Denver Broncos Thread

mikemac1 · 04-01-2012 03:52PM

D3PO wrote: »

Personally Id make the ballsy decision to cut him and get in Flynn (gamble as it is) and draft by need from there.

Jags have a new owner, tens of thousands of seats that need to be sold and Blaine Gabbert is horrible

If you're going to cut Tebow you may as well see can you get something from the Jags for him

poldebruin · 04-01-2012 03:58PM

D3PO wrote: »

When you think about it Elway is almost forced into committing to Tebow next year as is Fox. Personally Id make the ballsy decision to cut him and get in Flynn (gamble as it is) and draft by need from there.

oh yeah, their hands have totally been forced by the way things have worked out. I think it's clear by body language and in interviews that neither is enamoured with the situation as it stands.

While I agree it has looked more likely week by week that Tebow will have big problems adjusting to being a pocket-style passer, I still think you have to give him a full off-season as starter, and see what you've got next year.

I think he does have trade value though, either to jax or miami, however, I wouldn't want to be the starter on one of those teams and see him arrive into town.....cue qb controversy. Also, his short yardage and inside the 10 value are high. In fact, looking back now, Denver should have brought him in much more often in 3rd-1 and goal line situations when Orton was still there.

mikemac1 · 04-01-2012 04:00PM

Miami won't take him

Matt Moore had a fine season and deserves a shot as starter next season
Just this week he showed great agility to run to the left and slot a TD pass to the corner of the endzone against the Jets. Impressive

Chucky the tree · 04-01-2012 04:01PM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Tebow has had three poor games, but lets not write him off until we see what happens on sunday.

Lets have this conversation when he's in the offseason.

It's been alot more then 3.

D3PO · 04-01-2012 04:10PM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Tebow has had three poor games, but lets not write him off until we see what happens on sunday.

Lets have this conversation when he's in the offseason.

ah here are you serious ???

he was horrible in wins aswell. hes not thrown for 230 yards in a game this year and Denver have only scored 20 plus in 2 of 8 games.

give me a break. The hype has you blinded from reality

D3PO · 04-01-2012 04:12PM

mikemac1 wrote: »

Jags have a new owner, tens of thousands of seats that need to be sold and Blaine Gabbert is horrible

If you're going to cut Tebow you may as well see can you get something from the Jags for him

problem is salary. Tebow was a first rounder before the rookie pay scale. whos going to trade and take on his contract ?

worth a shot but i doubt they would bite

D3PO · 04-01-2012 04:14PM

poldebruin wrote: »

I think he does have trade value though, either to jax or miami, however, I wouldn't want to be the starter on one of those teams and see him arrive into town.....cue qb controversy. Also, his short yardage and inside the 10 value are high. In fact, looking back now, Denver should have brought him in much more often in 3rd-1 and goal line situations when Orton was still there.

i dont think he has trade value but i don think if cut he would be picked up. First rounder salary he jsut aint worth it right now even for Jax or Miami.

agree on using him as a situation QB in the red zone though. Denver should have done this mroe when Orton was there.

Johnny_Fontane · 04-01-2012 04:15PM

D3PO wrote: »

ah here are you serious ???

he was horrible in wins aswell. hes not thrown for 230 yards in a game this year and Denver have only scored 20 plus in 2 of 8 games.

give me a break. The hype has you blinded from reality

its all about the w

its that simple. do you think that in the post season, people care about stats? Ask bill belichick :cool:

kmart6 · 04-01-2012 06:03PM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Lets have this conversation when he's in the offseason.

Ok, we'll have this conversation when he's out of the Playoffs on Sunday!

D3PO · 05-01-2012 10:48AM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

its all about the w

its that simple. do you think that in the post season, people care about stats? Ask bill belichick :cool:

Yeah its all about the W. But if Chelsea won every game in a season 1 - 0 due to own goals do you think Torres should still get praise because they were winning ?

Give me a break.

Johnny_Fontane · 05-01-2012 10:49AM

kmart6 wrote: »

Ok, we'll have this conversation when he's out of the Playoffs on Sunday!

