Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fire John Elway

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

  • broncolee
    replied
    I understand what you’re saying.

    It likely would have been just for show.

    I’m willing to give Elway a pass on that one.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrMax
    replied
    Agreed, and that FL weather would be nicer to work in and retire. But after JE had his only GM success with GR*T veteran QB , PM, I would think he would at least have tried, to show he recognizes talent.

    Leave a comment:


  • broncolee
    replied
    Originally posted by MrMax View Post
    Tell me why again; Elway showed no interest in Tom Brady? Now I certainly understand why Brady wouldnt want to come here, but if Superbowl wins prove your smart , maybe we should get him for GM after he retires. In the meantime the Bucs have 44 points with 2 min left.
    It could be that Elway knew Brady had no interest in Denver.

    I think it’s fairly obvious that Brady wanted to go somewhere with a boat load of talent and the ability to influence roster decisions.

    I don’t know that Brady would have received either in Denver.

    I guess he would have at least had better talent than what was in New England on offense.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrMax
    replied
    Tell me why again; Elway showed no interest in Tom Brady? Now I certainly understand why Brady wouldnt want to come here, but if Superbowl wins prove your smart , maybe we should get him for GM after he retires. In the meantime the Bucs have 44 points with 2 min left.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Why are we talking about Osweiler? Dude was a fringe NFL talent. Are y’all forgetting we brought Osweiler back and, surprise, surprise he was garbage? I am extremely glad that he decided to take huge money from the Texans rather than us.

    Had he decided to take the offer Elway wanted to give him, he’d be just another Keenum. Big, fat waste of money that didn’t help the team at all. And Mark Sanchez didn’t even make it out of his first preseason here without getting cut. Got beat out by a 7th round pick that had never started a game.

    The fact is if we want to be a contender again, we have to find a good QB. I don’t know if Lock can make a 3rd year leap like Allen has, but if he can’t he should be gone after 21. And it’s right back to searching for another franchise QB. Because that’s what you have to do to be successful in the NFL. The best teams have the best QBs. We haven’t even had a decent QB since Manning. Not for lack of trying, yet we still need to find a guy. And we’ll be stuck where we are until we do.

    Doesn’t matter what the rest of the roster looks like, without a QB, we won’t be competing for anything but a top 10 pick.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taos_Broncomaniac
    replied
    Originally posted by sra84 View Post
    With Cleveland clinching a playoff berth today, there are now only 3 AFC teams that haven't been to the playoffs since 2016, the last five years....

    Jets...

    Bengals....


    .... Broncos.

    That's how far we've fallen. That's how bad we are. That's the company we're in. And that has happened under Elway. That's
    Since 2015, the Broncos, the Patriots, the Eagles and the Chiefs have won Super Bowl Championships.

    Pretty heady company if you ask me... Thank you Elway

    Leave a comment:


  • Bronco51
    replied
    Originally posted by RocketArm006 View Post

    They also wouldn’t have drafted Lynch.
    Bingo 10 char

    Leave a comment:


  • RocketArm006
    replied
    Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post

    Signing Os would have kept some continuity. Not signing Os led to bringing in Butt Fumble Sanchez to compete with Siemien. Os probably would not have panned out long term, but the drop off the cliff was so immediate, they have never recovered from it.
    They also wouldn’t have drafted Lynch.

    Leave a comment:


  • DiveInstructor
    replied
    Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post

    Signing Os would have kept some continuity. Not signing Os led to bringing in Butt Fumble Sanchez to compete with Siemien. Os probably would not have panned out long term, but the drop off the cliff was so immediate, they have never recovered from it.
    Well, they did go 9-7 with Siemian and Butt Fumble. Not sure sticking with Wait-a-whiler would have been much of an improvement. Maybe a tad, but only because Kubiak was still here. That drop off really happened when Kubiak left and was replaced by VJ. And now they have grandpa in his sweats. I think the bigger problem is who's in charge. Elway dropped the ball. Then he hired two offensive failures to run this team. Now, he and grandpa are going to select their GM. The blind are steering the ship.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mosk
    replied
    Elway giving up GM duties is a step in the right direction. Now we need to find an owner who is passionate about the Broncos and winning. The Bowlen’s don’t love the Broncos like Pat did.

