Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top 10 reasons we are winning in spite of Jake, not because of him (Merged)

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

  • Top 10 reasons we are winning in spite of Jake, not because of him (Merged)

    Here's some eye-opening information for those who want to say that Jake is "winning" games for us this year.

    I contend that we are winning in spite of Jake, not because of him. I also contend that it will bite us in the butt again when we can least afford it.

    Jake's INDIVIDUAL performance stats....

    Here's a little tidbit I found at another discussion board. The defense is the only reason we are where we are this year.

    1. Only five teams have been intercepted more per throw than the Broncos.

    2. Jake Plummer is on pace to throw almost 20 ints this season. It would be the sixth time he's achieved this dubious feat. I think Slap put it best when he said no other QB in the modern game has had 6 seasons of 20 or more ints in his career.

    3. 8 out of 10 of his ints have come in his first 20 passing attempts with a horrific 54% completion rate. So much for playing it safe and limiting Jake's snaps to 15-20 passing attempts a game.

    4. 7 out of 10 of his ints have come in passes thrown for 20 yards or LESS with a gutwrenching 55% completion rate. These passes are the bread and butter of the WCO. So much for dialing back the offense and limiting Jake to throw what should be high percentage, dink and dunk passes.

    5. He's fumbled the ball 4 times. That's more than the Bells and Damien Nash combined.

    6. Our great Defense has only given up 8 TDs so far. They are on pace for a record breaking season. Meanwhile almost half of the TDs they have given up (3) have come about when Jake Plummer has turned the ball over and given the other team starting field position INSIDE THE RED ZONE!

    7. In the first half of all 9 games so far, Jake has passed for just 5 TDs. That's 5 TDs in 18 quarters of football.

    8. There are only five starting QBs in the league that have a worse int per pass ratio than Jake:

    A. Walter QB, OAK
    C. Frye QB, CLE
    J. Harrington QB, MIA
    V. Young QB, TEN
    B. Roethlisberger QB, PIT

    9. Jake has been one of the least sacked QBs in the AFC but at the same time his completion % is 3rd worst in the AFC.

    He's only ahead of Andrew Walter/Vince Young.

    Here are some nobodies that have a better completion % than Jake:

    Charlie Frye Cle 67.8
    Damon Huard KC 66.3
    J.P. Losman Buf 59.4
    Joey Harrington 56.7
    Drew Brees NO 68.7
    Jon Kitna Det 68.6
    Brad Johnson Min 66.2
    Kurt Warner Ari 64.2
    Mark Brunell Was 60.9
    Alex Smith SF 59.1

    10. Jake Plummer leads the league in turnovers inside his own 20 yard line.
    sigpic

  • #2
    I found their arguments to be very good and hard to dispute.
    Last edited by LDB; 11-16-2006, 01:29 PM.
    Patriotic dissent is a luxury of those protected by better men than they.

    Comment


    • #3
      I wasnt on the boards last year so Im curious what you were saying then about Jake. Were you pulling for BVP?

      Comment


      • #4
        Don't waste your time, mtnman...

        I posted a very similar thread weeks ago, and was met with winning % and records and blah blah blah.

        No one wants to hear that Jake is hurting his team with his play, whether it's true or not. If there are any problems, its with the tight ends or the third ranked rushing attack .
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          mtnman, go take your analasys to espn, you will be much aprecciated there :thumb:

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mojo0730
            Don't waste your time, mtnman...

            I posted a very similar thread weeks ago, and was met with winning % and records and blah blah blah.

            No one wants to hear that Jake is hurting his team with his play, whether it's true or not. If there are any problems, its with the tight ends or the third ranked rushing attack .
            I disagree. This is exactly the kind of information people need to see.

            I would have liked Mntman to include some of the other information that people posted about this subject over on the Mane though. Kaylore had a very, very good post that added more fuel to the fire.


            -------------------------------

            Edit...because I thought it was so good...I brought it over here. This is Kaylore's post discussing Plummer. http://orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=49410


            I got this one... Here's the usual suspect of defense's and why they're flawed.

