Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2021 QB Crow thread

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

  • Originally posted by Humberg View Post

    This is what I find perplexing. I’m not going to say that I know for a fact that Justin Fields is the next hall of fame QB, and sure, there are some struggles but there’s also signs there of promise and viewing it through the rookie learning curve, how can you not be a little intrigued?

    And here’s the crux of what I find ridiculous about this argument. What’s the alternative? What are you proposing? I hear a number of you saying “well drafting a quarterback in the first round is far from a sure thing!” True, but then what? Don’t try? Keep taking journeyman quarterbacks that keep us dwelling in the halls of irrelevance? Are you suggesting that drafting a quarterback in the second round gives us a better chance? For those of you citing stats centered around Tom Brady do you advocate we only select quarterbacks in the sixth round? Are any of you bold (and silly) enough to argue that we have a higher statistical chance of finding a starting quarterback those other ways? Do you really think that it’s more likely we trade for Rogers or Watson? Those are blockbuster deals, Bradford was a huge trade that you just don’t see very often in the NFL, a high price paid, and Bradford is no Rogers or Watson to be sure.

    For those of you throwing up the four games Lock had as a rookie before he completely regressed, is Lock your plan for the future moving forward? Shall we sign him to a big contract? Really? Oh we’re just going to ignore last year? OTA’s? Training camp? Preseason? He was stellar coming in when TB got hurt right? Oh wait….hmmmm.

    I hear a lot of posters saying that continually passing on a quarterback in the first round is the right way to go. Well, what’s your proposal to fix that position because that is the approach we have been taking and the quarterback room has been utterly broken for seven years. Your approach has been tried and has failed to this point so the burden of proof is on you to argue why we shouldn’t take a different approach.

    And before you get too comfortable with Teddy B, remember, he’s destined to be a one year starter for us. If he’s good enough (debatable) to get us in to the playoffs, his free agency price tag is going to be probably bigger than we could (or should) afford. If he’s not good enough to get us into the playoffs, why would you pursue and overpay him? So what’s your realistic plan for 2022? I know one thing, there is more hope for the quarterback position in Chicago to vastly improve over the next few years than we have in Denver.

    Yes, drafting a QB in the first round will produce the Paxton Lynch’s and Tim Tebow’s of the world (although I would argue that Tebow was not a valid first round pick as nobody else other than McD thought so). And I’ll admit, Fields may turn out to be a bust. Trying in this world is sometimes going to fail. But sticking with it would have gotten us Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Justin Fields, Mac Jones. I would rather have any of those quarterbacks right now than what we have. Are you saying that you wouldn’t? And do you really think that Chubb, Jeudy and Surtain are more valuable than a legit starting quarterback? Are they going to be the missing cog in the wheel that is going to propel us to a championship? I don’t think so. Why you ask? Show me a division leader without a franchise quarterback right now in the NFL. Which is exactly why all of those players have been mentioned in the trade scenarios if a trade at quarterback were to happen. It’s because none of them are near as important as a legit, starting NFL quarterback. It’s a QB driven league, most important position in all of football and that even includes the coaches.

    And if the goal is to win a super bowl, bar none there has been no higher yield area to find a super bowl winning quarterback than the first round of the draft. Nothing else is even close and even that includes the unicorns like Tom Brady.

    So I’m calling out the posters that throw shade on Justin Fields. Instead of just ripping the idea of drafting him, give your long term solution at the quarterback position and make the argument for why that is a better way to go. I’m doubtful that you’ll be able to as I suspect once you stop defending the team decisions and strip away the Orange colored glasses and Kool-aid, there isn’t a whole lot of substance there for an alternative plan.
    The posters you’re talking about seem to have a vested interest in Fields failing.

    I don’t understand why that is. If in three years Fields turns out to be a superstar, those same people will be wondering why the Broncos didn’t draft him.

    I don’t think Shurmur is the right coach to work with Fields, so I am happy for him that the Broncos didn’t draft him. Just as I am happy for Josh Allen that the Broncos didn’t draft him.