I just cant discount any team with home field advantage in the playoffs. I know most will in this match up. I'm an Eagles fan, so dont care either way, but playoff ball is different.

Johnny_Fontane · 05-01-2012 10:52AM

D3PO wrote: »

Yeah its all about the W. But if Chelsea won every game in a season 1 - 0 due to own goals do you think Torres should still get praise because they were winning ?

Give me a break.

Man you are one sided in this.....you're not going to enjoy this game, because of your views, its a pity really, cos it could be a cracker.

Morrisseeee · 05-01-2012 12:51PM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Man you are one sided in this.....you're not going to enjoy this game, because of your views, its a pity really, cos it could be a cracker.

I (& most neutrals) would love it to be a cracker, but.............my head says: no. Alot has to happen for it to be a cracker, changes in form on both offences & defenses. The only questions Pittsburg have to answer are how will big Ben play, will he be hampered by his injury, if so there's a slight window of opportunity. Denver has too many Qs, QB, offence (even tho we have a good running attack, it didn't produce any points last week), our run D has struggled of late and we're not exactly 'hot' in the passing D either.
Elway has said he wants Tim to throw the ball this weekend, Tim has responded by saying, "yes sir", so either his throwing and confidence returns or it gets real ugly & we get to see a shut-out on Sun evening. I'd imagine that the very conservative playbook will get thrown out, so Tim has a monumantal challenge ahead of him, against a D that Brady/Brees/Rodgers wouldn't fancy. Of course we should never write Tim off, he has done some amazing things when backed up against a wall in some games, and now I think he's backed up against his biggest wall yet, fingers crossed he'll pull through, otherwise Mr. Elway might re-consider......again !
I looked back at his game against the Texans last year, we were 17-0 down at HT, then he pulls his socks up and actually has some nice throws (stats: 16/29 308 yrds, 1TD, 1Int, 1runTD), and we win by 1 point. Comparing his throwing motion from this match to last week, shows that his accuracy is way off, and his throwing action is slower, more awkward looking. But there's one worrying thing, he hasn't thrown consistently (well) for a whole game, and this is (& rightly so) why the vulchers are out to get him.
Some commentators are saying things like: which quarter will Brady Quinn come in ? will there be a shut-out ? how many picks will Tim throw ?

D3PO · 05-01-2012 01:01PM

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Man you are one sided in this.....you're not going to enjoy this game, because of your views, its a pity really, cos it could be a cracker.

hey i will watch it and I will enjoy it. My views on Tebow have no bearing on my enjoyment in watching playoff football.

why would they ?

D3PO · 05-01-2012 01:03PM

Morrisseeee wrote: »

II looked back at his game against the Texans last year, we were 17-0 down at HT, then he pulls his socks up and actually has some nice throws (stats: 16/29 308 yrds, 1TD, 1Int, 1runTD), and we win by 1 point.

Peolpe seem to forget how terrible the Texans passing D was last year.

Thats like putting up passing numbers on New England this year (Sorry pats fans) its hardly representative of good QB play to be fair.

LuckyLloyd · 05-01-2012 01:12PM

It took a lot longer than I had anticipated for teams to figure him out, but last weekend was a brilliant example of an NFL defense developing a successful game plan to stop an opposing team's primary weapon. To be honest, I genuinely think the best thing the Broncos could do is announce a couple of hours before the game that Quinn was starting. Pittsburgh are going to spend the whole week furthering what defenses have done the last three weeks - their preperation is going to be heavily biased towards a completely unorthodox QB. You actually come out with a traditional pocket passer who, whatever his other failings, has one hell of an arm and the element of surprise might be worth enough points off the bat to give you a shot.

