Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drew Lock Thread

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

  • Originally posted by WYBRONCO View Post

    Burrow and Herbert had teams that said they would live or die with a rookie QB and got rid of competition. Was it a good decision? It sure looks like it. Jalen wasn't supposed to start this year but obviously should have started sooner. If nothing else just to see what they had in him, with an awful Wentz season.

    Lock doesn't appear to be better than either of these 3 right now. I do seriously doubt Lock ends up ever being a solid franchise QB. While it is too early to confirm that, I am willing to eat lots of humble pie if I am wrong. Unless there is a huge shake up in the front office we will find out soon enough because Lock will get a chance next year to prove us wrong without serious change.
    I'm not a believer Lock will turn into the guy, especially on this team. For some reason, me suggesting that the Broncos need to give him help turned into me being a Lock supporter. All I want is the Broncos to stop looking like a basement dweller. You work with what you have, and right now, however bad as it may seem, Lock is the best the team had all year. So, you work around it. Did the Broncos? I'd say they haven't done a good job of it, or even an average one. I think they lean too heavily on a guy who is a project more than he is a true talent at the position (which includes decision-making). He had issues in college about relying too heavily on his arm strength, and guess what? They're letting him do the same here. I hear the, "we love the swagger" and "he's not afraid to go downfield", even from Fangio. That's not trying to get rid of his problem....that's making it worse.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Ear2dastreets View Post

      Lol smh ok lets go.

      Brees starter in 2002 stats 3,284 17 td 16int
      Don't skip an entire year just to try to prove your point.

      Again that was a completcompletely different NFL back in 2002. If lock played back then he would not have made through have a season. Qbs had no protection. Bump and run coverage on the wrs hence no 5 yrd rule. Wr got they head taken off. Dont try to compare those two NFL'S. Back qbs were given time

      In today's nfl when you come fresh out the gate throwing over 4k years 5 k years.. all the qbs back then wish they could play in today's nfl. Saying the could have played 10 more years.

      Lock is struggling in today's NFL....keep making excuses.
      I'm not making excuses for Lock; I was countering your point about Drew Brees showing promise early in his career. 11 TDs and 15 INTs with a QB rating of 67.5 isn't exactly what I'd describe as 'showing promise', regardless of the time and circumstances, especially when you consider the Chargers ended up with the #1 overall pick as a result. Out of the predominant starters at QB in 2003, Brees' rating was ranked 29th out of the 32 QBs, so it was still well below average in the circumstances. It had nothing to do with the era he played in - he simply didn't have a good season until his 4th in the league (3rd as the starter).

      Comment


      • Originally posted by WYBRONCO View Post

        Burrow and Herbert had teams that said they would live or die with a rookie QB and got rid of competition. Was it a good decision? It sure looks like it. Jalen wasn't supposed to start this year but obviously should have started sooner. If nothing else just to see what they had in him, with an awful Wentz season.

        Lock doesn't appear to be better than either of these 3 right now. I do seriously doubt Lock ends up ever being a solid franchise QB. While it is too early to confirm that, I am willing to eat lots of humble pie if I am wrong. Unless there is a huge shake up in the front office we will find out soon enough because Lock will get a chance next year to prove us wrong without serious change.
        I'm i dont think this is correct info Tyrol Taylor was the starter going into the season for the chargers and may have remained for a while if he didn't get injured and Herbert didn't shine during that injury
        sigpic
        oakland raders gm
        latavis murray trade bait

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

          I'm not making excuses for Lock; I was countering your point about Drew Brees showing promise early in his career. 11 TDs and 15 INTs with a QB rating of 67.5 isn't exactly what I'd describe as 'showing promise', regardless of the time and circumstances, especially when you consider the Chargers ended up with the #1 overall pick as a result. Out of the predominant starters at QB in 2003, Brees' rating was ranked 29th out of the 32 QBs, so it was still well below average in the circumstances. It had nothing to do with the era he played in - he simply didn't have a good season until his 4th in the league (3rd as the starter).
          Thats a lie is 3 out of his 1st four seasons were good like it or not and you show me outwise...if you don't think playing qb back then is harder than it now?? There is no need for me to continue this discussion with you.
          Until we get a TRUE not name "Lock" qb we will miss the playoffs and be average at best! I'm E2DS and I approve this message! "AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, NOW YA KNOW."

