'm doing no such thing. You simply missed the post and now you're trying to spin my post as something different than it was.
Quote:
You're right, I'll concede... Orton was kept afloat during 2005 by his defense alone his ROOKIE SEASON. Jesus, i'm not arguing that Orton was any good his rookie season, I'm referring strictly to his 2008 season, where his defense didn't carry him much and he had a 91 passer rating before he got severely injured in the 8th game. Oh wait, did I just bring that up?
And they went 9-7 and missed the playoffs. BTW...his passer rating was also skewed by the fact that they threw mostly high percentage passes to the short zones. He also was helped out by a nice RB with 1700 yards total offense...not quite the same as the mess Cutler worked with.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:12 AM   #79
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Here's my post from #46. As you can see...it's clear as day what I said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
Nonsense.

Check Orton's stats and here's what you find:

The 2005 season when he was a rookie and went 11-5 he played with the #1 ranked defense in the NFL. Three years later, after watching Griese and Grossman start ahead of him because Bears coaches didn't see him as the answer, he played with a defense ranked 16th instead. In virtually every categoy he improved from his rookie season, which one would expect, but the Bears finished with a 9-7 record. His completion percentage jumped by 7%, yardage increased by over 1100 yards, TD passes doubled, he threw the ball over 100 times more but had 1 fewer INT and 3 fewer sacks, yards per attempt jumped from 5.1 to 6.4 and he threw for more than 70 yards per game more...and his QB rating went from 59.7 to 79.6...a whopping 20 point gain. And in all this improvement, the Bears offense even improving from 26th in scoring to 14th...as a starter Orton won 2 fewer games. As for him having to run for his life...last year he was sacked 29 times, 20th overall...and the Steelers and Patriots gave up 49 and 48 respectively...this while playing in a short yardage passing game designed to let him dump the ball off and avoid taking sacks.

The record is clear...Orton's success in Chicago was primarily the result of a great defense and an offense designed to minimize his participation as much as possible, which is why the Bears traded him.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:16 AM   #80
RubberDuckie24
The One and Only
 
RubberDuckie24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Placerville, CA
Posts: 77

Adopt-a-Bronco:
John Elway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
I don't need you to tell me what I was referring to, and in fact I referenced BOTH years in that post, so you're simply wrong.

I'm doing no such thing. You simply missed the post and now you're trying to spin my post as something different than it was.

And they went 9-7 and missed the playoffs. BTW...his passer rating was also skewed by the fact that they threw mostly high percentage passes to the short zones. He also was helped out by a nice RB with 1700 yards total offense...not quite the same as the mess Cutler worked with.
Lol, ok, you're right.

However, you're wrong again discrediting Orton. I don't know why you insist on being so pessimistic. Shorter passes for a higher percentage rating actually works against you in quarterback passer rating - check it out for yourself: http://www.primecomputing.com/

Cutler had a running game as well, don't kid yourself. Every running back that ran for Cutler had over a 5 ypc. Forte? 3.9 ypc.

This doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Chicago's wide receivers were vastly inferior to that of the Broncos, and that the Offensive line for the Broncos was much better at keeping pressure off Cutler as well. Orton's got some goodies to play with now!

Last edited by RubberDuckie24; 05-18-2009 at 03:23 AM..
RubberDuckie24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:18 AM   #81
RubberDuckie24
The One and Only
 
RubberDuckie24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Placerville, CA
Posts: 77

Adopt-a-Bronco:
John Elway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
Here's my post from #46. As you can see...it's clear as day what I said.
Sorry bud, you weren't referencing to that paragraph, that post came several after the one where you were talking about comparing Orton in Chicago with a #1 defense and the one he's going to be stuck with in Denver. Haha, you're quite resilient in making yourself look right =)
RubberDuckie24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:27 AM   #82
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RubberDuckie24 View Post
Lol, ok, you're right.