I would be shocked beyond belief if Tebow gets it done this weekend.

neilster · 05-01-2012 01:52PM

D3PO wrote: »

totally agree. But honestly if your getting paid to run the Front Office you have to be prepared to make tough decisions. Just as Man U did with Ronaldo, the Cavs did with LeBron, Green Bay did with Farve etc

I think it would be pointless for Denver to draft a project QB to be honest. They either draft high or get in a FA or suck it and see what an offseason as starter does for Tebows game knowing worst case if he tanks they can hope to get Matt Barkley the following year.

my view is that he will tank so i guess its a case of backing him and drafting replacements for an ageing secondary this year and a RB, WR and O Line help. if he fails at least you have tooled up in such a way you can trade up in the following first round to get your guy.

if he succeeds then I guess your quids in,

When you think about it Elway is almost forced into committing to Tebow next year as is Fox. Personally Id make the ballsy decision to cut him and get in Flynn (gamble as it is) and draft by need from there.

Matt Flynn hasnt really been a secret for a while now, his stunning contribution the other night was flawless mature but within an awesome team . Kevin Kolb has shown the risks of this type of move (even though he has played behind an awful line) but i think even last off-season, people would have graded Matt Flynn above Kolb (maybe not everyone but he was mentioned in the buzz of free agency which is unusual for a back-up) much like Hasselbeck was graded as a packer before going to the Seahawks. There are risks but he has played briefly at a high level , its a lot of NFL snaps comparatively to a spread offense rookie in college or even Andrew Luck (im not disparaging Luck just his NFL experience). The sample is brief but at an elite level. I think Denver, the Redskins , Miami , the Jets and the Seahawks will take a long hard look at Flynn at Matt Cassell type money because

a) they are in the mid range for a first round pick which is too far away
b) with Barkley not declaring and Jones possibly following him and Tannehill not convincing there is a drop-off in picking the others and Shanahan , Carroll & possibly Jeff Fisher dont want to a John Fox/ Jack Del Rio on it by drafting and being associated with the pick . Matt Moore , TJack or a Free Agent would be dull but safer
c) The drop off in talent with people staying in school will make the price for trading up to the Rams/Vikes spots too prohibitive ...some people have said 3 1st's and 2nd round pick
d) they have lots of other needs and FreeAgency might be the place to solve QBack

The Redskins might be the best set in ways but still need a wide reciever and or a running back , light at corner also
Denver really need a DT ---devon still looks nice
Jets really need a pass rusher and usher out Calvin Pace also someone to replace Bart Scott --Kuechly , Zach Brown , Ingram if he fell
Seattle have one of the lowest sacks totals so a pass rusher

Getting back to Denver i can see Elway going through training camp and being in the same position again with the same questions ...the thing about Elway is that he has the reputational capital around Mile High to make a ballsy decision

D3PO · 05-01-2012 02:18PM

neilster wrote: »

Matt Flynn hasnt really been a secret for a while now, his stunning contribution the other night was flawless mature but within an awesome team . Kevin Kolb has shown the risks of this type of move (even though he has played behind an awful line) but i think even last off-season, people would have graded Matt Flynn above Kolb (maybe not everyone but he was mentioned in the buzz of free agency which is unusual for a back-up)

Im not saying he was a secret. The reason I compared him to Kolb was that they are in similar situations in that after a few starts both looked like exacellent QB's

Kolb had a bunch of 300 yard games off the bat. Flynn has had two starts and looked excellent in both.

The fact remains is although hes likely to come good. There isnt a big enough body of work not to consider Flynn a gamble. thats all I was pointing out.

P.S I think Landry Jones is a bust waiting to happen so shame on you for even mentioning him in your post

neilster · 05-01-2012 02:19PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It took a lot longer than I had anticipated for teams to figure him out, but last weekend was a brilliant example of an NFL defense developing a successful game plan to stop an opposing team's primary weapon. To be honest, I genuinely think the best thing the Broncos could do is announce a couple of hours before the game that Quinn was starting. Pittsburgh are going to spend the whole week furthering what defenses have done the last three weeks - their preperation is going to be heavily biased towards a completely unorthodox QB. You actually come out with a traditional pocket passer who, whatever his other failings, has one hell of an arm and the element of surprise might be worth enough points off the bat to give you a shot.

