Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unbelievable

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by topscribe
    Hope you're kidding. TDK used "kneejerk" as an adjective, not a noun . . .

    -----
    just trying to lighten the mood a smidgen here people....


    [SIZE=1][B]Adopted Bronco:Kenard Lang

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Broncos04Champs
      A few points...
      Like I was saying - the Elway/Plummer argument is in my opinion, a seperate argument from the "how is Jake playing right now" arguments.
      I will always have a personal bias towards Elway, because he was basically my idol as a kid, so I completely get your point about Jake could never be better than Elway to you. But that being said, Jake's career isn't over yet, and he could still accomlish amazing things in his career before it is over. Until it is over, the debate about his place in history among other QB's will always have the variable of "What is he going to do still, in the remaining part of his career"

      As for Pro-Jake people never saying anything bad about him, I agree there are some out there. Trying to make excuses for 20 interceptions is lame, and I never tried. I always said Jake had a pretty good year in 2004, but way too many interceptions. Some may word it "He had a really bad year in 2004, because all the interceptions" It doesn't really matter how you word it, 2004 is DEAD to all of us because the Colts beat us in the playoffs.

      This year after the Miami game, I said Jake played bad, but I also said the rest of the team played bad - which was thought of as being real Pro-Jake because I didn't put "enough" blame on him.

      My point is, I can only speak for me, but I am a Jake Plummer fan that knows he isn't perfect, and in analyzing his play, I can admit when he messes up. So just like you guys don't want to be told you HATE jake, I don't want to be told I think he can walk on water and is the best ever, blah blah blah.
      Excellent! This is my point. I can VERY easily see when Jake has a good game. I can very easily see when he has a bad game. I also know that his "wins" are just as much a "team" win as his losses are. But there are some, not all some that tend to feel Jake does NOoooo wrong. He wins, but the llosses are the "team's" fault. His horrible QB rating in the first half doesn't matter, because it was the team's fault...but the second half, Jake played great... blah blah blah.

      The point is this, and thank you for having such an open mind to discuss this. Some of us can see that Jake is certainly having a great year! Absolutely! But we can ALSO see that Jake is having a great year, because he has been taught to be more efficient, and less "jake" than all 8 years of his career in the past. Thats GREAT! I mean. If Jake becomes the efficient QB that doesn't turn the ball over, thats what I want to see, but can we turn around and say he's great, because he's having ONE season (out of 9) where he has eliminated all the mistakes?? Is that how a QB is normally judged on being great? Because he's improved over his mistakes in the past??

      No. As you said. Jake is having a great YEAR. If a person doesn't think that Jake is a GREAT QB, but having a great year...that same person will probably STILL feel that Jake is not a great QB. Because, as you said, there is a difference between a career and a year. SO although some of us know and can see and ENJOY Jake's great year, that doesn't mean we are willing to "jump on the hype" and say that we feel he's a great QB. Mtn-man may not KNOW what it will take for him to see, or feel, that Jake is a good QB. Right now, Mtn-man just sees a QB that is having a career year. From that perspective, he doesn't know what it will take to change his mind, because he's only seen 9 games (of one season) of the "New Jake." We ALL don't know if that "New Jake" is going to be the guy that sticks around, or if he's going to go back to being like all the other QBs in history that have had career years. That's why Mtn-man is hesitant in jumping to the "Jake is great" side of the discussion. He doesn't want to turn around next year and feel as though he jumped on the bandwagon too soon. THere are some here that just truly feel Jake is the "second coming"... I'm not ready to say that at all yet.

      I mentioned earlier that Jake won't get the BIG credit if he would win a Super Bowl this year (or next year if thats the first one). Because Shanahan has done a great job of bringing in the talent he needs, and has an incredible job of coaching this year. Its obvious to everyone (well, most everyone) that Jake is a changed QB this season, and its because of Mike. SO winning a Super Bowl would be more on Shanahan's shoulders, than on Plummers.