            1. "He wins games." Does he? Look at Shanahan's win record before Jake Plummer!...oh crap. Now look at Jake's win record without Shanahan. What do you notice? Now some will say "but that's because the Cardinals sucked those years!" Yes they did. Yes they did indeed.

            2. "But he had (insert number) good drives at the end of (insert game he almost botched)!" I don't get why people think making big mistakes again and again, every game is ok as long as you win. People say "well he didn't cost us any games." Does anyone else realize how good the rest of this team is and how much crappier he's making it look?

            3. "The defense has holes." First, yes they do. We're pretty banged up in addition to our regular weaknesses. The problem is there isn't anything we can do about it. On the other hand, we do have someone else who could play Quarterback, and the fact that he is going to sooner or later spells the inevitable.

            Second, what in the world does the defense have to do with Jake Playing like crap? Is that his job?

            The funniest was when Alec tried to blame Jake's crap play on the defense by saying that their "bend-don't-break" method puts Jake in bad field position. He seems to think that when Jake is turning the ball over in our own redzone over and over, or even going three-and-out five times in a row it's more acceptable than our defense not sacking offense's back to their own one yard line over and over.

            4. "Jake won a lot of games for us/took us to the playoffs three times." This is true, but that was then and this is now. Players change. Consider these men: Brad Johnson, Drew Bledsoe, Kurt Warner. These are all men who have played in and/or won super bowls. Do they look like they could win a super bowl now? Are they playing like they could? What happened? What about all they've done?! Doesn't it count for something? Nope. It's about now. I'd give my right nut for 2005 Jake or even 2003 Jake.

            5. "Jake is what he is. Why are you upset by this?" Surprised I put this one up here? Some of you calling for a change are even making this mistake. The idea that "this is the same Jake" we've always had also isn't true.

            While there are some of the same problems we've always seen, he's playing some of the worst football of his career here. This is worse than even 2004 because then Jake was at least putting up big yards and scoring touchdowns. This year it's just all incompletions and interceptions other than big plays where Javon largely stole the ball from a defender or took a short pass and broke it for a big TD. I don't think we'll ever see anything as bad as his play in 1999, but 2002 or 1998? It's starting to look that way...

            6. "Well Shanahan hasn't made the change. If Jay were really better he would put him in like Foster or Nash." If anyone really thinks the implications for changing an underachieving right tackle are the same as switching out your starting QB, you are insane.

            7. "We're winning now." This is the only argument that has any merit, but I still disagree. Sure, "why change horses mid-stream?" Because your horse has almost gotten you drowned and managed to do so once already. Slap's analogy of clinging to a rock in a flood was spot on.

            I think that it also sends a bad message to the veterans and players who were replaced during the season when you don't hold every position accountable. I think we put Jay in based on fairness, even if it means losing games in the short term. If we make the change, when Jay starts to struggle Jake can put it on himself for playing poorly enough to lose the support of his coaches and letting his teammates down.

            8. "Jake is just having some struggles/a bad start." This one is the funniest because it suggests he's only hit some bumps here and there. If you can't see with your own eyes how bad he is, then I don't know what to say. Then again I saw Foster getting owned every week and some people seemed to think I was making that up, so I guess that's that.

            9. "It's not Jake! I blame (Rod Smith/Mike Heimerdinger/the whole offense/Mike Shanahan saving the "real" stuff for later/no running game/Receivers can't get open/loss of Kubiak/new players/ et al) for making him look bad!" This is also funny because suddenly it's everyone else's fault. Despite clear evidence (Jake repeatedly throwing balls behind his receivers for example) that Jake himself is a large part of the problem, people still try and pretend really he's fine and the whole team is just out of whack. Consider these facts:

            The running game is fine. The receivers, including Rod, are getting open, the protection has been pretty good (sacks are low). It's hard to see a problem on offense. Also, anyone who thinks Shanahan is saving plays for a certain opponent is being ridiculous. He designs new plays and scripts for each opponent and if you ask EVERY player in the league they'll tell you that watching tape of Shanahan against other opponents is pointless because he never uses the same thing twice! So shut up with the "he's saving it" crap!