However, you're wrong again discrediting Orton. I don't know why you insist on being so pessimistic. Shorter passes for a higher percentage rating actually works against you in quarterback passer rating - check it out for yourself: http://www.primecomputing.com/
Short passes contribute to safe passes, which help keep the INT percentage down, which is what most posters here are suggesting is the reason Orton is going to be superior as a decision maker...not making mistakes. We'll see how much Brandon Marshall, Eddie Royal and Tony Scheffler like catching 5 yard out patterns now that we no longer have the deep zones threatened like we did. We'll also find out how good this offensive line is at holding blocks for a QB who is more or less immobile compared to Cutler.
Quote:
Cutler had a running game as well, don't kid yourself. Every running back that ran for Cutler had over a 5 ypc. Forte? 3.9 ypc.
Cutler had no consistent chain mover. Denver's RB's gained yardage mostly because of the threat of Jay's arm that kept defenses honest. Once the field shortened however and they got inside the 20 where the deep threat was removed by the boundaries of the end zone, the running threat was significantly curtailed and our mediocre backs came up short. Forte also caught 65 passes out of the backfield...which is just as good as a run because it removes the risk of the pass...nobody on our team came close to that.
Quote:
This doesn't take into consideration the fact that Chicago's were vastly inferior to that of the Broncos, and that the Offensive line for the Broncos was much better at keeping pressure off Cutler as well. Orton's got some goodies to play with now!
Part of the reason you think Chicago had no weapons is because they had no real downfield passing threat to get them the ball. Do you think Hester will be a different player when he can run 20 yard patterns instead of 10? Denver has a superior O-line but Chicago's line is not bad and they now have two of the best in the league in Pace and 6 time pro bowler Olin Kreutz.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:37 AM   #83
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff View Post
Powerful indicators ... although it's definitely true the "other 10" on offense here are vastly superior to the "other 10" for the Bears.

My only question is, why are you so concerned with our backup quarterback?
He's the one who still has a spleen.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 03:38 AM   #84
BroncoBuff
***************
 
BroncoBuff's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 25,854

Adopt-a-Bronco:
MALIK+QUANTERUS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
He's the one who still has a spleen.
2-Shay!
BroncoBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 05:01 AM   #85
BroncoInSkinland
Lurker
 
BroncoInSkinland's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,024

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Current D-line
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulamau View Post
Plus with Andra Davis joining DJ, plus Ayers, Doom and Reid at OLB we'll be decent there.
Not that I want to thread jack this from the fascinating discussion on Orton vs. Cutler, but you may not want to put too much faith in Davis. My fiancee is a Browns fan, and I have seen an awful lot on Davis over the past few seasons. I haven't looked up stats so I don't have support for this right now, but Davis has looked like he is declining on the field.

He is still an excellent hitter, but his play recognition is lacking for a veteran IMHO, and his coverage skills are mediocre at best. If I were using Andra, it would be as a situtaional player for obvious running downs. He is an excellent leader and motivator however, and I think his attitude may rub off on some of our players, which I believe is his primary value and the reason McDaniels went after him.
BroncoInSkinland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 06:40 AM   #86
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
Maybe if we hadn't given up 30, 30 and FIFTY TWO POINTS in their last 3 games we wouldn't be having this idiotic disucssion.
Or maybe Cutler could have shown up in the losses to Miami (3 picks, 60.7 rating) and Oakland (1 pick, 49.8 rating), among others, and then winning one of the final 3 games wouldn't have been necessary. And regardless of the poor defense in those final 3 games Cutler didn't exactly light the world on fire himself.

You've built up in your own mind this legendary Jay Cutler that doesn't exist. Good for you, it's nice that you can have such fond memories of him. But back in the real world he was an inconsistent, above average QB last year. I'll point out once again that the offense averaged 15.5 points in the 8 losses and Cutler had 13 of his 18 picks in those losses. Go ahead and blame it all on the defense but a lot of the blame lies at the feet of the QB who failed to get the offense he leads into the endzone.
TonyR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 07:43 AM   #87
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nęstved, DK
Posts: 11,040

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
Or maybe Cutler could have shown up in the losses to Miami (3 picks, 60.7 rating) and Oakland (1 pick, 49.8 rating), among others, and then winning one of the final 3 games wouldn't have been necessary. And regardless of the poor defense in those final 3 games Cutler didn't exactly light the world on fire himself.

You've built up in your own mind this legendary Jay Cutler that doesn't exist. Good for you, it's nice that you can have such fond memories of him. But back in the real world he was an inconsistent, above average QB last year. I'll point out once again that the offense averaged 15.5 points in the 8 losses and Cutler had 13 of his 18 picks in those losses. Go ahead and blame it all on the defense but a lot of the blame lies at the feet of the QB who failed to get the offense he leads into the endzone.
You are clearly from the "The QB should win every game" school of thinking. I find it remarkable that we ONLY won games last year when Cutler played at a very high level.