      I have also stated that Jake will NEVER ever ever be mentioned in the conversation of the "greatest to ever play." Then the come back is "well, Jake's career isn't over yet." True. But I ask YOU, since you seem to be reasonable.. if Jake wins a Super Bowl after being in the league 9 years...never having established himself as a winner in the playoffs before... does that make him one of the greats, or does it make him one of the Mark Rypiens and the Trent Dilfers?? It makes him a Brad Johnson, Right? Until he can prove he can win something else, or come close.... right?

      Let me give you an example WHY. Lets take Rich Gannon. Rich was in the league for a long time, never really getting his chance to start. Once he DID get the chance to start in the first 4 years with Oakland, he went 41-23, 2 AFC West titles, he took his team to THREE consecutive AFC Championship games, 1 SUper Bowl, and was a finalist for NFL MVP twice. So I would say, that Rich established himself as a winner late in his career. Would you say that RIch Gannon is an all time great? Why not? Because he didn't win early in his career, and then found the right system to make him a winner, right??

      Jake is in his 9th season. How many more do you realistically feel he has left, 4? Thirteen NFL seasons is quite a bit, especially with the style he plays, and the young talent always there to take your spot. So are we about to say that Jake is going to establish himself as an all time great, even if he begins to throw up some decent "numbers??" I don't think so. Now. I'm not saying YOU thought Jake was/is and all -time great. I'm just putting that out there to answer the "what if he wins more than one" arguements. He may win more. The ODDS are greatly against him.
      .................. NOW THIS LAST IS MY BEST PART... (sorry so long)
      Like you said. Past years are "Dead".. because we didn't win. The future games are all that matters. However. Its from the past that we learn. Do we ignore past events, just because they are ugly? Or do we remember past events so that we learn from past patterns and mistakes?

      Some wil say "don't judge Jake on his past, when he is playing so good now." I can KIND OF understand this statement. I KNOW this is a "what have you done for me lately league, but you can't ignore past performances only to be blinded by career years. Do you want to know something that just hit me? Have you ever thought, that the ONLY ones you want to "FORGET what they've done in the past and look what they are doing now" are the ones that LOST in the past? How many people are looking at Tom Brady, and saying "forget the three Super Bowls he won in the past, he sucked against the Chiefs!" The only time we want to forget the past performance of a player, is when the past performance of a player isn't what we want to remember! Interesting huh? So its ironic, the BIGGEST supporters of Jake are the ones that are saying "quit judging him by his past and look at what he's doing now"... are the very ones that are admitting that his past history as a QB, isn't up to par. Yet, those are the very same people that can't understand why others have doubts about his performance? I love irony.
      Ravage!!!
      Trouble
      Last edited by Ravage!!!; 11-30-2005, 02:24 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Jake is playing good and you still have Bronco fans who still don't like him. They know who they are and the people who like Jake like myself know who they are. You always have to laugh at the village idiots.

        Comment


        • #64
          Jake is doing a good job leading his team to 9-2. Good for you Jake.
          Emancipate your mind!
          The People's Poster

          Comment


          • #65
            Generally a very good post. Just a couple points:

            Originally posted by Ravage!!!
            [Jake] wins, but the llosses are the "team's" fault. His horrible QB rating in the first half doesn't matter, because it was the team's fault...but the second half, Jake played great... blah blah blah.
            I think you may be alluding to the postseason Colts game last year. I am one who pointed this out about Jake. However, I admitted that Jake stunk up the place the first half, just as did the whole team. I added Jake excelled in the second half (admittedly, when it was too late). And, yes, the whole team played better. I also pointed out the many times Elway stunk up a first half, then came out firing the second, and for that I was lambasted in a "don't you dare mention Plummer and Elway in the same breath." Nonetheless, it remains true.