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

            I'm not making excuses for Lock; I was countering your point about Drew Brees showing promise early in his career. 11 TDs and 15 INTs with a QB rating of 67.5 isn't exactly what I'd describe as 'showing promise', regardless of the time and circumstances, especially when you consider the Chargers ended up with the #1 overall pick as a result. Out of the predominant starters at QB in 2003, Brees' rating was ranked 29th out of the 32 QBs, so it was still well below average in the circumstances. It had nothing to do with the era he played in - he simply didn't have a good season until his 4th in the league (3rd as the starter).
            You cherry picked his 2003 season ignoring he played less games than his 2002 season, where he had generally better stats, In general it's not the stat line thats the point, its how he looked. You can look at a stat sheet and get a basic, low level idea of how something went. But it's watching the players play that tells you if they showed promise.
            It's how Drew Brees looked while being a young player in an at the time very defensive heavy NFL. And we're also talking about a QB who is seriously only 5'10 or 5'11, him being 6'0 is widely considered to be false. In comparison to Lock who is prototype QB size.

            Size does matter, which is why before drafts you see pundits spend hours talking Kyler is too small, Baker is too small, etc. Such and such has small hands. He can't see over the OL. He can't see the field.
            sigpic
            Adopted Broncos:
            EmmanuelSanders

            Comment


            • Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post

              You cherry picked his 2003 season ignoring he played less games than his 2002 season, where he had generally better stats, In general it's not the stat line thats the point, its how he looked. You can look at a stat sheet and get a basic, low level idea of how something went. But it's watching the players play that tells you if they showed promise.
              It's how Drew Brees looked while being a young player in an at the time very defensive heavy NFL. And we're also talking about a QB who is seriously only 5'10 or 5'11, him being 6'0 is widely considered to be false. In comparison to Lock who is prototype QB size.

              Size does matter, which is why before drafts you see pundits spend hours talking Kyler is too small, Baker is too small, etc. Such and such has small hands. He can't see over the OL. He can't see the field.
              Thats exactly what did. Trying to prove a weak point. See thats when you know people just be talking and making weak excuses..

              "I wondering they would have gave up on Elway Allen, Brees, blah blah. He straight chose one year Brees had a bad season and ran with it.. lock sucks its gonna take another year for the vast majority to realize that. Can anyone name one good game lock had this year vs a team with a winning record.
              please don't bring up the patriots games with the coulda woulda shoulda.
              Until we get a TRUE not name "Lock" qb we will miss the playoffs and be average at best! I'm E2DS and I approve this message! "AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, NOW YA KNOW."

              Comment


              • Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post

                You cherry picked his 2003 season ignoring he played less games than his 2002 season, where he had generally better stats, In general it's not the stat line thats the point, its how he looked.
                The reason he played less games in 2003 is because he was benched due to his poor play. Just a reminder of the comment I originally replied to:

                Originally posted by Ear2dastreets View Post

                Nope bc those two players showed promise.
                Is a player being benched and then out-performed by a 41-year-old a player that shows promise?

                Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post
                In general it's not the stat line thats the point, its how he looked.
                From memory, his play was also bad. That said, it's been 17 years and the league was different back then as you've already stated. This is a direct quote from Schottenheimer from 2003 after he benched Brees in favour of Flutie:

                “No. 1, Drew has been struggling with the accuracy part of it. And, as we know, there are a lot of issues that affect that, but the bottom line is the production hasn’t been there. And Doug Flutie brings a different style of play, as was evident the other day in the game in Chicago.”

                Prior to Brees being benched, players on the defensive side of the ball were clamouring for a change to be made (Marcellus Wiley in particular). He simply wasn't playing well and showed no signs of being a good player in the league until 2004.





                Comment


                • The Drew Lock supporters will love this, but it's worth viewing for everyone on this thread:

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D215...ature=emb_logo

                  Particularly interesting is around the 6:00 mark, where he analyzes what happened during the INT play. I have to agree that the receivers did give up. That's one of my big issues with this Fangio/Shurmur team is too many half-hearted efforts.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

                    The reason he played less games in 2003 is because he was benched due to his poor play. Just a reminder of the comment I originally replied to:



                    Is a player being benched and then out-performed by a 41-year-old a player that shows promise?



                    From memory, his play was also bad. That said, it's been 17 years and the league was different back then as you've already stated. This is a direct quote from Schottenheimer from 2003 after he benched Brees in favour of Flutie:

                    “No. 1, Drew has been struggling with the accuracy part of it. And, as we know, there are a lot of issues that affect that, but the bottom line is the production hasn’t been there. And Doug Flutie brings a different style of play, as was evident the other day in the game in Chicago.”