Cutler was clearly the reason we won every game we won, his stats in those games are through the roof. If you also want to place the blame on him for every game we lost, you are saying we might as well have played with no defense since their involvement in games is completely irrelevant. Cutler clearly played badly in a lot of the games we lost, but not once, not a single time did the defense step up and win a game.
Here are some of the QBs who had triple digit passer ratings against us: Jamarcus Russel (twice, in fact 67% of the 100+ passer rating games of his career came against us last year), Damon Huard (only 100+ rating of last year) and David Garrard. Three of those efforts came in games we could have and should have won, but when you allow a lackluster group of QBs like that to put up 100+ ratings, you are just not going to have a lot of success.
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 07:53 AM   #88
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
Or maybe Cutler could have shown up in the losses to Miami (3 picks, 60.7 rating) and Oakland (1 pick, 49.8 rating), among others, and then winning one of the final 3 games wouldn't have been necessary. And regardless of the poor defense in those final 3 games Cutler didn't exactly light the world on fire himself.

You've built up in your own mind this legendary Jay Cutler that doesn't exist. Good for you, it's nice that you can have such fond memories of him. But back in the real world he was an inconsistent, above average QB last year. I'll point out once again that the offense averaged 15.5 points in the 8 losses and Cutler had 13 of his 18 picks in those losses. Go ahead and blame it all on the defense but a lot of the blame lies at the feet of the QB who failed to get the offense he leads into the endzone.
That offense was also essentially lacking any legitimate talent at running back, which meant that it was entirely on his back to not only produce points every time down the field, but to do so when other teams didn't fear our running game. Yes I know the stats say we had a respectable running game...they are utterly deceiving. Our RB's were so pathetic the only ones left now are those that didnt' see the field...the rest were sent packing. Our running game existed solely as a by-product of teams fearing Cutler's arm and playing to defend the pass. This is why the ground game stalled inside the red zone, because the ability to stretch the field vertically declined by virtue of the end zone lines shortening the field, hence the defense no longer needed worry about the deep zones. All QB's have off games, and young ones have more of them. I've already demonstrated that Manning couldn't win without at least a passable defense, so why would you expect Cutler to do so?
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 08:06 AM   #89
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulamau View Post
Competing with these three most likely to start at DE, we have Darrell Reid who can definitely play, Ryan McBean who should be ready to contribute and UDFAs Rulon Davis and Everett P. plus Nic Clemons and Mathias Askew. I particularly like Davis and Everett P ( not even trying his last name) to push McBean and Reid as rotation for the two DE spots.
Reid can "definitely play"? Says who? He's a career scrub and hasn't played LB either. That "logic" fascinates me. The other guys are also unheralded...mostly UDFA types...promising, perhaps...but every team in the NFL thinks that about the unwanted rookies they scoop off the scrap heap. For every Woodyard there are 30 flops.
Quote:
From this group, at least two to three guys will emerge as viable decent rotation guys at least.
It's more likely that they'll emerge by default since our talent sucks, which you might consider something that makes them "viable"...I don't.
Quote:
Oh and don't forget Robert Ayers when lining up in the three point stance, as well!
The typical 3-4 DE is 25-30 pounds bigger than him. I expect him to play OLB, which he'll have to learn since he's not done it before, much like Elvis will also have to learn.
[quoteThe secondary I'm not even going talk about , its a done deal.[/quote]
Champ is a year older and coming off his first significant injuries. Dawkins is 36 this year and basically what Lynch was to us two years ago. The two Miami guys are average...neither was coveted enough for the Dolphins to keep them. The top rookie's possibly better suited to a nickel back. If that's what you call a "done deal"...what do you call a problem that needs fixing? We *might* be improved a bit...we might not be.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 09:35 AM   #90
colonelbeef
Lets be friend
 
colonelbeef's Avatar
 
Elway is the new Jerry West

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 3,883

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Derek Wolfe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
People used to say Manning (both of them) couldn't win a championship.

Stupid logic.
Both Mannings. Stupid logic to say the least.

Drew Brees must be awful too from that standpoint
colonelbeef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 10:43 AM   #91
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
...when you allow a lackluster group of QBs like that to put up 100+ ratings, you are just not going to have a lot of success.
Very true. And when you average 15.5 points a game, as we did in our 8 losses, you're also not going to have a lot of success.

Take the Buffalo game as an example. We outgained the Bills 532-275. That's right, almost double the offensive yardage output. But we didn't put the ball in the endzone enough and turned the ball over twice. And somehow this is the defense's fault?!?

Our defense was awful, I'll grant you that. But the defense isn't the only problem this team had and doesn't deserve ALL of the blame.

Last edited by TonyR; 05-18-2009 at 11:56 AM..
TonyR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 10:46 AM   #92
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
That offense was also essentially lacking any legitimate talent at running back, which meant that it was entirely on his back to not only produce points every time down the field, but to do so when other teams didn't fear our running game. Yes I know the stats say we had a respectable running game...they are utterly deceiving.
We had at least 1 competent back healthy for 5 of our 8 losses.