I would be shocked beyond belief if Tebow gets it done this weekend.

John Fox is a wily auld buzzard , hard to see how he isnt overmatched though , that mean linebacking corps will love to get in hits on Tebow , whats the chances of big fines for helmet to helmet hits

btw has anyone seen the Saturday Night Live sketch where Jesus takes the Jake Plummer role and asks Tebow to tone down the religious stuff haha

Morrisseeee · 05-01-2012 07:38PM

Interesting comment from Elway, as regards Quinn replacing Tebow:

'I don't think so, but you never know. I think the coaches are looking at it right now,' Elway said. 'We're in the playoffs, and the coaching staff is going to do anything they can to help us win this football game.'

Their stats, it just so happens they have both thrown 353 attempts, also both are the same height & weight:

I'd imagine the only situation where Quinn might come in on Sunday is when the game is well and truly out of reach and any hope of 'Tebowtime' is gone.

neilster · 06-01-2012 08:37AM

D3PO wrote: »

Im not saying he was a secret. The reason I compared him to Kolb was that they are in similar situations in that after a few starts both looked like exacellent QB's

Kolb had a bunch of 300 yard games off the bat. Flynn has had two starts and looked excellent in both.

The fact remains is although hes likely to come good. There isnt a big enough body of work not to consider Flynn a gamble. thats all I was pointing out.

P.S I think Landry Jones is a bust waiting to happen so shame on you for even mentioning him in your post

No its a fair point ...you can point to the Packers undoubted skills at bringing a QB on ....and then you can counter with Andy Reids' Academy of QBacks and Marty Mohrinweg etc for Kolbs tuition , Vicks improvement , Donovan McNabb as a spread passer being able to function in the West Coast offense. The one thing would be Kolb sometimes stunk all by himself at times with Philly , looking tenuous in the pocket etc. That was the contention when Arizona signed him that why didnt they sign him for a year extra and then sign him long-term instead of long-term straight off the bat . Which begs the question did some of the likes of Seattle, Miami, Redskins , Denver, SanFran & Buffalo (the QB needy teams of 2010) bid up Kolb's services which makes some of these teams not look that stupid now

Miami with Matt Moore, TJack , Denver have found ways to win sometimes without making the big splash /mistake.

Also you have a point on Landry Jones but he has also shown he could get it done but he looks bust material...i would take Ryan Mallett way ahead of him ....but ho wmuch of that was to do with Broyles getting open ?

neilster · 06-01-2012 09:06AM

Morrisseeee wrote: »

Interesting comment from Elway, as regards Quinn replacing Tebow:

I'd imagine the only situation where Quinn might come in on Sunday is when the game is well and truly out of reach and any hope of 'Tebowtime' is gone.

I think this would be a pretty bad sign if he got benched for Quinn. First it would be an admittance that he had played pretty badly on the day . Secondly it would say something about how Quinn could give you increased chances to win. Also the opportunity given to Quinn could work (i think its far-fetchedbut...) and that would create another debate for the playoffs if they won

I think this would be a decision made by Elway and im not sure he does Jerry Jones on it and lands down on the sideline wanting to get his own way but it is an interesting scenario that could happen because Tebow will get a torrid time. I thought Denver in the Chiefs game had a nice balance to the first quarter with McGahee making holes . Clady and Co can sure open up lanes for the veteran and if you could lay the game on the back of a successful power-running game , soak up the clock , hang in there ...give the defense a chance to make some plays on a small amount of playing time ...keep it close ...bring the opposition down to a dogfight

It makes the trade of Brandon Lloyd look perplexing in a way as Tebow needs help

Jolly Red Giant · 06-01-2012 11:53AM

poldebruin wrote: »

I think McDaniels had something like 5 picks in the first 2 rounds several years ago and we did not see a huge influx of talent into the team.

