Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-Camp State of the Broncos

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by neckbeard View Post
    Under Lovie Smith, the Bears are 45-35 (.563) in the regular season. Counting postseason games, it's 47-37 (.559).

    The Bears team record with KO under center is 21-12 (.636). Take away the games Kyle played in (all starts) and the Bears record becomes 24-23 regular season (.521) or 26-25 w/postseason (.510).

    If Kyle was just along for the ride, why do they do so much better with him? It's pretty consistent too, 10-5 (.667) in 2005, 2-1 (.667) in 2007, and 9-6 (.600) last season.

    In 2005, with Grossman the Bears lost a playoff game badly to a Panthers team that Orton had led the Bears to an easy win over just a month prior. In 2007, after Grossman and Griese had destroyed the Bears season with a 5-8 start, Orton posted the only back-to-back wins of the season - going 2-1 playing against 2 teams fighting to get into the playoffs (Vikes & Saints) and the Bears fiercest rival (Packers) with a Bears team that had nothing left to play for.

    The difference with and without KO is just too big and too consistent to ignore...
    Rex Grossman was 23-12 as the Bears starting Quarterback. He led them to the playoffs, won at least 1 playoff game, and has made a Super Bowl appearance. I guess he's a great QB also because of his winning record


    sigpic


    FA Targets: DT Jason Jones, DT Pat Simms, S Reggie Smith, LB Dan Connor



    :cool:

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by MindField View Post
      After witnessing what has been the most tumultuous offseason in Denver Broncos history, the dust has now settled, and the shape of the team is taking hold. Training Camp is now about a month away, and the NFL's dead season is nearing the end.

      Here's my take on the state of the team, and how I see the Broncos as they head into the 2009 season.

      Coaching:

      I am on record around here as being strongly anti-Shanahan, and six months later, I remain sternly unapologetic. His philosophies became stale, and he neglected two thirds of the team. He was more concerned with meaningless offensive rankings, and constantly rationalized and made excuses for his teams shortcomings. Ten years of underachievement on the field, lackluster performances and uninspired play were enough.

      Bottom line: Good riddance.

      I, like any Broncos fan, will fondly remember the teams of the late 90's, and the Super Bowl Championships that gave this team legitimacy as an elite team in the annals of NFL history, and Mike Shanahan deserves 100% credit for that.

      But if he deserves the credit when things went well, he also deserves the blame when it went off track, and the monumental failure of the Broncos last season in dropping three straight to cost them a playoff berth meant Shanahan's time was up.

      Enter Josh McDaniels.

      The Broncos lead a fairly detailed, exhaustive coaching search to replace the fired Mike Shanahan.

      In addition to McDaniels, the Broncos interviewed a variety of candidates from a variety of backgrounds, and clearly in the interview process, McDaniels blew his competition away.

      It does not take long to understand this guy has a plan and a vision, and he has a single-minded focus. I loved the fact that when McD was hired, he did not just speak about simply improving the Broncos defense, he made it clear the entire Broncos organization was flawed, and improvement was needed across the board. He quickly called into question the myth that the Broncos offense 'was already there' as a championship calibur unit by illustrating it's shortcomings in several key components.

      In my opinion, McDaniels selection of his coaching staff was brilliant, and I loved what he was able to accomplish in free agency and the draft, especially in addressing the glaring need of improving special teams by bringing in players who can perform well in that capacity.

      Of course, the big test for McDaniels is how well he can succeed in the aftermath of his showdown and subsequent trade of Jay Cutler, but in examining several areas of the team, it is clear to me the Broncos will be improved in several key areas.

      Personally, I am a believer in Josh McDaniels, and I think he is going to transform the Broncos into a tougher, more well-rounded team. The Broncos were dead in the water under Shanahan, and I think Pat Bowlen realized that as well, and decided it was time for radical change at Dove Valley...and for better or worse, things will be dramatically different in Denver.

      QB's

      Jay Cutler is a supremely talented QB physically. I was in support of the Broncos trading up to draft him, and I supported him over his first two seasons with the Broncos, even through his growing pains, and the nagging questions that surrounded him as a leader, and in his role as the most important athlete in the city of Denver, Colorado.

      I tolerated and made excuses for his on-field tantrums in the face of adversity, and his off field, post-game press conferences where his petualnt behavior rivaled that of my teenage son.