And how was Arizona able to get it done with a much worse running game than ours? Other than the fact that they had a better QB...
TonyR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 11:09 AM   #93
BABronco
RP2012
 
BABronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,173

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Clady
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by summerdenver View Post
btw, the one loss is the MNF OT game against GB where we did not get the ball in over time.
Don't get me started on that game. I was so ****ing pissed at the D! One play and a TD. Pathetic. And against an aged QB who is a major douche. Made the loss even worse.
BABronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 11:25 AM   #94
footstepsfrom#27
helmet to helmet hitter
 
footstepsfrom#27's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 16,143

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Joe Mays
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
We had at least 1 competent back healthy for 5 of our 8 losses.
You mean one of those McD cut before getting to minicamp because they sucked eggs? Impressive for sure...
Quote:
And how was Arizona able to get it done with a much worse running game than ours? Other than the fact that they had a better QB...
They went a mediocre 9-7 then put it together in the playoffs...it happens once in a blue moon.
footstepsfrom#27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 12:05 PM   #95
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
You mean one of those McD cut before getting to minicamp because they sucked eggs? Impressive for sure...

They went a mediocre 9-7 then put it together in the playoffs...it happens once in a blue moon.
To your first point, Hillis was healthy for the first 5 losses.

To your second point, Arizona was tied for 3rd in scoring (we were 16) and 4th in yards (we were 2nd) despite being 32nd (last!) in the league in rushing. They averaged 73.6 ypg and 3.5 ypc. We were 116.4 and 4.8. See what this does to your running game excuse? Their QB got it done in the red zone, ours didn't.

Warner in the red zone: 104.4 (despite a lesser rush attack and O-line)

Cutler in the red zone: 74.1

Case closed.
TonyR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 12:12 PM   #96
BroncoMan4ever
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoMan4ever's Avatar
 
That's just like your opinion, man

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 13,293

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VIRGIL GREEN!!!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elsid13 View Post
OK there is no proof for that statement at all. In fact the media reported multiply times that reason that Cutler was good fit for Shanahan was that had the football intelligence to understand very complex playbook and was able to master offense game plan that was the hardest in the NFL,week in and week in the NFL.

And your Ayers statement is BS. Ever Coach/GM listen to his staff when comes to draft choices, even Mike Brown doesn't do it alone.
The Ayers statement isn't crap. it wasn't until the last few years when Mike was listening to advice from the Goodmans that our drafts were actually good. everyone knows that almost every decision made with the team was made by Shanahan alone.

And i am not saying Cutler is a complete dummy when it comes to the mental aspects of the game, i am saying that Orton is better, and unlike Jay he doesn't have the ego of thinking he can throw a ball through a brick wall, which means he will think before he throws and make better decisions than Jay did. we all know there were a few plays every game, sometimes more, where Jay threw passes that made everyone think WTF is he thinking, and that occured because he was too egotistical thinking he could squeeze a ball anywhere.
Orton doesn't have that arm or ego. He is going to come in be smart with the ball, and listen to his coaches.
BroncoMan4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 12:23 PM   #97
fdf
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
. . . In virtually every categoy he improved from his rookie season, which one would expect, but the Bears finished with a 9-7 record. His completion percentage jumped by 7%, yardage increased by over 1100 yards, TD passes doubled, he threw the ball over 100 times more but had 1 fewer INT and 3 fewer sacks, yards per attempt jumped from 5.1 to 6.4 and he threw for more than 70 yards per game more...and his QB rating went from 59.7 to 79.6...a whopping 20 point gain. And in all this improvement, the Bears offense even improving from 26th in scoring to 14th...as a starter Orton won 2 fewer games . . .
Not sure how you get from the above quoted language to the conclusion that Orton is a crappy quarterback--especially given that he played the second half of last season on a really bad ankle and his stats suffered badly after his injury. Those are pretty decent numbers and more important, improving numbers after two years of sitting on the bench.

Seems to me like he's Griese with a stronger arm, better pocket presence (Griese's was awful, even before his shoulder injury--seemed like he fumbled 75% of the time he got sacked) and without Griese's weird personality and almost autistic leadership skills. Despite that, Griese was a pretty good QB for us before his injury took a barely adequate arm and turned it into a noodle.

My biggest beef with grabbing Orton as the replacement is that I understand he has only a year left on his contract. If McDaniels coaches him to a good year, he costs us a barrel of money and soon.