            The point is this, and thank you for having such an open mind to discuss this. Some of us can see that Jake is certainly having a great year! Absolutely! But we can ALSO see that Jake is having a great year, because he has been taught to be more efficient, and less "jake" than all 8 years of his career in the past. Thats GREAT! I mean. If Jake becomes the efficient QB that doesn't turn the ball over, thats what I want to see, but can we turn around and say he's great, because he's having ONE season (out of 9) where he has eliminated all the mistakes?? Is that how a QB is normally judged on being great? Because he's improved over his mistakes in the past??
            Much--too much--has been said about how Shanny has "pulled in the reins" with Jake. Glossed over has been the fact that Jake spent the preponderance of the offseason reviewing film, studying his own play, finding out what he was doing that ended up with so many INTs. He also reviewed what he was doing right so he could do some more of it . . . . and, boy, has he ever! But Jake is just as responsible for his improvement as are the coaches.

            We ALL don't know if that "New Jake" is going to be the guy that sticks around, or if he's going to go back to being like all the other QBs in history that have had career years. That's why Mtn-man is hesitant in jumping to the "Jake is great" side of the discussion. He doesn't want to turn around next year and feel as though he jumped on the bandwagon too soon. THere are some here that just truly feel Jake is the "second coming"... I'm not ready to say that at all yet.
            I can understand your reservations. I likely would be the same way, had I not followed Jake throughout his entire career, going back to his fresman year in college, and was not familiar with his talents and achievements.

            I mentioned earlier that Jake won't get the BIG credit if he would win a Super Bowl this year (or next year if thats the first one). Because Shanahan has done a great job of bringing in the talent he needs, and has an incredible job of coaching this year. Its obvious to everyone (well, most everyone) that Jake is a changed QB this season, and its because of Mike. SO winning a Super Bowl would be more on Shanahan's shoulders, than on Plummers.
            So what is so different about that from any other QB? Did not Elway have TD, McAffrey, Rod Smith, Sharpe, Zimmerman, Schlereth (or however you spell his name), Nalen, Elam, Romo, Pryce, Mobley, Atwater? You can go to all the SB QBs in history, all the way back to Bart Starr, and cite their respective supporting casts, without whom none of those QBs would have reached the SB, let alone win it.

            I have also stated that Jake will NEVER ever ever be mentioned in the conversation of the "greatest to ever play." Then the come back is "well, Jake's career isn't over yet." True. But I ask YOU, since you seem to be reasonable.. if Jake wins a Super Bowl after being in the league 9 years...never having established himself as a winner in the playoffs before... does that make him one of the greats, or does it make him one of the Mark Rypiens and the Trent Dilfers?? It makes him a Brad Johnson, Right? Until he can prove he can win something else, or come close.... right?
            As big a supporter of Jake's that I have been, I won't go anywhere near the "greatest ever" club regarding Jake. He has a LOT of talent, and I believe he can take us places. But let's be fair to Jake, for pity's sake. Montana? Elway? Unitas? Jake would not even place himself into that category.


            Past years are "Dead".. because we didn't win. The future games are all that matters. However. Its from the past that we learn. Do we ignore past events, just because they are ugly? Or do we remember past events so that we learn from past patterns and mistakes?
            Yes, that is exactly what Jake did over the offseason, isn't it?

            Some wil say "don't judge Jake on his past, when he is playing so good now." I can KIND OF understand this statement. I KNOW this is a "what have you done for me lately league, but you can't ignore past performances only to be blinded by career years. Do you want to know something that just hit me? Have you ever thought, that the ONLY ones you want to "FORGET what they've done in the past and look what they are doing now" are the ones that LOST in the past? How many people are looking at Tom Brady, and saying "forget the three Super Bowls he won in the past, he sucked against the Chiefs!" The only time we want to forget the past performance of a player, is when the past performance of a player isn't what we want to remember! Interesting huh? So its ironic, the BIGGEST supporters of Jake are the ones that are saying "quit judging him by his past and look at what he's doing now"... are the very ones that are admitting that his past history as a QB, isn't up to par. Yet, those are the very same people that can't understand why others have doubts about his performance? I love irony.
            No, Rav, to the contrary, that is the right way to approach it. Remember the good (provided it is supported by continued present performance) and forget the bad (if the present performance contradicts the bad). Otherwise, it would not be fair to the individual in question. In view of Jake's performances since joining the Broncos, why should I give a rat's behind how he may have "failed" with the Cardinals (although I view it entirely differently)? Nonetheless, as you expressed, the issue, good or bad, does not involve those years, but "what have you done for me lately?"

