Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Importance of a Backup QB This Year

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

  • johnlimburg
    replied
    Originally posted by Roddoliver View Post
    Caleb Hanie in the 2012 preseason: 56.4% 246 Yards 6.3 YPA 1 TD 1 INT 73.2 QB Rating.

    If those were Tebow's numbers, it still would have been Tebow's worst performance in preseason...

    Tebow in the 2011 preseason: 65.5% 310 Yards 10.0 YPA 1 TD 0 INT 108.3 QB Rating.

    Tebow in the 2010 preseason: 64.1% 344 Yards 8.8 YPA 2 TD 2 INT 88.0 QB Rating.
    And that 2011 pre season was a pretty bad one for Tebow. Yet he was able to produce a plus 100 quarterback rating. WHat does that tell you about the stats. They are so deceptive and rarely tell the whole story. I am not into the stats and was never aware of them. What I am saying is that with some of the throws Caleb Haine was able to make throughout the pre season. People would be raving about how well he played. How he was able to move the ball okay with the first unit offense. How he was able to hit some timing routes. How he operated from under center and all sorts of non sense people used to spout when Tebow was here. Hell when Tebow completed a slant route in the first pre season game people were like wow. He is improving.

    PS: IN PEYTON MANNINGS 2012 PRE SEASON HE HAD A WORST QB RATING.

    Originally posted by kevlar441
    And "Patience Always Wins"?

    I'm curious why you always seem so angry to me lately. I love your well thought out posts.
    I am just sick of the non sense people go on with. And that Patience Always Wins stems from more stupidity by a large part of this forum. When free agency started everyone was complaining saying Bowlen is cheap and no one wants to come here and Peyton Manning is screwing us. This was within 24 hours of free agency opening. Then we ended up having a pretty good free agent class. With the draft everyone was crying every step of the way, and we ended up having a pretty good draft and now most agree. That is why. But I will ry to chill
    Last edited by johnlimburg; 09-07-2012, 07:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • -Rod-
    replied
    Originally posted by johnlimburg
    The fact is as I said from the start. If it was Tebow who played like Haine in the pre season everyone would be saying look at the potential and improvment.
    Caleb Hanie in the 2012 preseason: 56.4% 246 Yards 6.3 YPA 1 TD 1 INT 73.2 QB Rating.

    If those were Tebow's numbers, it still would have been Tebow's worst performance in preseason...

    Tebow in the 2011 preseason: 65.5% 310 Yards 10.0 YPA 1 TD 0 INT 108.3 QB Rating.

    Tebow in the 2010 preseason: 64.1% 344 Yards 8.8 YPA 2 TD 2 INT 88.0 QB Rating.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoManiac_69
    replied
    Without reading this entire thread, the backup position is a major concern of mine.

    To even suggest losses will only give us better draft picks is unacceptable thinking.

    This is a win now league and we all know it. That's why we spent the mega millions on Peyton in the first place but I personally was upset that we let Tebow go. We had a backup already in house with potential of becoming the man once Peyton retires. We had a man that brought spark and anticipation when he hit the field. Just like our old friend Gary Kubiak.

    Now, I don't want to start yet another whole debate about Tim and what direction this team took, but what is left on the roster at this point is a concern to me if Manning goes down because I want to win. Not play for draft picks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peapod
    replied
    Based upon the few times I've seen Hanie in action, I'd throw my support towards those who feel he is an adequate backup QB to Manning. I first saw Hanie when he QB-ed CSU against CU and thought he was terrific. (Then again, what QB isn't against CU?). I only saw him play twice while he was at Chicago and, although not terrific, he was competent, especially given that he had an O-line that leaked like a piece of cheescloth. That's the one thing I noticed when he played in the pre-season games this year. He had a tendancy to get happy feet and leave the pocket much too early. I suspect that habit developed because of his experience in Chicago. Otherwise, he looked to me like he read defenses reasonably well, has a good arm, is quick on his feet and best of all, he's a competitor. I'm hoping that our O-line will provide better protection than he's been accustomed to. If so, I think he'll be just fine as a backup and don't see any reason for the Broncs to find a reject from another team. As for Brock...hey, he's a rookie with potential. Give him a chance before giving him the ax.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan Dan
    replied
    Originally posted by DoomTrooper View Post
    Truth be told, Tom Brady should have five rings right now, but Eli "Forrest Gum" Manning certainly had a lot of luck those two superbowls.