      I was done with Jay Cutler after Mike Shanahan was fired, and his reluctance to embrace change and accept McDaniels as the new Head Coach. I resented his indifference and his failure to promptly return McDaniels phone calls, and I was further irritated at his bloated sense of entitlement when he basically insisted on the retention of the offensive system he had operated under Jeremy Bates, and his reaction when McDaniels chose to go in a different direction.

      So while I realize the physical skills Jay Cutler possessed as a QB, I have just as many concerns about his mental makeup and his emotional maturity, which are also key components all great QB's must have.

      I also believe that McDaniels soured on Jay Cutler at some point in his evaluation process, which is why the Matt Cassel trade possibility was considered.

      I am not sure what I think of the trade in terms of what the Broncos got back in the deal.

      I think there is a chance the Broncos could have received more in compensation for Cutler than they got if they had held out a little longer, and turned down a trade or two, but what's done is done, and it is clear McDaniels felt the Bears were the best trading partner, largely because they could get a quality veteran QB in return.

      Enter Kyle Orton.

      In announcing the details of the trade, McDaniels stated that he felt Kyle Orton was an 'under-rated' NFL QB that had the skills to be successful in his system. This statement is going to go a long way in determining the legitimacy of McD's evaluations of QB's, and how much he can be trusted.

      The fact is, Kyle Orton has been able to lead teams to winning records in the NFL, as his 21-12 record as a starter indicates. I am also interested to see if Orton's background in the spread at Purdue will help him in his execution of McD's 'Amoeba' offense, as it has for Drew Brees in New Orleans.

      Chris Simms was just starting to scratch the surface of becoming a legit NFL starting QB in Tampa when he suffered that devastating ruptured spleen, and two years out of the league has him on the comeback trail, but I for one am not counting him out yet. Simms has the size, strength and intelligence to become a very good NFL QB if given the chance.

      I am also looking forward to what Tom Brandstater develops into over the next coule of years under McD's watchful eye. Brandstater has all the physical tools you look for, so he is this giant piece of clay McDaniels will be looking to mold. With time on his hands, and the luxury to learn without pressure, Brandstater could suprise down the road and develop in a similar manner that Aaron Rogers has in Green Bay...or like Matt Cassel did in New England.

      Ding, dong, the witch is dead, and Jay Cutler has been traded.

      Time to move on.
      I think most of this is reasonable and I agree with a lot of it. I don't agree with saying Orton is the reason why the Bears won. His stats were horrible in his first 15 games in 2005, yet the team went 10-5. According to the 10-5, you could say Orton is a winner, but his stats were so bad that there is no way that he was the reason why they won those 10 games.

      I'm not against Orton. I hope he flourishes in McD's system and does well for us, but I think it's ridiculous when a QB gets credit for wins and losses when his stats show otherwise. I can see if his performance week in and week out is clearly the reason why the team won. Orton never had that in CHI, yet the team had a good win/loss record. I think people just want to build Orton up, which is understandable since he will most likely be our starter in the coming season, and since his stats don't exactly build any confidence they are turning to team win/loss as the confidence booster.
      2 of the top 3 NFL QBs of all time have been Broncos

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Chiefs>You
        I hate how you guys keep pointing out Ortons record. There are 21 other starts on that team. Orton did not lead that team to that record, he just hopped on for the ride. In many of the wins, the defense allowed less than 20 points. Orton did nothing but manage the games, and he was barely successful at doing that. Hell, by the way you guys talk, your dream qb would probably be Trent Dilfer.
        Originally posted by neckbeard
        Under Lovie Smith, the Bears are 45-35 (.563) in the regular season. Counting postseason games, it's 47-37 (.559).

        The Bears team record with KO under center is 21-12 (.636). Take away the games Kyle played in (all starts) and the Bears record becomes 24-23 regular season (.521) or 26-25 w/postseason (.510).

        If Kyle was just along for the ride, why do they do so much better with him? It's pretty consistent too, 10-5 (.667) in 2005, 2-1 (.667) in 2007, and 9-6 (.600) last season.

        In 2005, with Grossman the Bears lost a playoff game badly to a Panthers team that Orton had led the Bears to an easy win over just a month prior. In 2007, after Grossman and Griese had destroyed the Bears season with a 5-8 start, Orton posted the only back-to-back wins of the season - going 2-1 playing against 2 teams fighting to get into the playoffs (Vikes & Saints) and the Bears fiercest rival (Packers) with a Bears team that had nothing left to play for.