            The arguments to keep him in don't hold water. The only thing that can save him is solid play the rest of the year. After 9 games, I don't see that happening.
            Last edited by LDB; 11-16-2006, 01:33 PM.
            Patriotic dissent is a luxury of those protected by better men than they.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by broncos_mtnman
              Here's some eye-opening information for those who want to say that Jake is "winning" games for us this year.

              I contend that we are winning in spite of Jake, not because of him. I also contend that it will bite us in the butt again when we can least afford it.

              Jake's INDIVIDUAL performance stats....

              Here's a little tidbit I found at another discussion board. The defense is the only reason we are where we are this year.


              Here are some nobodies that have a better completion % than Jake:

              Charlie Frye Cle 67.8
              Damon Huard KC 66.3
              J.P. Losman Buf 59.4
              Joey Harrington 56.7
              Drew Brees NO 68.7
              Jon Kitna Det 68.6
              Brad Johnson Min 66.2
              Kurt Warner Ari 64.2
              Mark Brunell Was 60.9
              Alex Smith SF 59.1

              10. Jake Plummer leads the league in turnovers inside his own 20 yard line.
              Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Mark Brunell, Brad Johnson, and Jon Kitna are hardly nobodies.

              The rest of those facts are hard to dispute however.
              You will always be a Bronco Darrent, R.I.P.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by quiksilverkid13
                Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Mark Brunell, Brad Johnson, and Jon Kitna are hardly nobodies.

                The rest of those facts are hard to dispute however.

                They are so old, they are back to noobie playing level!

                Comment


                • #9
                  CP4U, Mtnman . . .

                  This is why I have stood by you on these boards, even though we have been foes
                  over Jake. These "yes he is, no he isn't" arguments bore the hell out of me. But you
                  always give me something to debate over.

                  I have a couple counterpoints to your post, but I am working, so perhaps later when
                  I have a little more time.

                  -----

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by topscribe
                    This is why I have stood by you on these boards, even though we have been foes
                    over Jake. These "yes he is, no he isn't" arguments bore the hell out of me. But you
                    always give me something to debate over.

                    I have a couple counterpoints to your post, but I am working, so perhaps later when
                    I have a little more time.

                    -----
                    winning percentage?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by LDB
                      I disagree. This is exactly the kind of information people need to see.

                      I would have liked Mntman to include some of the other information that people posted about this subject over on the Mane though. Kaylore had a very, very good post that added more fuel to the fire.


                      -------------------------------

                      Edit...because I thought it was so good...I brought it over here. This is Kaylore's post discussing Plummer. http://orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=49410


                      I got this one... Here's the usual suspect of defense's and why they're flawed.

                      1. "He wins games." Does he? Look at Shanahan's win record before Jake Plummer!...oh crap. Now look at Jake's win record without Shanahan. What do you notice? Now some will say "but that's because the Cardinals sucked those years!" Yes they did. Yes they did indeed.

                      2. "But he had (insert number) good drives at the end of (insert game he almost botched)!" I don't get why people think making big mistakes again and again, every game is ok as long as you win. People say "well he didn't cost us any games." Does anyone else realize how good the rest of this team is and how much crappier he's making it look?

                      3. "The defense has holes." First, yes they do. We're pretty banged up in addition to our regular weaknesses. The problem is there isn't anything we can do about it. On the other hand, we do have someone else who could play Quarterback, and the fact that he is going to sooner or later spells the inevitable.

                      Second, what in the world does the defense have to do with Jake Playing like crap? Is that his job?

                      The funniest was when Alec tried to blame Jake's crap play on the defense by saying that their "bend-don't-break" method puts Jake in bad field position. He seems to think that when Jake is turning the ball over in our own redzone over and over, or even going three-and-out five times in a row it's more acceptable than our defense not sacking offense's back to their own one yard line over and over.