    Either way, the mere fact that we are paying Manning more than Tom Brady shows what kind of expectations our FO has of him, not to mention all the Broncomaniacs that believe we have our new John Elway.

    It will ABSOLUTELY be a failure if we pay Manning all this money, more than anybody else save Drew Brees, and not fully expect at least one ring.

    Elway traded away a promising young QB who has had success in the playoffs, for the best regular season QB of all time (not post season, regular season) and has signed this 36 year old to what, a five year long contract? I am honestly not even convinced he will play this whole sixteen game season before he's forced into retirement, then what? Big Bird to the rescue?

    We wasted a second round pick on this guy, and he is absolutely horrible and inexperienced. If the future of this franchise is Brock Osweiler, then it looks like another decade of mediocrity is in store for us (unless the next Andrew Luck or Matt Barkley falls to us).

    I wish John Elway learned more about scouting from Jack Elway. Tangibles don't make champions.

    EDIT: Yes, I was upset when we traded away Tebow, but it was only because I thought he could learn a lot from Manning (for however long he played for us). I actually thought it was a good move to bring Manning in, and I expect a superbowl win from him. What I'm really mad about is the Osweiler pick.

    Honestly, if Manning went down this year (or next year, or two, three years from now) who would win more games for us? Tebow or Big Bird?

    I personally believe Tebow would have.
    I think in the long haul I would pick Oz, I would need to see him play more. I have watched Tim play more, thats why I pick Brock.

    Leave a comment:


  • broncolee
    replied
    I agree with those that say Garrard would be a better back up choice than what the Broncos have now. Hopefully they will sign him after week 1.

    That being said, there is still too much concern over the back up position. Manning was the most the durable quarterback in the league until last season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Raider_Nation
    replied
    Originally posted by ERoyal248 View Post
    That being said, it's a QB league, and unless Cassel steps up significantly, they are in trouble.
    Absolutely right. He's got some pretty stiff competition in the form of Manning, Rivers, and Palmer.

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    A distraction on a football team is usually a negative team member who gets into off the field trouble or a good team mate who is having some kind of personal crisis.

    Tebow presents a rare type of distraction seemingly unprecedented.

    Coaches want their team to focus; the fewer the distractions, the greater the focus will be.

    Leave a comment:


  • ERoyal248
    replied
    Originally posted by Raider_Nation View Post
    That's an accurate list Sam. I can't believe all the respect I'm reading for the Chiefs. I really don't think they're going to do that well. A lot of writers love to cite the fact they had injuries last year, but I think that's a silly argument considering how few actual key players they lost.

    Look at my team for example; we lost our owner, we lost our starting QB, we lost our star RB, we lost up to three of our starting WRs at one time, (DHB, Moore, Ford) and we lost our best pass rusher. But you don't hear anyone saying "Hey I think the Raiders will be good because they were decimated by injuries last year."

    And in being a Raider fan, I'll be the first to tell you Stanford Routt will single-handedly lose at least one game for the Chiefs via PIs or TDs given up. Being in a division with Manning, Rivers, and Palmer, that guy is going to get slaughtered.
    Charles, Berry, Moeaki, and added Winston, Hillis, Routt (big downgrade from Carr), Boss among others. That being said, it's a QB league, and unless Cassel steps up significantly, they are in trouble.

    Leave a comment:


  • ERoyal248
    replied
    Originally posted by DoomTrooper View Post
    Truth be told, Tom Brady should have five rings right now, but Eli "Forrest Gum" Manning certainly had a lot of luck those two superbowls.

    Either way, the mere fact that we are paying Manning more than Tom Brady shows what kind of expectations our FO has of him, not to mention all the Broncomaniacs that believe we have our new John Elway.

    It will ABSOLUTELY be a failure if we pay Manning all this money, more than anybody else save Drew Brees, and not fully expect at least one ring.

    Elway traded away a promising young QB who has had success in the playoffs, for the best regular season QB of all time (not post season, regular season) and has signed this 36 year old to what, a five year long contract? I am honestly not even convinced he will play this whole sixteen game season before he's forced into retirement, then what? Big Bird to the rescue?

    We wasted a second round pick on this guy, and he is absolutely horrible and inexperienced. If the future of this franchise is Brock Osweiler, then it looks like another decade of mediocrity is in store for us (unless the next Andrew Luck or Matt Barkley falls to us).

    I wish John Elway learned more about scouting from Jack Elway. Tangibles don't make champions.