2009
No.12 - Knowshown Moreno (or as he is affectionately known by Broncos fans - Knowshow). All flash with little substance and made of glass. Currently on IR because of torn ACL
No.18 - Robert Ayers - a DE who was played at OLB in the 3-4 for his first two years. Has improved since moved back to DE in Fox's 4-3. Has been solid if not spectacular this year.
No.37 - Alphonso Smith - Broncos traded away a first rounder in 2010 (they got from Bears for Cutler - ended up as the No.6 pick in the draft) to move up in the 2nd round to take Smith. The Broncos traded Smith to the Lions for a useless TE Dan Gronkowski (because his brother played for the Pats) after a year. Smith is now a back-up CB with the Lions and Grankowski has bounced around and is currently with the Browns.
No. 48 Darcel Mcbath - Another player made of glass. Wavied by Broncos last Sept and has played in one game for the Jags this year.
No.46 - Richard Quinn - Biggest head scratcher in years for Broncos fans McDaniels trade up into the 2nd round for a player he could have got in the 5th or 6th round. Now with the Wash. A 'terrific' pass catching TE who has made one catch in three seasons (ironically from Tim Tebow).

Bad drafting has a massive impact on the talent coming onto a roster and both Shanahan (who preferred signing free agents) and McDaniels were brutal at it.

Jolly Red Giant · 06-01-2012 12:43PM

Couple of points of information

neilster wrote: »

But you could see Elway being sorely tempted to give two first round picks for Matt Flynn and a bunch of other picks cos thats what it will cost to get RGIII, Matt Flynn or cast aside healthy Peyton

Matt Flynn is a Free Agent - money - not draft picks - will decide where he goes.

neilster wrote: »

I think this would be a decision made by Elway and im not sure he does Jerry Jones on it and lands down on the sideline wanting to get his own way but it is an interesting scenario that could happen because Tebow will get a torrid time.

Just like when Tebow replaced Orton, any decision to bench Tebow will be made by Fox - not Elway. The footballing side of the Broncos is run by EFX - but coaching decisions are made by Fox and Fox alone. There is no way Fox would be in Denver if he didn't.

neilster wrote: »

It makes the trade of Brandon Lloyd look perplexing in a way as Tebow needs help

Lloyd was traded because he was a prima donna who was only interested in his own stats and was a locker room cancer because he knew his stats would drop with Tebow at QB.

Now back to Tebow for a minute -

poldebruin wrote: »

While I agree it has looked more likely week by week that Tebow will have big problems adjusting to being a pocket-style passer, I still think you have to give him a full off-season as starter, and see what you've got next year.

Tebow does not, will not and will never have to be a 'pocket-style passer'. what he must do is learn to be able to read defences, go through his progressions, and when necessary check-down and complete some of those passes.

No matter how much Tebow progresses his will always be an option type of QB. He has tremendous all round talent and the question still to be answered is 'can he be a good enough passer to then be able to use his other talents to win games?'

Now - I think people are approaching the discussion on Tebow from the wrong perspective - i.e. from the perspective of what is necessary from a QB in the current NFL. But the NFL is not a static game - it constantly evolves and changes. Different types of offenses and defences emerge, evolve and disappear over time. Over the past few years the NFL has changed the rules to make the game more passer friendly (primarily by stopping CB's playing the game) - but there is a limit to how far this can go.

John Fox is an old-school coach who loves to play hard defence and run the ball down the gut. I love this type of football and was thrilled to see Fox become Denver's coach. Fox has said more than once that he has been waiting for years for an opportunity to develop an offence capable of playing football in the trenches in an old-school fashion. He believes that the spread offence is reaching it's limits and that an old-style running offence (adapted to modern times) can have a major impact in the NFL. He likes the fact that he has the opportunity to run the option offense with Tebow and if it shows potential he would like to expand it and develop it next season.

There are major advantages in what Fox is attempting to do -
1. NFL offenses are focussed on passing the ball and require a specific type of player to play in the offence. By shifting to the read-option type of running offense the Broncos can get better players suited to the offense at a cheaper price because other teams are passing them up.
2. NFL defences are totally focussed on stopping the pass happy offenses in the league. They do not have the schemes or personnel to stop the a read-option type of running offense. Any team that implements and develops the read-option offense will, potentially have a big advantage as opponents will have to alter their entire defensive scheme for one or two games each season.
3. It allows the Broncos to focus their draft and free agent acquisitions on developing a seriously good defence - and no matter what anyone says - the no.1 priority in winning the Superbowl is having a top notch defence.

