Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bench Joe Flacco

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by FL BRONCO View Post
    I am not suggesting he should sit for years. But he should not be thrown in there behind a line like this one. That's not going to be good for him or us.
    I don't think the O line is as bad as everyone says. With more mobility its possible that we can start getting the ball downfield.
    Superbowl 50 Champions!

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by FL BRONCO View Post
      Only if we fix the line issues first. Otherwise, let Flacco take the beating this year and earn his money and deal with the line in the offseason and bring Lock in next year. We could do him more harm then good by putting him in behind this line right now.
      we could also start his development and let us know whether we have a future franchise or we again using a pick on a QB, lock sits on the bench we don't know

      this line is bad, but flacco is just as bad...with Lock you have the ability to call plays that move the qb out of the pocket, roll him out, Lock can run, he can scramble things that flacco just takes the sack on

      at 2-5 we aint going anywhere, we need to know what lock has
      sigpic
      when do native Americans become human and not mascots

      Comment


      • #93
        Regardless if the offensive line is bad or not, you have to start Lock as soon as possible, which would be the Cleveland game at home if I'm correct. Now, things change if Flacco comes out next week, lights it up against the Colts, and we win by scoring 49 points. As I don't see that as being remotely possible, then Lock plays against Cleveland.

        It sucks, and he's probably not ready. But that doesn't really matter at this point does it? I'm actually surprised by people arguing that point.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by FL BRONCO View Post
          I am not suggesting he should sit for years. But he should not be thrown in there behind a line like this one. That's not going to be good for him or us.
          I get that we're worried about Lock getting killed behind this line, but what is the timeline for waiting for it to be fixed? If we hide him on the bench for the rest of this season and focus on o-line in this offseason, then we have to march Flacco out next year, right? I mean, we won't know if the line has actually improved until we see them perform for a few games.

          Let's say the line does improve next year and the offense is playing better, but they're still a mediocre offense. In this case, the argument will be "Flacco gives us the best chance to win" which keeps us in this bridge QB purgatory.

          Let's say the o-line only marginally improves. Then we have the same problem we have now where we hide our QB on the bench because we're afraid of getting him killed.

          Let's say the o-line improves drastically and the offense improves as well. Now we're stuck playing a 35-36 year old mediocre QB, but we won't move on from him because we're winning, but he's on borrowed time because he's a rental mercenary who only has a few years left anyway.

          Though I agree the line sucks, we can't just hide our young QBs on the bench for fear of injury. I really think some mobility and young enthusiasm will go a long way to overcoming some of the line issues.

          We have a rare opportunity this year to evaluate our young QB so we can assess the QB position and make decisions in the offseason based on the QB position. If Lock comes in and shows some flashes and looks like he can be a viable starter, then maybe we can finally commit to our young franchise QB. If he comes out and looks like way too much of a project, then perhaps we're looking at a high 1st round QB.

          I'm just personally tired of the bridge QB/hide our young QB approach. It's time to admit that bringing in a vet QB isn't going to work long term. We have the opportunity to change it up. I really hope we do.
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #95
            It doesn't have to be Lock yet. We have 3 QBs that have never taken a regular season snap. I don't see why we can't give Allen or Rypien a shot while Lock sits. Lock is the guy the FO wanted to invest him. Why rush him into starting before he might be ready?

            If we need to see what Lock has, why can't we also see if Allen or Rypien are viable options? The season is almost gone as it is. Why not use the rest of the season to test all options?
            Eternal Broncos Optimist

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by RocketArm006 View Post
              I get that we're worried about Lock getting killed behind this line, but what is the timeline for waiting for it to be fixed? If we hide him on the bench for the rest of this season and focus on o-line in this offseason, then we have to march Flacco out next year, right? I mean, we won't know if the line has actually improved until we see them perform for a few games.

              Let's say the line does improve next year and the offense is playing better, but they're still a mediocre offense. In this case, the argument will be "Flacco gives us the best chance to win" which keeps us in this bridge QB purgatory.

              Let's say the o-line only marginally improves. Then we have the same problem we have now where we hide our QB on the bench because we're afraid of getting him killed.

              Let's say the o-line improves drastically and the offense improves as well. Now we're stuck playing a 35-36 year old mediocre QB, but we won't move on from him because we're winning, but he's on borrowed time because he's a rental mercenary who only has a few years left anyway.

              Though I agree the line sucks, we can't just hide our young QBs on the bench for fear of injury. I really think some mobility and young enthusiasm will go a long way to overcoming some of the line issues.

              We have a rare opportunity this year to evaluate our young QB so we can assess the QB position and make decisions in the offseason based on the QB position. If Lock comes in and shows some flashes and looks like he can be a viable starter, then maybe we can finally commit to our young franchise QB. If he comes out and looks like way too much of a project, then perhaps we're looking at a high 1st round QB.

              I'm just personally tired of the bridge QB/hide our young QB approach. It's time to admit that bringing in a vet QB isn't going to work long term. We have the opportunity to change it up. I really hope we do.
              If you wait until the O-line is improved to start Lock, then you may as well just cut your losses with that pick and move on in the 2020 draft.

              It really does suck, and it's not the ideal situation we're in. But IMO starting Lock is the only thing that can salvage this season - not by wins and losses, mind you. But by at least finally getting a solid evaluation of a young quarterback.
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
                It doesn't have to be Lock yet. We have 3 QBs that have never taken a regular season snap. I don't see why we can't give Allen or Rypien a shot while Lock sits. Lock is the guy the FO wanted to invest him. Why rush him into starting before he might be ready?