IMHO, Cutler was gone as soon as Shanahan and Bates left. Just my opinion and I'm not interested in arguing that again. I understand you feel differently. In any event, by the time he refused to call the owner back, we had to replace him (regardless how we got there and whether McPoopyPants was the stupidest person in the world in making that happen). Replacing him with a guy with only a year left under contract is going to turn out to be expensive, unless Orton has a bad year. Worse, that hit is going to occur about the same time we have to resign the class of 2006, who are going to get some big numbers, either in Denver or elsewhere.

But, if he works out well in McDaniel's system, he'll be worth the money (of course, it's easy for me to spend Pat Bowlen's money--I should be in Congress, huh?).

But I'm pretty comfy the team is starting back in the right direction after some years of depressing deterioration on D and special teams. The franchise was a mess. And yes, I'm one of the guys that really really really wanted a 330 lb nose tackle and was disappointed we didn't take one until free agency
fdf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 12:27 PM   #98
RubberDuckie24
The One and Only
 
RubberDuckie24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Placerville, CA
Posts: 77

Adopt-a-Bronco:
John Elway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
To your first point, Hillis was healthy for the first 5 losses.

To your second point, Arizona was tied for 3rd in scoring (we were 16) and 4th in yards (we were 2nd) despite being 32nd (last!) in the league in rushing. They averaged 73.6 ypg and 3.5 ypc. We were 116.4 and 4.8. See what this does to your running game excuse? Their QB got it done in the red zone, ours didn't.

Warner in the red zone: 104.4 (despite a lesser rush attack and O-line)

Cutler in the red zone: 74.1

Case closed.
Orton: 96 passer rating in the red zone. And while you might attribute that to his running game (which has already been dispelled as being much better than Denvers if at all), his TD-INT ratio of 13-1 goes to show you that he isn't going to make those stupid decisions when it comes down to the clutch like Cutler did in the red zone.
RubberDuckie24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 01:07 PM   #99
Mr.Meanie
Ring of Famer
 
Mr.Meanie's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,606

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27 View Post
Here are the only two really relative stats that mean much in this discussion:

1) In 37 starts made by Cutler, the defense surrendered FEWER than 21 points only 13 times. In those games Cutler was 12-1...a .923 winning percentage

2) In 34 starts made by Orton, the Bears defense surrendered MORE than 21 points only 14 times. In those games Orton was 4-10...a .285 winning percentage.
Really, really bad analogy. That's just horribly bad.

If you're trying to say how good Jay is vs. Orton when teams hold each other under 21 points, here is how you make the comparison:

Defense holding opponent under 21 points:

Cutler - 10-1 - .909 career winning percentage
Orton - 17-3 - .850 career winning percentage


That's not a really big difference...

On the other hand, Defense allowing opponent more than 21 points:

Cutler - 5-24 - .208 career winning percentage
Orton - 4-6 - .400 career winning percentage


Who looks better there? It's still not a huge difference.... but by that ridiculous measuring stick it looks like Orton is the better player.

The point is, football is all about team. There are some times when the defense wins and loses games, when the QB wins and loses games, when the kicker and ST wins and loses games. It's beyond retarded to use those stats to say one player is better than the other.

QB rating is a better stat to use if you're going to try to compare. Better yet... leadership on and off the field, work ethic, intelligence, and what their teammates say about them is a much better indicator of which QB is superior. I think we would all agree that Orton is far superior to Vick, although Vick is more athletically gifted. He just doesn't posess the intangibles that make a QB great in the NFL.

edit: actually I went back and checked those numbers. Orton was actually .400 when defenses allowed >21

Last edited by Mr.Meanie; 05-18-2009 at 01:16 PM..
Mr.Meanie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2009, 01:33 PM   #100
BroncoMan4ever
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoMan4ever's Avatar
 
That's just like your opinion, man

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 13,293

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VIRGIL GREEN!!!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
To your first point, Hillis was healthy for the first 5 losses.

To your second point, Arizona was tied for 3rd in scoring (we were 16) and 4th in yards (we were 2nd) despite being 32nd (last!) in the league in rushing. They averaged 73.6 ypg and 3.5 ypc. We were 116.4 and 4.8. See what this does to your running game excuse? Their QB got it done in the red zone, ours didn't.

Warner in the red zone: 104.4 (despite a lesser rush attack and O-line)

Cutler in the red zone: 74.1

Case closed.
one problem with this post. yes Hillis was healthy for the 1st 5 losses, however he was being used as a FB at the time. he was a complete non factor in 3 of those games. and only during the Miami game where he had a great receiving day but was a non factor in the running game and against Oakland where he had a decent rushing performance was he a factor in our 1st 5 losses
BroncoMan4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:23 PM.


Denver Broncos