        The difference with and without KO is just too big and too consistent to ignore...
        Originally posted by getlynched47 View Post
        Rex Grossman was 23-12 as the Bears starting Quarterback. He led them to the playoffs, won at least 1 playoff game, and has made a Super Bowl appearance. I guess he's a great QB also because of his winning record
        According to ProFootballReference.com, Rex was 19-12 (.612) as a starter in the regular season, counting post-season he was 21-14 (.600).

        But his rookie year was with former Bears coach Jauron (now the Bills HC). Under Lovie Smith, Rex was 17-11 (.607) in the regular season, 19-13 (.594)counting the playoffs.

        Lovie's Bears were 45-35 (.563) in the regular season, 47-37 (.559) with the playoffs. Take Rex's games out of there and the team record becomes 28-24 (.538) for the regular season, with the playoffs it becomes 30-36 (.535).

        However, if you look at Rex's win-loss record for each season, you should notice something right away...
        • 2003 - 2-1 (.667)
        • 2004 - 1-2 (.333)
        • 2005 - 1-0 (1.000) regular season, 1-1 (.500) with playoffs
        • 2006 - 13-3 (.813) regular season, 15-4(.790) with playoffs
        • 2007 - 2-5 (.286)
        • 2008 - 0-1 (.000)

        His win-loss percentages are all over the place. If Rex was at all responsible for the wins, you would see some sort consistency to his record. There isn't any. Rex was the QB who was along for the ride, not Kyle...

        :orton:
        Don't hate on the 8!
        "That's a crap question."
        - Kyle Orton

        Comment


        • #49
          Are we ready ...

          ... for part two yet?
          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by rainmaker View Post
            I pray that Josh McDaniels can succeed. But everyone must realize that the odds are against him. How many new head coaches make it to the superbowl? How many head coaches period make it? I think he has a good chance but lets be honest, it's a HUGE challenge that most coaches are not up to.

            Shanahan spoiled Bronco fans and I feel like we think we can wave a magic wand and win another superbowl. It's a long hard road people. How many coaches has Denver had and how many of them won SB's?

            I am not saying McDaniels can't do it, I am just saying it will be hard. If we as a fanbase turn on our only SB winning coach when his worst seasons are 7-9, how long will it be before we are calling for McDaniels head if he doesn't field a playoff team by year two? Some idiot fans are already at the guillotine and McD hasn't even coached a game yet.

            I guess what I am saying is we were spoiled, then we bit the hand that fed us in letting Shanny go, and this attitude is trouble for the new coach. I hope we give McDaniels at least three years to field a playoff team before we give him the fan axe.
            i am one of the idiots that wants mcdaniels gone, i do agree with what you said and you said it with class. i cannot talk about mikes firing without getting hot, i cannot put into nice words the way i feel about the broncos right now. i dont agree with 3 yrs though, i think we can already see mcdaniels is not head coach material, with his handeling of cutler to free agent sighnings, and the draft. we went from contender to completely needing to reload, the fact that he thinks the offence needed to be fixed is crazy and his defensive moves are baffeling to say the least.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Game View Post
              That is not smack, just facts. If you want smack here you go from one bronco fan to a supposed nother "you are a dumb ass".
              Game I have already pointed out in another thread that when it comes to posting you fall into the "troll" category and this post is no exception.

              If you need me to reiterate my points about your posting habits again I will feel free to do so with examples, again, but I'm sure anyone can click on your user name and reread all of your posts for clarification. The real question is why would anyone want to reread any of the negative, insulting crap you keep posting?
              Is it solipsistic in here, or is it just me?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Chiefs > You View Post
                In 2005, the Bears had the #1 defense. So Orton didnt really have the team on his back.

                He throws picks just about as often as he throws TDs at a 3.3/3.0 TD to INT ratio. The man is a 55% passer. Fifty-Five! Can you defend that. He carried no team on his back. He won on the back of the Chicago Bears defense. Rex Grossman's record is 19-12. I suppose he's a great qb too. He even led his team to the Superbowl! He's way better than Orton!!

                And dont use the bears post season records in your arguments. Orton hasn't thrown EVEN ONE pass in the post season.
                That's funny, neither has Matt Cassel. I respect some Chiefs fans opinion. That being said I wonder if your eyes are brown. Don't get me started on what the Chiefs have done in recent history. It's amazing that you can even talk trash about our position this off season, when you also traded away your best player to the falcons, and have Larry Johnson pulling a Brandon Marshall. We both got our staff from New England, and we are both starting one hit wonder QB's from other teams. Talk about calling the kettle black. I think you had better go reevaluate your teams position before coming over here making up this garbage.
                Is it solipsistic in here, or is it just me?