            -----

            Comment


            • #66
              Generally a very good post. Just a couple points:
              Gee... thanks.

              I think you may be alluding to the postseason Colts game last year. I am one who pointed this out about Jake. However, I admitted that Jake stunk up the place the first half, just as did the whole team. I added Jake excelled in the second half (admittedly, when it was too late). And, yes, the whole team played better. I also pointed out the many times Elway stunk up a first half, then came out firing the second, and for that I was lambasted in a "don't you dare mention Plummer and Elway in the same breath." Nonetheless, it remains true.

              *smiles*.. I think its interesting... you want to use Elway to justify your point. No. .I take that back. You MUST try and use the name of Elway to justify your point. Interesting. Jake's play doesn't stand on its own. Hmmmmm


              Much--too much--has been said about how Shanny has "pulled in the reins" with Jake. Glossed over has been the fact that Jake spent the preponderance of the offseason reviewing film, studying his own play, finding out what he was doing that ended up with so many INTs. He also reviewed what he was doing right so he could do some more of it . . . . and, boy, has he ever! But Jake is just as responsible for his improvement as are the coaches.

              RIiiiiiiiiiight. Considering everything you just said in that sentence is NOTHING but guess work and conjecture, I can say that I don't think thats ALLL thats going on. Its obvious to EVERYONE and their grandmother that Jake has had the reigns pulled back, and its WORKED. For the FIRST time in his career, its worked, and you guys AGAIN don't want to give credit to ANYONE ELSE other than Jake!! *laughs* It just doesn't stop!! You guys are amazing! Thank you for exemplifying everything I said earlier about this same type of approach!

              I can understand your reservations. I likely would be the same way, had I not followed Jake throughout his entire career, going back to his fresman year in college, and was not familiar with his talents and achievements.
              Top. I couldn't care if you watched him when he was wearing diapers. Seriously. This doesn't make you more of an authority on Jake. Because all I need to KNOW about the NFL Jake, is from what I've seen of Jake while he's in the NFL. We've seen what he can, and cannot do. We've seen it for nearly a decade now. So I don't know why you point out that you have watched him play four years of College and 8 years of Pros would give you MORE confidence that the "old" Jake won't show up again. This doesn't make sense, really. I take it back, it does make sense. It shows why you won't open your eyes to some more of the obvious things, and continue to put the blame on other's shoulders, and will continue to give credit to Jake where NOT only is it not needed or warranted...but also where its not applicable.

              So what is so different about that from any other QB? Did not Elway have TD, McAffrey, Rod Smith, Sharpe, Zimmerman, Schlereth (or however you spell his name), Nalen, Elam, Romo, Pryce, Mobley, Atwater? You can go to all the SB QBs in history, all the way back to Bart Starr, and cite their respective supporting casts, without whom none of those QBs would have reached the SB, let alone win it.

              YEs, and Dilfer, Johnson, Rypien, and Williams all had good players on their teams as well. Why do you suppose those QBs aren't given credit for their SB wins? Because they didn't win anything before they hooked up with that particular coach and team!! Just as Jake. JOHN ELWAY (again, its hilarious you continue to compare Jake to John)... TOOK his team again and again and AGAIN to the SUper Bowl... Not to mention had and INCREDIBLE Playoff record. Sure it takes other players to WIN the Bowl... its a TEAM sport. But the facts are, IF Jake were to win the Super Bowl THIS season, the credit would be given to SHANAHAN!! Why? Because Shanahan is the one that took the first round QB Jake, who was NOT resigned in Arizona. He brought in the SAME Jake, that threw for 20+INTS in 4 out of 6 years and made him into a proficient, effective, mistake free QB. Mike made the BIG trades, the BIG FA signings, the doubted draft picks,and surrouned Jake with a team to WIn. Until NOW, Shanahan has been labeled as the coach that could only coach the GREAT QBs to the Super Bowl. Now he's up for Coach of the Year. In a season where he had TONS of doubters about his moves.. and you don't think MIKE is the one that is going to get credit for taking this team to the bowl??? Seriously? Man.. you are TRULY blind. You can't even open your eyes to see the facts that are laid out in front of you.