Now some will argue that the last three games (and the game against the Steelers on Sun) show that the read-option will not work in the NFL. I disagree - and there are a number of reasons -
1. The Broncos are running a very basic and very conservative offense with a limited number of plays. They have been forced to do this because of Tebow's current skills set.
2. Tebow has to be able to pass the ball from the pocket - not become a 'pocket-style passer' - but be able to go through reads, progressions and check-downs and deliver a decent ball (i.e. to become competent). This is necessary to keep the defence off balance, cope with blitzs (and particularly the zone blitz) and effectively use the play-action.
3. The Broncos roster is poor and depleted after years of poor personnel decisions. The team is getting beat because the players simply aren't good enough (including Tebow) to win currently.
4. If (and it is a big IF) Tebow develops into a competent passer, then Fox has an opportunity to develop an offensive playbook that no other team will be able to combat. He will be able to build a roster of offensive players to use the playbook and he will be able to do what he loves to do - have a run orientated offense and fight for the win in the trenches.

Now - there is no guarantee that any of this will work or come to fruition in any way. But the off-season will tell a lot. Here is what I think will happen -
1. The Broncos will start Tebow next season.
2. Elway will work with Tebow in the off-season at developing his passing skills.
3. The Broncos will sign a vetern back-up (could bring Quinn back)
4. The Broncos will draft a QB in the mid-rounds- if he is an option type QB then it will indicate they are happy with how Tebow is developing - if it is an 'NFL' type QB then they are worried that Tebow won't be good enough.
5. Fox has a five year contract and he has an excellent relationship with Elway. As someone said earlier, Fox is a 'wily auld buzzard' and he knows how to coach a football team. He will adapt and change as necessary and Elway will give him all the time he needs. Elway knows that he won his superbowl rings because of the Broncos defence. Fox will build one of the best defences in the league and the offence will evolve depending on how Tebow develops (or not).

LuckyLloyd · 06-01-2012 04:34PM

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Tebow does not, will not and will never have to be a 'pocket-style passer'. what he must do is learn to be able to read defences, go through his progressions, and when necessary check-down and complete some of those passes.

No matter how much Tebow progresses his will always be an option type of QB. He has tremendous all round talent and the question still to be answered is 'can he be a good enough passer to then be able to use his other talents to win games?'

Even if it were that simple, the fact remains that his current throwing mechanics and ability to read the defense are as bad as I've ever seen (or observers of the NFL for decades have seen). To even get to a servicable level on QB fundamentals for the NFL level is a truly mammoth task.

Now - I think people are approaching the discussion on Tebow from the wrong perspective - i.e. from the perspective of what is necessary from a QB in the current NFL. But the NFL is not a static game - it constantly evolves and changes. Different types of offenses and defences emerge, evolve and disappear over time. Over the past few years the NFL has changed the rules to make the game more passer friendly (primarily by stopping CB's playing the game) - but there is a limit to how far this can go.

This might be true, but Tebow doesn't exist in the late fifeties, he exists in the here and now - where 4,000 yard passing seasons are now commonplace. 10 QBs threw for more than 4k in the air this year as compared to 4 in 2002 (the top 20 QBs in the league this year totalled 80,610 yards between them as opposed to 70,621 in 2002). On the other side of the coin, we've had 15 players to have rushed over 1,000 yards this year as compared to 17 in 2002 (the top 20 rushers amassed 22,814 yards this year as opposed to 25,790 in 2002).