                Comment


                • #53
                  OK, sorry for the delay...the entire team profile and review have been completed in the first and second posts.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I agree with much of it, but I don't think Scheff is gone after the year.

                    I think he's going to thrive, and be used extensively. He's a matchup nightmare, and while not a devastating blocker he has improved in that area.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by PowderAddict View Post
                      I agree with much of it, but I don't think Scheff is gone after the year.

                      I think he's going to thrive, and be used extensively. He's a matchup nightmare, and while not a devastating blocker he has improved in that area.
                      I agree. I think that he will be split out a lot more, especially if Marshall leaves the team.
                      sigpic
                      Thank you to my grandfather jetrazor for being a veteran of the armed forces!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Music to some people's ears.

                        Originally posted by #1atwaterfan View Post
                        i think we can already see mcdaniels is not head coach material, with his handeling of cutler to free agent sighnings, and the draft.
                        I understand that you don't like the way he has Handeled things, but we are Baching him up.
                        "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by BroncsSB#3 View Post
                          I think most of this is reasonable and I agree with a lot of it. I don't agree with saying Orton is the reason why the Bears won. His stats were horrible in his first 15 games in 2005, yet the team went 10-5. According to the 10-5, you could say Orton is a winner, but his stats were so bad that there is no way that he was the reason why they won those 10 games.

                          I'm not against Orton. I hope he flourishes in McD's system and does well for us, but I think it's ridiculous when a QB gets credit for wins and losses when his stats show otherwise. I can see if his performance week in and week out is clearly the reason why the team won. Orton never had that in CHI, yet the team had a good win/loss record. I think people just want to build Orton up, which is understandable since he will most likely be our starter in the coming season, and since his stats don't exactly build any confidence they are turning to team win/loss as the confidence booster.
                          Orton may or may not succeed, but that is not to say that he is the only option at QB for the future of the Denver Broncos.

                          He could play out his contract this year and be gone, who knows?

                          I still say the primary reason for including him in the trade was to give the Broncos another veteran QB option. In other words, he was a short-term answer.

                          What he does with this opportunity remains to be seen.

                          I have an open mind, and I am willing to judge him on his own merit, and if he is not getting the job done, I will be calling for Chtris Simms...and if he fails, I will be calling for the Broncos to draft another QB for 2010.

                          In any case, Cutler was not going to work out, so that chapter had to end, and personally, I don't think we lost as much as some assume.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by MindField View Post
                            Orton may or may not succeed, but that is not to say that he is the only option at QB for the future of the Denver Broncos.

                            He could play out his contract this year and be gone, who knows?

                            I still say the primary reason for including him in the trade was to give the Broncos another veteran QB option. In other words, he was a short-term answer.

                            What he does with this opportunity remains to be seen.

                            I have an open mind, and I am willing to judge him on his own merit, and if he is not getting the job done, I will be calling for Chtris Simms...and if he fails, I will be calling for the Broncos to draft another QB for 2010.

                            In any case, Cutler was not going to work out, so that chapter had to end, and personally, I don't think we lost as much as some assume.
                            Maybe McD wants to see whether he can groom Brandstater for the future?

                            The kid does have some tools . . .

                            -----

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by topscribe View Post
                              Maybe McD wants to see whether he can groom Brandstater for the future?

                              The kid does have some tools . . .

                              -----
                              Wouldn't that be a hoot?

                              It seems that that scenario is coming up more and more often; not only on the board, but also in casual 'Broncos talk' with friends, family and other fans.

                              No one knows, of course, but it does provide for some interesting feelings. He might even be forced in to action a la Brady and then just never looks back.

                              Synchronicities... oh my!
                              Winter is Coming!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Mount-n-Groan View Post
                                Wouldn't that be a hoot?

                                It seems that that scenario is coming up more and more often; not only on the board, but also in casual 'Broncos talk' with friends, family and other fans.

                                No one knows, of course, but it does provide for some interesting feelings. He might even be forced in to action a la Brady and then just never looks back.

                                Synchronicities... oh my!
                                Stranger things have happened, and wouldn't Josh have the last laugh in that case!

                                Oh the backstroking we would see around here!!

                                'Oh, I didn't mean it, I really loved McD from the start!'

                                Hahahahahaha...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X