              As big a supporter of Jake's that I have been, I won't go anywhere near the "greatest ever" club regarding Jake. He has a LOT of talent, and I believe he can take us places. But let's be fair to Jake, for pity's sake. Montana? Elway? Unitas? Jake would not even place himself into that category.

              Thank you Top. I knew we could at least agree on this.

              Yes, that is exactly what Jake did over the offseason, isn't it?You are suggesting Jake learned from the past in this sentence. I don't know. I'm never saying Jake can't learn from past mistakes. But I know thats what Shanahan did, and showed that he can lead Jake another direction.

              No, Rav, to the contrary, that is the right way to approach it. Remember the good (provided it is supported by continued present performance) and forget the bad (if the present performance contradicts the bad). Otherwise, it would not be fair to the individual in question. In view of Jake's performances since joining the Broncos, why should I give a rat's behind how he may have "failed" with the Cardinals (although I view it entirely differently)? Nonetheless, as you expressed, the issue, good or bad, does not involve those years, but "what have you done for me lately?"
              Thank you for making my point, TOp. You again want to forget the past, because the past isn't up to par.... just as you said. Lets not 'dwell' on last years INTs.. those are in the past.. lets only look as to what he's doing for us this season... right? No. Its, Lets ENJOY what he's doing for us this year, but lets not forget where he has come. Can you not enjoy the improvment if you do not remember the past? Can you NOT have valid points of concern, or need to improve, if you don't remember the past? Be reasonable.

              This Team is being built as a mini-Tampa (thats not insulting to our team, only using Tampa as an example to the philosophy). We don't have any great WRs (yes I know Rod is great, but he's not exactly the tops in the league at THIS point in his career) (and NO top, he isn't as good now as he was in '98, despite the numbers you try to show .We have a good running game. A stout defensive line. A GOOD LB corp with TOUGH COrners and a hard hitting safety (THE same hard hitting safety)...and a punter to play field position. A QB that manages the game and LIMITING the turnovers.. thus keeping that field position and having a stout defense to keep it to our advantage. I can't help that you guys don't see this as being the formula. Jake has been taught to limit his mistakes and manage the game. To be SURE not to give the other team those short fields and easy scores. Just as Brad Johnson. Now that doesn't mean Jake isn't going to throw the ball deep. Brad throws the ball deep. It doesn't mean that all the passes are going to be dink and dunks. Brad doesn't throw just dink and dunks. It means that Shanahan has pulled the reigns so that the INTs don't put our team in trouble. Say what you want. Say that this is somehow insulting Jake. Its just fact.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by sportsgeist
                You always have to laugh at the village idiots.
                You're right.

                I just laughed at what you wrote.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by broncos_mtnman
                  Since St. Jake doesn't lose playoff games (according to those who make constant excuses for him), he can't win them either.

                  So, your question can't be answered.
                  He can lose them and did. *see first half last years colts game vs 2nd half stats for jake*
                  He can win them and will this year. *like HBO, just you wait*

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by broncos_mtnman
                    You're right.

                    I just laughed at what you wrote.
                    Ziiiinnngg!

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Ravage!!!
                      Excellent! This is my point. I can VERY easily see when Jake has a good game. I can very easily see when he has a bad game. I also know that his "wins" are just as much a "team" win as his losses are. But there are some, not all some that tend to feel Jake does NOoooo wrong. He wins, but the llosses are the "team's" fault. His horrible QB rating in the first half doesn't matter, because it was the team's fault...but the second half, Jake played great... blah blah blah.

                      The point is this, and thank you for having such an open mind to discuss this. Some of us can see that Jake is certainly having a great year! Absolutely! But we can ALSO see that Jake is having a great year, because he has been taught to be more efficient, and less "jake" than all 8 years of his career in the past. Thats GREAT! I mean. If Jake becomes the efficient QB that doesn't turn the ball over, thats what I want to see, but can we turn around and say he's great, because he's having ONE season (out of 9) where he has eliminated all the mistakes?? Is that how a QB is normally judged on being great? Because he's improved over his mistakes in the past??