John Fox is an old-school coach who loves to play hard defence and run the ball down the gut. I love this type of football and was thrilled to see Fox become Denver's coach. Fox has said more than once that he has been waiting for years for an opportunity to develop an offence capable of playing football in the trenches in an old-school fashion. He believes that the spread offence is reaching it's limits and that an old-style running offence (adapted to modern times) can have a major impact in the NFL. He likes the fact that he has the opportunity to run the option offense with Tebow and if it shows potential he would like to expand it and develop it next season

One of my favourite things in all of football is watching Paul Johnson teams run the Triple Option at the college level, but that type of offense would get crushed at the NFL level where the worst defender on the field at any one time was likely in the running for selection on an end of season all conference selection in college.

The trends fly completely in the face of the bolded, romantic and all as it might be. If Denver's plan is to focus more on the option then Tebow and Fox will be looking for work by the end of next season. The effectiveness of the Wildcat has diminished massively the last season or so as every NFL team now does some preperation for it (on both sides of the ball). Tebow caught teams off guard early on, but the last three weeks have shown what time to analyse and prepare for his skillset can produce.

The whole 'the NFL can change' and 'Tebow can be unorthodox and still succeed' sentiment is ultimately very naive. The dude doesn't have an NFL arm and if he doesn't develop one he won't be a stating NFL QB in the long term. This is the (maybe unfortunate) reality.

Jolly Red Giant · 06-01-2012 05:06PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Even if it were that simple, the fact remains that his current throwing mechanics and ability to read the defense are as bad as I've ever seen (or observers of the NFL for decades have seen). To even get to a servicable level on QB fundamentals for the NFL level is a truly mammoth task.

I suggest you read my comments again - I have been a Broncos fan for over 35 years - I have seen all the ups and downs -and most importantly - I do not believe Tebow will make a servicable QB.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This might be true, but Tebow doesn't exist in the late fifeties, he exists in the here and now - where 4,000 yard passing seasons are now commonplace. 10 QBs threw for more than 4k in the air this year as compared to 4 in 2002 (the top 20 QBs in the league this year totalled 80,610 yards between them as opposed to 70,621 in 2002). On the other side of the coin, we've had 15 players to have rushed over 1,000 yards this year as compared to 17 in 2002 (the top 20 rushers amassed 22,814 yards this year as opposed to 25,790 in 2002).

I never said he did - and to be honest - the stats are pretty much irrelevent.

The NFL is constantly going through a process of evolving and changing. The fact that there has been a shift from running the ball to passing the ball over the past 10 years does not mean that the trend will continue. It could - but it isn't a given. At a certain point in time the current trend of spread offences and passing the ball will reach its limit - just as has happened in the past with every other type of offence and defence. All that requires for things to change is for one team to get success by changing things - and things can change quite dramatically in the NFL. What change will occur is still speculation.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

One of my favourite things in all of football is watching Paul Johnson teams run the Triple Option at the college level, but that type of offense would get crushed at the NFL level where the worst defender on the field at any one time was likely in the running for selection on an end of season all conference selection in college.

And again - where did I say that a triple option college offence (which the Broncos didn't and won't run) is the future of the NFL?

If you read what I said - I said an old style rushing offence updated to the modern game might have some success.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The trends fly completely in the face of the bolded, romantic and all as it might be. If Denver's plan is to focus more on the option then Tebow and Fox will be looking for work by the end of next season. The effectiveness of the Wildcat has diminished massively the last season or so as every NFL team now does some preperation for it (on both sides of the ball). Tebow caught teams off guard early on, but the last three weeks have shown what time to analyse and prepare for his skillset can produce.

There is an assumption here that if the Broncos decide that they can have success with a running offence that they will simply stick to what they have been doing this season. Of course the offence would have to develop and evolve and expand for it to have any chance of success. Will it work? I don't know- but I do believe that Fox will be given the time to try it if there is the possibility of it succeeding - and won't be sacked if it fails (which will be apparent quite quickly).

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The whole 'the NFL can change' and 'Tebow can be unorthodox and still succeed' sentiment is ultimately very naive. The dude doesn't have an NFL arm and if he doesn't develop one he won't be a stating NFL QB in the long term. This is the (maybe unfortunate) reality.