                    Prior to Brees being benched, players on the defensive side of the ball were clamouring for a change to be made (Marcellus Wiley in particular). He simply wasn't playing well and showed no signs of being a good player in the league until 2004.




                    If you say so some coaches do that so the qb confidence won't get down and live to fight another day. You can use 2003 and go back 17 years....again 3 out of 4 years was good...but hey lock is the next Elway.
                    Until we get a TRUE not name "Lock" qb we will miss the playoffs and be average at best! I'm E2DS and I approve this message! "AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, NOW YA KNOW."

                    Comment


                    • I think the reality is Lock will be back as our starter next season. Unless he comes out this weekend and has his worst game as a pro (which is very possible) he'll be back. I'm not rooting for him to lose, I just see a QB that has a learning deficiency. We as fans need to embrace the fact that another QB WILL be added in the off-season.

                      I'm going on record right now saying we'll have a QB controversy before we hit mid season. Lock, imo, will actually be worse when Sutton comes back because he'll just eye him down every snap. He trained with Josh Allen this past off-season, one progressed and one fell flat on his face....just saying

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post

                        You cherry picked his 2003 season ignoring he played less games than his 2002 season, where he had generally better stats, In general it's not the stat line thats the point, its how he looked. You can look at a stat sheet and get a basic, low level idea of how something went. But it's watching the players play that tells you if they showed promise.
                        It's how Drew Brees looked while being a young player in an at the time very defensive heavy NFL. And we're also talking about a QB who is seriously only 5'10 or 5'11, him being 6'0 is widely considered to be false. In comparison to Lock who is prototype QB size.

                        Size does matter, which is why before drafts you see pundits spend hours talking Kyler is too small, Baker is too small, etc. Such and such has small hands. He can't see over the OL. He can't see the field.
                        Thats a myth. Thats why Wilson is one of the best qbs in the league right now at 5'11. Thats why Kyler and Baker both went first overall not to mention Kyler is one of the up and coming players at qb. Size doesn't matter as much as like intangibles talent work ethic and football iq. It is probably one of the least effective things to judge a qb by. All qbs take time to develop and adjust to the nfl. Not short ones. What is open in college doesn't happen in the nfl. Most players are smarter and faster then the average guy you run into college. It takes time for any qb to adjust
                        sigpic
                        oakland raders gm
                        latavis murray trade bait

                        Comment


                        • Wow. LOL, this is unreal. Apparently Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers are 'good' QB's, and all we need is a 'good' QB to overcome the weak spots on our team, and Drew Lock is a bust because he's not a 'good' QB like Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers. Lock will be back next year and hopefully we'll have a healthier team with a different RT.
                          Adopt-A-Bronco: Kendell Hinton

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by listopencil View Post
                            Wow. LOL, this is unreal. Apparently Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers are 'good' QB's, and all we need is a 'good' QB to overcome the weak spots on our team, and Drew Lock is a bust because he's not a 'good' QB like Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers. Lock will be back next year and hopefully we'll have a healthier team with a different RT.
                            My signature says it all
                            Until we get a TRUE not name "Lock" qb we will miss the playoffs and be average at best! I'm E2DS and I approve this message! "AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, NOW YA KNOW."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by listopencil View Post
                              Wow. LOL, this is unreal. Apparently Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers are 'good' QB's, and all we need is a 'good' QB to overcome the weak spots on our team, and Drew Lock is a bust because he's not a 'good' QB like Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers. Lock will be back next year and hopefully we'll have a healthier team with a different RT.
                              Well, locker room talk is that Lock has a ways to go. They interviewed Melvin Gordon, and Gordon flat out said Lock has a lot to learn, and the team has to believe in him whether or not he does good. That's pretty damning, coming from a teammate. Hearing it at the end of the year tells me that the locker room doesn't really believe he's going to be the man.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

                                Well, locker room talk is that Lock has a ways to go. They interviewed Melvin Gordon, and Gordon flat out said Lock has a lot to learn, and the team has to believe in him whether or not he does good. That's pretty damning, coming from a teammate. Hearing it at the end of the year tells me that the locker room doesn't really believe he's going to be the man.
                                But guys like Sutton and Fant have praised Lockat various points as have Jeudy and Hamler. Gordon has only played with Phillip Rivers so of course he’s going to say that because he’s likely comparing him to a future HoFer. Lock does have a lot to learn but that doesn’t mean he isn’t learning.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X