                      No. As you said. Jake is having a great YEAR. If a person doesn't think that Jake is a GREAT QB, but having a great year...that same person will probably STILL feel that Jake is not a great QB. Because, as you said, there is a difference between a career and a year. SO although some of us know and can see and ENJOY Jake's great year, that doesn't mean we are willing to "jump on the hype" and say that we feel he's a great QB. Mtn-man may not KNOW what it will take for him to see, or feel, that Jake is a good QB. Right now, Mtn-man just sees a QB that is having a career year. From that perspective, he doesn't know what it will take to change his mind, because he's only seen 9 games (of one season) of the "New Jake." We ALL don't know if that "New Jake" is going to be the guy that sticks around, or if he's going to go back to being like all the other QBs in history that have had career years. That's why Mtn-man is hesitant in jumping to the "Jake is great" side of the discussion. He doesn't want to turn around next year and feel as though he jumped on the bandwagon too soon. THere are some here that just truly feel Jake is the "second coming"... I'm not ready to say that at all yet.

                      I mentioned earlier that Jake won't get the BIG credit if he would win a Super Bowl this year (or next year if thats the first one). Because Shanahan has done a great job of bringing in the talent he needs, and has an incredible job of coaching this year. Its obvious to everyone (well, most everyone) that Jake is a changed QB this season, and its because of Mike. SO winning a Super Bowl would be more on Shanahan's shoulders, than on Plummers.

                      I have also stated that Jake will NEVER ever ever be mentioned in the conversation of the "greatest to ever play." Then the come back is "well, Jake's career isn't over yet." True. But I ask YOU, since you seem to be reasonable.. if Jake wins a Super Bowl after being in the league 9 years...never having established himself as a winner in the playoffs before... does that make him one of the greats, or does it make him one of the Mark Rypiens and the Trent Dilfers?? It makes him a Brad Johnson, Right? Until he can prove he can win something else, or come close.... right?

                      Let me give you an example WHY. Lets take Rich Gannon. Rich was in the league for a long time, never really getting his chance to start. Once he DID get the chance to start in the first 4 years with Oakland, he went 41-23, 2 AFC West titles, he took his team to THREE consecutive AFC Championship games, 1 SUper Bowl, and was a finalist for NFL MVP twice. So I would say, that Rich established himself as a winner late in his career. Would you say that RIch Gannon is an all time great? Why not? Because he didn't win early in his career, and then found the right system to make him a winner, right??

                      Jake is in his 9th season. How many more do you realistically feel he has left, 4? Thirteen NFL seasons is quite a bit, especially with the style he plays, and the young talent always there to take your spot. So are we about to say that Jake is going to establish himself as an all time great, even if he begins to throw up some decent "numbers??" I don't think so. Now. I'm not saying YOU thought Jake was/is and all -time great. I'm just putting that out there to answer the "what if he wins more than one" arguements. He may win more. The ODDS are greatly against him.
                      .................. NOW THIS LAST IS MY BEST PART... (sorry so long)
                      Like you said. Past years are "Dead".. because we didn't win. The future games are all that matters. However. Its from the past that we learn. Do we ignore past events, just because they are ugly? Or do we remember past events so that we learn from past patterns and mistakes?

                      Some wil say "don't judge Jake on his past, when he is playing so good now." I can KIND OF understand this statement. I KNOW this is a "what have you done for me lately league, but you can't ignore past performances only to be blinded by career years. Do you want to know something that just hit me? Have you ever thought, that the ONLY ones you want to "FORGET what they've done in the past and look what they are doing now" are the ones that LOST in the past? How many people are looking at Tom Brady, and saying "forget the three Super Bowls he won in the past, he sucked against the Chiefs!" The only time we want to forget the past performance of a player, is when the past performance of a player isn't what we want to remember! Interesting huh? So its ironic, the BIGGEST supporters of Jake are the ones that are saying "quit judging him by his past and look at what he's doing now"... are the very ones that are admitting that his past history as a QB, isn't up to par. Yet, those are the very same people that can't understand why others have doubts about his performance? I love irony.
                      WOW................lots of time on your hands.................