    My Opinion isn’t determined by what the Popular Opinion is. Sometimes I agree with the Majority, Sometimes I Don’t. If My Opinion is Different than Yours, I have to Ask One Question:
    You Mad Bro?
    Don’t Be A Mean Girl

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Humberg View Post


      I hear a lot of posters saying that continually passing on a quarterback in the first round is the right way to go. Well, what’s your proposal to fix that position because that is the approach we have been taking and the quarterback room has been utterly broken for seven years. Your approach has been tried and has failed to this point so the burden of proof is on you to argue why we shouldn’t take a different approach.
      This seems like a straw-man. Is anyone saying that?

      Or have posters simply been defending the FO for not taking a QB they didn't believe was the answer?

      I can only speak for myself, but I honestly expected us to draft Fields when he fell to us, and I was shocked when we didn't.

      I was ok with it, because I wanted to see what Teddy and/or Lock could bring.

      I personally preach patience. While NEVER drafting a QB in the first round is not a sound policy, neither is simply drafting one and tossing them immediately.

      We drafted Lynch in the first round in 2016. He didn't look great in his rookie year, but we rightly didn't give up immediately and we kept him around another year. He was still horrible, so we dumped him.

      We should have gone after a QB in 2018. They liked Chubb too much and chose to go that route instead. I REALLY wanted either Jackson or Allen, personally... but I think if we went with the popular choice amongst fans at the time, we probably would have gotten Rosen. My reasoning for wanting either of those two isn't because I claim to be a College QB guru... quite the opposite... the only two schools I follow even a bit in college are UofL and UWyo. So I was biased for those two, and I remember seeing fans everywhere saying they'd both be busts.

      We drafted Lock in 2019. While a first round QB is preferable for trying to find your franchise guy, there's not a huge difference between a late first round pick and an early second round pick, and I don't mind picking a QB up in that spot if you think they can be 'the guy'.

      Lock came in and took a team that looked horrible with Flacco and turned in a 4-1 record with them.

      In his second year, Lock looked much worse, but there were honestly enough extenuating circumstances to the season that I was willing to stick it out for one more year IF the guy we wanted in the draft wasn't there.

      They brought in Teddy as a high-level backup/mentor/fallback plan, IMO... for in case of injury or to help teach either Lock and/or a rookie if the right one was there for us.

      Ultimately, they didn't choose to go after a QB at 9.

      Then Teddy beat out Lock in the offseason and here we are.

      No, we absolutely should not be avoiding picking a QB in the first round at all costs. That's silly.

      Nor should we be picking a QB in the first round who we don't think will be successful. That's just as silly.

      Fields is getting most of the attention as the QB argument guy because he was the one that everyone thought we would pick when he slid to us. If he doesn't work out and Jones does, everyone will put on their hindsight glasses and say 'We could have had Jones'. Sure, it's true, but it's not the genius move everyone was saying we should have made at the time.

      Picking Fields when not believing him to be the answer would be like picking Rosen when not believing he was the answer. Or even like picking Allen or Jackson while not believing they are the answer. If the team picked them out of some sort of 'responsibility' to pick a QB in the first round, what are the chances that the staff properly buys in and develops them with patience?

      I'll go a step further.

      A lot of comments have been made about how we should have gotten one this last draft because there's no good QBs in the next draft. If that turns out to be true, and come draft time next year there's no QB we believe could be our future... I don't want them to pick a QB just to pick a QB. Build up the trenches. Build the team that you will need to support the guy whenever you can get the guy, but don't go all in on a QB that you think is going to fail. Trade for a few future picks in the process to build up ammo for when a guy comes around you can actually believe in.

      Never for a second have I felt that Keenum, or Flacco, or etc etc. was their attempt to solidify our future at the position. They were meant as something to give us our best chance while we continue our search, because it's really hard to find those actual top-10 QBs that we all desperately want.

      We have a GM in his first year in the position, and it feels like the detractors act as though he's at fault for us being a crappy franchise since SB XXXIII. In reality, we've only been looking for a QB for 5 years, and we've drafted a QB twice in that time period. I'm ok with them getting 2-3 years to see what they have instead of just 1, so I don't feel we're that off track.

      It feels like the level response Paton is getting for passing on 2 QBs is the same as if he'd had the first overall pick the past five years and decided against drafting a QB every single time. In reality, we looked into the cost of trading for several different QBs that we felt were upgrades to our situation, and we simply didn't believe that Fields or Jones were upgrades.