Tebow needed to be drafted by a team that would have been able to sit him on the bench for four or five seasons to learn his trade as an NFL QB. I didn't want him to be a Bronco - I knew it would create problems - but the Broncos are stuck with him and the whole scenario has to run its course. Whether Tebow succeeds or not is irrelevent to me - as a Bronocs fan I want the team to succeed - I don't care who is the QB or what offence they run.

Personally I like the shift back to running the ball, hitting hard between the tackles, fighting in the trenches and building a nasty, hard-hitting and dominant defence. I think if Fox sticks with that philosophy the Broncos can have success. If Tebow is part of that, then well-enough - but he is going to have to improve a lot as a passer if he is to get a chance.

LuckyLloyd · 06-01-2012 07:36PM

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

I never said he did - and to be honest - the stats are pretty much irrelevent.

The NFL is constantly going through a process of evolving and changing. The fact that there has been a shift from running the ball to passing the ball over the past 10 years does not mean that the trend will continue.

It isn't a 10 year trend though! It is a 50 year trend!

I apologise for being curt, but the bolded words in that exact order tend to make my blood boil!

kmart6 · 06-01-2012 09:46PM

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Matt Flynn is a Free Agent - money - not draft picks - will decide where he goes.

Not true! He's not a FA yet....and there is the possibility that the Packers will place the Franchise Tag on him...like the Patriots did with Cassel...that could result in draft picks, players or money....or a any combination of the 3!

Jolly Red Giant · 06-01-2012 11:56PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It isn't a 10 year trend though! It is a 50 year trend!

I beg to differ - the NFL has gone through a variety of different types of offence over the past 50 years and it has switched between passing and rushing offensive philosophies - sometimes even within a specific offensive scheme - e.g. the pass-heavy West Coast Offence of the 49'ers to the later run-heavy veriation of the WCO run by Shanahan's Broncos to the pass-friendly one of the Packers of today. The NFL has changed the rules to make the game more pass-friendly in recent years but I believe it is starting to reach the limit of its evolution.

Interesting side-point - three of the eight division winners (and not the best three by any means) were run-heavy teams - 49'ers, Texans and Broncos.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I apologise for being curt, but the bolded words in that exact order tend to make my blood boil!

There is only one stat that matters in the NFL - W/L - the rest of the stats can only show trends but can give the complete wrong impression. Case in point from this thread -

Kyle Orton had really good stats picked up between the 20's and in garbage time -
Last season he passed for 3,645 yds, scoring 20 TD's and 9 picks - the Broncos went 3-10 with Orton
This season Tebow has passed for 1,725 yds in 11.5 games passing for 12 TD's and 6 INTs - the Broncos went 7-4 with Tebow at QB.
Who had the better stats? - Orton by a mile -
who would Broncos fans pick to be the QB out of the two? - Tebow hands down -
why? - look at the W/L record.

kmart6 wrote: »

Not true! He's not a FA yet....and there is the possibility that the Packers will place the Franchise Tag on him...like the Patriots did with Cassel...that could result in draft picks, players or money....or a any combination of the 3!

I doubt the Packers franchise him - it would mean paying at least $14million for a back-up if they can't move him ($6million more than Rodgers).

The highest pick they can be sure of is an end of the 3rd round compensatory pick. If they slap the franchise tag on him they get 2 first rounders if they don't match any offer. Now it is technically against NFL rules to franchise a player in order to trade him - but it is done.

It would mean something more like a 1st and a 3rd with a multi-year deal already worked out before Flynn gets tagged. But it is a high-risk strategy. If Flynn refuses to talk with a trade partner the Packers are screwed. If either Flynn or a trade partner balks then Flynn is guaranteed to be the highest paid player on the team and walks the following year after costing them $14million against the salary cap.

I have yet to read anything that suggests the Packers intend to tag Flynn - most commentators suggest that the TE Finlay will get the tag as the Packers really cannot afford to lose him while they can actually do without Flynn.

LuckyLloyd · 08-01-2012 10:52PM

Brilliant through a quarter and a half.

Don't get it.

Denver Broncos Thread

Comments