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by PR-Broncomaniac
                        WOW................lots of time on your hands.................
                        You're telling me. THat, and I'm a fast typer.. thank god!!!!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Ravage!!!
                          You're telling me. THat, and I'm a fast typer.. thank god!!!!
                          Your fingers must be moving at Mach 3.0 to type that in 5 mins.................

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Wow . . .

                            Originally posted by Ravage!!!
                            Generally a very good post. Just a couple points:
                            Gee... thanks.

                            I think you may be alluding to the postseason Colts game last year. I am one who pointed this out about Jake. However, I admitted that Jake stunk up the place the first half, just as did the whole team. I added Jake excelled in the second half (admittedly, when it was too late). And, yes, the whole team played better. I also pointed out the many times Elway stunk up a first half, then came out firing the second, and for that I was lambasted in a "don't you dare mention Plummer and Elway in the same breath." Nonetheless, it remains true.

                            *smiles*.. I think its interesting... you want to use Elway to justify your point. No. .I take that back. You MUST try and use the name of Elway to justify your point. Interesting. Jake's play doesn't stand on its own. Hmmmmm


                            Much--too much--has been said about how Shanny has "pulled in the reins" with Jake. Glossed over has been the fact that Jake spent the preponderance of the offseason reviewing film, studying his own play, finding out what he was doing that ended up with so many INTs. He also reviewed what he was doing right so he could do some more of it . . . . and, boy, has he ever! But Jake is just as responsible for his improvement as are the coaches.

                            RIiiiiiiiiiight. Considering everything you just said in that sentence is NOTHING but guess work and conjecture, I can say that I don't think thats ALLL thats going on. Its obvious to EVERYONE and their grandmother that Jake has had the reigns pulled back, and its WORKED. For the FIRST time in his career, its worked, and you guys AGAIN don't want to give credit to ANYONE ELSE other than Jake!! *laughs* It just doesn't stop!! You guys are amazing! Thank you for exemplifying everything I said earlier about this same type of approach!

                            I can understand your reservations. I likely would be the same way, had I not followed Jake throughout his entire career, going back to his fresman year in college, and was not familiar with his talents and achievements.
                            Top. I couldn't care if you watched him when he was wearing diapers. Seriously. This doesn't make you more of an authority on Jake. Because all I need to KNOW about the NFL Jake, is from what I've seen of Jake while he's in the NFL. We've seen what he can, and cannot do. We've seen it for nearly a decade now. So I don't know why you point out that you have watched him play four years of College and 8 years of Pros would give you MORE confidence that the "old" Jake won't show up again. This doesn't make sense, really. I take it back, it does make sense. It shows why you won't open your eyes to some more of the obvious things, and continue to put the blame on other's shoulders, and will continue to give credit to Jake where NOT only is it not needed or warranted...but also where its not applicable.

                            So what is so different about that from any other QB? Did not Elway have TD, McAffrey, Rod Smith, Sharpe, Zimmerman, Schlereth (or however you spell his name), Nalen, Elam, Romo, Pryce, Mobley, Atwater? You can go to all the SB QBs in history, all the way back to Bart Starr, and cite their respective supporting casts, without whom none of those QBs would have reached the SB, let alone win it.