    EDIT: Yes, I was upset when we traded away Tebow, but it was only because I thought he could learn a lot from Manning (for however long he played for us). I actually thought it was a good move to bring Manning in, and I expect a superbowl win from him. What I'm really mad about is the Osweiler pick.

    Honestly, if Manning went down this year (or next year, or two, three years from now) who would win more games for us? Tebow or Big Bird?

    I personally believe Tebow would have.
    Fair point with Brady.

    Not, it will not be an absolute failure.

    He had to trade Tebow, no way you can keep him and his crazy fans in Denver with Manning. Too much of a circus, see what's happening in NY. And while i liked Tebow, last year was an abberation and would of been an absolute disaster if they started him this year. We'd be in the running for Barkley.

    It's WAY too early to tell if we wasted that pick or not, Brock was a project going in. I'll take Elway's word over the armchair GM's.

    And Tebow was a good story, but he'll be lucky to be in the NFL as a QB 2-3 years from now. It's his 3rd year, and he still hasn't gotten any better if better at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Raider_Nation
    replied
    Originally posted by Roddoliver View Post
    Garrard started 14 games in 2010, completing 64.5% of his passes with a 90.8 QB rating. He's clearly a much better QB than Hanie, Garrard can play even better than Orton. The issue is how much time Garrard would need to learn the Broncos' system, and he is 34 years old with health problems. Hanie has been studying this system since the end of March. Hard Knocks showed that Garrard was having some problems with the Dolphins' playbook. Garrard has respectable stats, he would be a very good backup if healthy, it's a matter of money and time to learn the system.
    He would certainly be a better choice for you guys, IMO. His problem is he can't seem to stay healthy these days. It would be awful for Manning to go down, and then Garrard comes in, gives you guys a solid game or two, and goes down himself so the 3rd guy can lose out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Raider_Nation
    replied
    Originally posted by BluenOrnge4Life View Post
    Uhh Jamal charles and eric berry are big key players. Still, they don't have the QB to hang with the rest of the division IMO. 1. Manning 2. Rivers 3. Palmer 4. Cassell
    Notice I didn't say any, I said "few." In comparison to the Raiders, the comparison I used, they have very few key losses. The reason I said that is because if you didn't watch last season and went solely by what the sports media says, you'd think they lost every single playmaker on the team.

    But of course the media gives the Chiefs a pass for being awful, while paying zero attention to a team going through catastrophic losses and still managing an 8-8 record. With how bad the Raiders have been in recent years, and with all of our losses last year, we really shouldn't have won more than 5 games.

    Leave a comment:


  • -Rod-
    replied
    Garrard x Hanie

    Garrard started 14 games in 2010, completing 64.5% of his passes with a 90.8 QB rating. He's clearly a much better QB than Hanie, Garrard can play even better than Orton. The issue is how much time Garrard would need to learn the Broncos' system, and he is 34 years old with health problems. Hanie has been studying this system since the end of March. Hard Knocks showed that Garrard was having some problems with the Dolphins' playbook. Garrard has respectable stats, he would be a very good backup if healthy, it's a matter of money and time to learn the system.

    Leave a comment:


  • BluenOrnge4Life
    replied
    Originally posted by Raider_Nation View Post
    That's an accurate list Sam. I can't believe all the respect I'm reading for the Chiefs. I really don't think they're going to do that well. A lot of writers love to cite the fact they had injuries last year, but I think that's a silly argument considering how few actual key players they lost.

    Look at my team for example; we lost our owner, we lost our starting QB, we lost our star RB, we lost up to three of our starting WRs at one time, (DHB, Moore, Ford) and we lost our best pass rusher. But you don't hear anyone saying "Hey I think the Raiders will be good because they were decimated by injuries last year."

    And in being a Raider fan, I'll be the first to tell you Stanford Routt will single-handedly lose at least one game for the Chiefs via PIs or TDs given up. Being in a division with Manning, Rivers, and Palmer, that guy is going to get slaughtered.
    Uhh Jamal charles and eric berry are big key players. Still, they don't have the QB to hang with the rest of the division IMO. 1. Manning 2. Rivers 3. Palmer 4. Cassell

    Leave a comment:


  • BluenOrnge4Life
    replied
    David Garrard. I'd rather get a guy who's established himself as a proven starter in this league, to backup Manning, than some guy who was captain of the titanic last year.

    Backup Qbs DO matter. While I don't expect Manning to have any setbacks with his neck, it would be nice to have a quality backup to right the ship if Manning had to miss a game or two with a small injury. Hanie is not that guy.. he's proven that. (See 2011 season in Chicago)

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X