    In baseball, I’m a Mets fan. I couldn’t be happier that the Mets have a new owner. We have an owner who is passionate about the Mets and winning. I saw a video of Alex Rodriguez and his pitch for his ownership of the Mets and he said “baseball” wasn’t even a top 3 importance of his ownership team. They wanted to rebrand and “sell” the Mets. Why would “baseball” not be the utmost importance, and how are you going to do that with an awful team? I feel that’s exactly what’s happening here and the children are milking whatever is left of what their father left them. This losing culture for the last half decade is blatantly unacceptable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bronco51
    replied
    Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

    I agree with your first sentence. If that was the argument, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's your last sentence stating that Osweiler was "your only viable plan", along with having to offer Osweiler a long-term contract, that is the issue. Osweiler wasn't good. His numbers generally sucked, at least when compared to league QB's. He looked OK next to a broken Manning, but just barely. Signing someone like him was just creating a bigger issue out of a failure.

    There's no doubt that Elway thought the team, with its lightning in a bottle defense, could continue to win without a good QB. And, he was wrong. But, him signing Osweiler would've just been yet another wrong in a string of Elway's failures in giving this team its franchise QB.
    Signing Os would have kept some continuity. Not signing Os led to bringing in Butt Fumble Sanchez to compete with Siemien. Os probably would not have panned out long term, but the drop off the cliff was so immediate, they have never recovered from it.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheAsianPA
    replied
    Originally posted by Letswinplz77 View Post

    Yeah, the former took us to 5 Super Bowls in 16 years, winning 2, the latter took us to 2 Super Bowls in 10 years, winning 1. Are we honestly disappointed with those results?
    Yes. His latter half of the GM led to 4 losing seasons, 5 with no playoffs. 2013-2015 was great. But that was half a decade ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • DiveInstructor
    replied
    Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post

    The issue isn't so much that Elway let such a great talent in Osweiler go but rather how poorly he planned the post-Manning era....
    ,
    ...The inability to re-sign Osweiler, who was your only viable plan post-Manning, was a precursor to more bad decisions to come, not necessarily letting a great player walk away.
    I agree with your first sentence. If that was the argument, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's your last sentence stating that Osweiler was "your only viable plan", along with having to offer Osweiler a long-term contract, that is the issue. Osweiler wasn't good. His numbers generally sucked, at least when compared to league QB's. He looked OK next to a broken Manning, but just barely. Signing someone like him was just creating a bigger issue out of a failure.

    There's no doubt that Elway thought the team, with its lightning in a bottle defense, could continue to win without a good QB. And, he was wrong. But, him signing Osweiler would've just been yet another wrong in a string of Elway's failures in giving this team its franchise QB.

    Leave a comment:


  • mojo0730
    replied
    Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

    I'm curious why so many think that the non-signing of Osweiller would have turned into a good thing. After his "debut" as a team's QB in Houston, he was let go and has been unable to secure a spot as a team's QB. Seems like he's back-up material at best. I doubt him staying would have produced substantially different results in his play.

    I think Elway dodged a bullet not signing Osweiller. Unfortunately, he took a bullet by going with Siemian.
    The issue isn't so much that Elway let such a great talent in Osweiler go but rather how poorly he planned the post-Manning era. I don't think anyone is sitting here believing Osweiler was going to be a Hall-of-Fame quarterback but he played well in place of Manning during 2015, and on a Super Bowl team that believed in him we might have been able to stay afloat. Instead, the Broncos waited needlessly until Osweiler hit the free agent market and then had to try to outbid the Texans. When they failed to re-sign Osweiler, they had to go with options that weren't really viable for a team coming off a Super Bowl win.
    ,
    The inability to re-sign Osweiler, who was your only viable plan post-Manning, was a precursor to more bad decisions to come, not necessarily letting a great player walk away.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt. Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by Kyousukeneko View Post
    I think consultant is a good role for Elway.
    I think so, He did it for 10 years, let's get some new game planning involved.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X