                If we need to see what Lock has, why can't we also see if Allen or Rypien are viable options? The season is almost gone as it is. Why not use the rest of the season to test all options?
                Because the investment is in Lock by the value of the pick in which he was selected. You can't have that pick wasted.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post
                  Regardless if the offensive line is bad or not, you have to start Lock as soon as possible, which would be the Cleveland game at home if I'm correct. Now, things change if Flacco comes out next week, lights it up against the Colts, and we win by scoring 49 points. As I don't see that as being remotely possible, then Lock plays against Cleveland.

                  It sucks, and he's probably not ready. But that doesn't really matter at this point does it? I'm actually surprised by people arguing that point.
                  I agree with you completely, and you are correct about Him being available to play against the browns. Lock has to start, unless Flacco lights it up, which is not likely, we need as big of a sample of Lock as we can get.

                  This will help us identify if he is the future prospect or if we draft one in R1.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
                    It doesn't have to be Lock yet. We have 3 QBs that have never taken a regular season snap. I don't see why we can't give Allen or Rypien a shot while Lock sits. Lock is the guy the FO wanted to invest him. Why rush him into starting before he might be ready?

                    If we need to see what Lock has, why can't we also see if Allen or Rypien are viable options? The season is almost gone as it is. Why not use the rest of the season to test all options?
                    Because that implies that there is no plan at all for that position IMHO. You play Lock because it signals you are moving forward with a plan to be successful for the future. Sticking with Flacco signals you are waving the white flag and waiting for next year. Continuing to start Flacco also signals there will most likely be a 'competition' next summer for the starting spot. And we all know how successful those have been in the past.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post
                      Because the investment is in Lock by the value of the pick in which he was selected. You can't have that pick wasted.
                      I realize that. That's why specifically mentioned that Lock is the guy we invested most in. Which is why I'd start Allen or Rypien. The investment isn't as high in them so if they go out and don't play well, it's no big loss. But if we throw Lock out there and he struggles, we probably just hindered his development when he was the guy that we put our future in.

                      Let Lock sit and learn while we see if Allen or Rypien are guys worth keeping around. If not let Lock get his feet wet starting the last 2-3 games. We need to start making moves for the future. If we aren't gonna play Allen or Rypien, they don't need to be taking up roster spots.
                      Eternal Broncos Optimist

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post
                        If you wait until the O-line is improved to start Lock, then you may as well just cut your losses with that pick and move on in the 2020 draft.

                        It really does suck, and it's not the ideal situation we're in. But IMO starting Lock is the only thing that can salvage this season - not by wins and losses, mind you. But by at least finally getting a solid evaluation of a young quarterback.
                        Totally agree. I'm firmly in the "It's time to commit to a young franchise QB" camp. Let's evaluate the kid as much as possible so we can either commit to Lock or draft a different QB #1 and commit to him. It's simply time to let go of the bridge QB philosophy and build around a QB who will be here for 10+ years.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
                          I realize that. That's why specifically mentioned that Lock is the guy we invested most in. Which is why I'd start Allen or Rypien. The investment isn't as high in them so if they go out and don't play well, it's no big loss. But if we throw Lock out there and he struggles, we probably just hindered his development when he was the guy that we put our future in.

                          Let Lock sit and learn while we see if Allen or Rypien are guys worth keeping around. If not let Lock get his feet wet starting the last 2-3 games. We need to start making moves for the future. If we aren't gonna play Allen or Rypien, they don't need to be taking up roster spots.
                          Different strokes for different folks. Me personally, I would rather see how he does with live bullets, and then work on what needs improving over the offseason. That would advance his development quicker IMHO.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
                            I realize that. That's why specifically mentioned that Lock is the guy we invested most in. Which is why I'd start Allen or Rypien. The investment isn't as high in them so if they go out and don't play well, it's no big loss. But if we throw Lock out there and he struggles, we probably just hindered his development when he was the guy that we put our future in.

                            Let Lock sit and learn while we see if Allen or Rypien are guys worth keeping around. If not let Lock get his feet wet starting the last 2-3 games. We need to start making moves for the future. If we aren't gonna play Allen or Rypien, they don't need to be taking up roster spots.
                            Because game-time reps are the only thing that will get Lock experience and knowledge. It's a complete waste of time starting Allen or Rypien. At that point you may as well leave Flacco out there.
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post
                              Because that implies that there is no plan at all for that position IMHO. You play Lock because it signals you are moving forward with a plan to be successful for the future. Sticking with Flacco signals you are waving the white flag and waiting for next year. Continuing to start Flacco also signals there will most likely be a 'competition' next summer for the starting spot. And we all know how successful those have been in the past.
                              Flacco can't start anymore. Our young offensive players can't develop with a QB that takes more sacks than the TDs he throws. We need to start the other QBs we have, I'm just wondering if it has to be Lock.

                              We have other guys that we can look at. We have other arms we can thrown out there that are much lower risk, much higher reward. If Allen or Rypien can go out there and ball, that's much better for the Broncos moving forward than sticking with Flacco.
                              Eternal Broncos Optimist

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
                                Flacco can't start anymore. Our young offensive players can't develop with a QB that takes more sacks than the TDs he throws. We need to start the other QBs we have, I'm just wondering if it has to be Lock.

                                We have other guys that we can look at. We have other arms we can thrown out there that are much lower risk, much higher reward. If Allen or Rypien can go out there and ball, that's much better for the Broncos moving forward than sticking with Flacco.
                                I don't see the logic in sending two quarterbacks out there in Allen or Rypien that are completely destined to fail or not really matter. Lock is the future because of the investment you put into him. He may fail too, but at least you'll have an idea after 8 games where we might be. You won't get anything with Allen or Rypien except wasted reps for Lock.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X