                            YEs, and Dilfer, Johnson, Rypien, and Williams all had good players on their teams as well. Why do you suppose those QBs aren't given credit for their SB wins? Because they didn't win anything before they hooked up with that particular coach and team!! Just as Jake. JOHN ELWAY (again, its hilarious you continue to compare Jake to John)... TOOK his team again and again and AGAIN to the SUper Bowl... Not to mention had and INCREDIBLE Playoff record. Sure it takes other players to WIN the Bowl... its a TEAM sport. But the facts are, IF Jake were to win the Super Bowl THIS season, the credit would be given to SHANAHAN!! Why? Because Shanahan is the one that took the first round QB Jake, who was NOT resigned in Arizona. He brought in the SAME Jake, that threw for 20+INTS in 4 out of 6 years and made him into a proficient, effective, mistake free QB. Mike made the BIG trades, the BIG FA signings, the doubted draft picks,and surrouned Jake with a team to WIn. Until NOW, Shanahan has been labeled as the coach that could only coach the GREAT QBs to the Super Bowl. Now he's up for Coach of the Year. In a season where he had TONS of doubters about his moves.. and you don't think MIKE is the one that is going to get credit for taking this team to the bowl??? Seriously? Man.. you are TRULY blind. You can't even open your eyes to see the facts that are laid out in front of you.

                            As big a supporter of Jake's that I have been, I won't go anywhere near the "greatest ever" club regarding Jake. He has a LOT of talent, and I believe he can take us places. But let's be fair to Jake, for pity's sake. Montana? Elway? Unitas? Jake would not even place himself into that category.

                            Thank you Top. I knew we could at least agree on this.

                            Yes, that is exactly what Jake did over the offseason, isn't it?You are suggesting Jake learned from the past in this sentence. I don't know. I'm never saying Jake can't learn from past mistakes. But I know thats what Shanahan did, and showed that he can lead Jake another direction.

                            No, Rav, to the contrary, that is the right way to approach it. Remember the good (provided it is supported by continued present performance) and forget the bad (if the present performance contradicts the bad). Otherwise, it would not be fair to the individual in question. In view of Jake's performances since joining the Broncos, why should I give a rat's behind how he may have "failed" with the Cardinals (although I view it entirely differently)? Nonetheless, as you expressed, the issue, good or bad, does not involve those years, but "what have you done for me lately?"
                            Thank you for making my point, TOp. You again want to forget the past, because the past isn't up to par.... just as you said. Lets not 'dwell' on last years INTs.. those are in the past.. lets only look as to what he's doing for us this season... right? No. Its, Lets ENJOY what he's doing for us this year, but lets not forget where he has come. Can you not enjoy the improvment if you do not remember the past? Can you NOT have valid points of concern, or need to improve, if you don't remember the past? Be reasonable.

                            This Team is being built as a mini-Tampa (thats not insulting to our team, only using Tampa as an example to the philosophy). We don't have any great WRs (yes I know Rod is great, but he's not exactly the tops in the league at THIS point in his career) (and NO top, he isn't as good now as he was in '98, despite the numbers you try to show .We have a good running game. A stout defensive line. A GOOD LB corp with TOUGH COrners and a hard hitting safety (THE same hard hitting safety)...and a punter to play field position. A QB that manages the game and LIMITING the turnovers.. thus keeping that field position and having a stout defense to keep it to our advantage. I can't help that you guys don't see this as being the formula. Jake has been taught to limit his mistakes and manage the game. To be SURE not to give the other team those short fields and easy scores. Just as Brad Johnson. Now that doesn't mean Jake isn't going to throw the ball deep. Brad throws the ball deep. It doesn't mean that all the passes are going to be dink and dunks. Brad doesn't throw just dink and dunks. It means that Shanahan has pulled the reigns so that the INTs don't put our team in trouble. Say what you want. Say that this is somehow insulting Jake. Its just fact.
                            I dont' know how to answer that, Rav. I really don't. It seemed to me I agreed with you on most points and simply added a few clarifications according to my own point of view. But you took my remarks and spun them completely out of kilter.

                            I took definitive steps to show how my view was different, yet you insisted on putting me squarely back with "you guys."

                            I really do find this post offensive, Rav. I really do.

                            -----

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by PR-Broncomaniac
                              Your fingers must be moving at Mach 3.0 to type that in 5 mins.................
                              Five minutes? I'm not that fast... My brain can't even move that fast

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Emancipator
                                Jake is doing a good job leading his team to 9-2. Good for you Jake.
                                Too simple...

                                You must study and provide significant backing for your arguments.


















                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X