                      4. "Jake won a lot of games for us/took us to the playoffs three times." This is true, but that was then and this is now. Players change. Consider these men: Brad Johnson, Drew Bledsoe, Kurt Warner. These are all men who have played in and/or won super bowls. Do they look like they could win a super bowl now? Are they playing like they could? What happened? What about all they've done?! Doesn't it count for something? Nope. It's about now. I'd give my right nut for 2005 Jake or even 2003 Jake.

                      5. "Jake is what he is. Why are you upset by this?" Surprised I put this one up here? Some of you calling for a change are even making this mistake. The idea that "this is the same Jake" we've always had also isn't true.

                      While there are some of the same problems we've always seen, he's playing some of the worst football of his career here. This is worse than even 2004 because then Jake was at least putting up big yards and scoring touchdowns. This year it's just all incompletions and interceptions other than big plays where Javon largely stole the ball from a defender or took a short pass and broke it for a big TD. I don't think we'll ever see anything as bad as his play in 1999, but 2002 or 1998? It's starting to look that way...

                      6. "Well Shanahan hasn't made the change. If Jay were really better he would put him in like Foster or Nash." If anyone really thinks the implications for changing an underachieving right tackle are the same as switching out your starting QB, you are insane.

                      7. "We're winning now." This is the only argument that has any merit, but I still disagree. Sure, "why change horses mid-stream?" Because your horse has almost gotten you drowned and managed to do so once already. Slap's analogy of clinging to a rock in a flood was spot on.

                      I think that it also sends a bad message to the veterans and players who were replaced during the season when you don't hold every position accountable. I think we put Jay in based on fairness, even if it means losing games in the short term. If we make the change, when Jay starts to struggle Jake can put it on himself for playing poorly enough to lose the support of his coaches and letting his teammates down.

                      8. "Jake is just having some struggles/a bad start." This one is the funniest because it suggests he's only hit some bumps here and there. If you can't see with your own eyes how bad he is, then I don't know what to say. Then again I saw Foster getting owned every week and some people seemed to think I was making that up, so I guess that's that.

                      9. "It's not Jake! I blame (Rod Smith/Mike Heimerdinger/the whole offense/Mike Shanahan saving the "real" stuff for later/no running game/Receivers can't get open/loss of Kubiak/new players/ et al) for making him look bad!" This is also funny because suddenly it's everyone else's fault. Despite clear evidence (Jake repeatedly throwing balls behind his receivers for example) that Jake himself is a large part of the problem, people still try and pretend really he's fine and the whole team is just out of whack. Consider these facts:

                      The running game is fine. The receivers, including Rod, are getting open, the protection has been pretty good (sacks are low). It's hard to see a problem on offense. Also, anyone who thinks Shanahan is saving plays for a certain opponent is being ridiculous. He designs new plays and scripts for each opponent and if you ask EVERY player in the league they'll tell you that watching tape of Shanahan against other opponents is pointless because he never uses the same thing twice! So shut up with the "he's saving it" crap!

                      The arguments to keep him in don't hold water. The only thing that can save him is solid play the rest of the year. After 9 games, I don't see that happening.
                      I was going to bring these up later, once the "he wins games" arguement was brought up.

                      Thanks for getting them for me.

                      I agree. That whole thread had many excellent arguements that are hard to dispute.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bleedbluorange
                        winning percentage?

                        You can easily counter that with Kyle Orton!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Bronco T
                          They are so old, they are back to noobie playing level!
                          So by your logic, John Elways was a nobody in his final seasons. Brett Farve is a nobody right now. Rod Smith is a nobody.
                          You will always be a Bronco Darrent, R.I.P.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by quiksilverkid13
                            So by your logic, John Elways was a nobody in his final seasons. Brett Farve is a nobody right now. Rod Smith is a nobody.
                            Let's not get hung up on the "nobody" word. :nono:

                            Let's keep this on topic, please.
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by quiksilverkid13
                              So by your logic, John Elways was a nobody in his final seasons. Brett Farve is a nobody right now. Rod Smith is a nobody.

                              I didnt realize Elway, Favre, and Smith was on that list. I must have missed it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X