      Comment


      • Originally posted by LordTrychon View Post

        This seems like a straw-man. Is anyone saying that?

        Or have posters simply been defending the FO for not taking a QB they didn't believe was the answer?
        I understand your point. I think it’s not as simple as defending not taking a player because they didn’t feel they were the right player. Seven years. They’ve had seven years to figure this out. It’s not just one draft, one off season. One pick. It’s seven years. That’s not a decision, it’s a culture, a guiding philosophy, a legacy of failure. It’s picking LB, WR, CB despite not having solidified the quarterback. It’s refusing to be in rebuild while trying to shoot the moon statistically given that you gave a weak link at the most important, fundamental piece in your team.

        I can only speak for myself, but I honestly expected us to draft Fields when he fell to us, and I was shocked when we didn't.

        I was ok with it, because I wanted to see what Teddy and/or Lock could bring.

        I personally preach patience.
        Shock yes. And not okay with it because it is rare you have that opportunity. And I think it goes beyond being curious about what Lock or Teddy could do. Sure, if they play lights out, then at worst you have a first round quarterback that you trade later for a ransom. But did either Lock or Teddy really have enough going for them at that point to justify belief that they were going to lead this team to the promised land? Patience and exploring options is great, but you also have to hedge your bets and be realistic.

        While NEVER drafting a QB in the first round is not a sound policy, neither is simply drafting one and tossing them immediately.

        We drafted Lynch in the first round in 2016. He didn't look great in his rookie year, but we rightly didn't give up immediately and we kept him around another year. He was still horrible, so we dumped him.
        You could argue there was ample evidence that he wasn’t going to work out prior to the 2017 season and the extra year was not justified. I mean he can’t even make it in the CFL that’s how bad he is.

        We should have gone after a QB in 2018. They liked Chubb too much and chose to go that route instead. I REALLY wanted either Jackson or Allen, personally... but I think if we went with the popular choice amongst fans at the time, we probably would have gotten Rosen. My reasoning for wanting either of those two isn't because I claim to be a College QB guru... quite the opposite... the only two schools I follow even a bit in college are UofL and UWyo. So I was biased for those two, and I remember seeing fans everywhere saying they'd both be busts.
        Yep, another opportunity wasted. No other way to look at this.

        We drafted Lock in 2019. While a first round QB is preferable for trying to find your franchise guy, there's not a huge difference between a late first round pick and an early second round pick, and I don't mind picking a QB up in that spot if you think they can be 'the guy'.

        Lock came in and took a team that looked horrible with Flacco and turned in a 4-1 record with them.

        In his second year, Lock looked much worse, but there were honestly enough extenuating circumstances to the season that I was willing to stick it out for one more year IF the guy we wanted in the draft wasn't there.
        Ok. Didn’t have a problem with drafting Lock per se. Didn’t really have a chance to get someone else that year. I agree he looked promising as a rookie before teams had tape on him. However, while it’s possible there are extenuating circumstances that following season, hanging your chances on that is problematic when you have a chance the next draft to go get a top talent.

        They brought in Teddy as a high-level backup/mentor/fallback plan, IMO... for in case of injury or to help teach either Lock and/or a rookie if the right one was there for us.

        Ultimately, they didn't choose to go after a QB at 9.

        Then Teddy beat out Lock in the offseason and here we are.
        Yep, you said it. Here we are now realizing that was a colossal mistake. Again .

        No, we absolutely should not be avoiding picking a QB in the first round at all costs. That's silly.

        Nor should we be picking a QB in the first round who we don't think will be successful. That's just as silly.

        Fields is getting most of the attention as the QB argument guy because he was the one that everyone thought we would pick when he slid to us. If he doesn't work out and Jones does, everyone will put on their hindsight glasses and say 'We could have had Jones'. Sure, it's true, but it's not the genius move everyone was saying we should have made at the time.

        Picking Fields when not believing him to be the answer would be like picking Rosen when not believing he was the answer. Or even like picking Allen or Jackson while not believing they are the answer. If the team picked them out of some sort of 'responsibility' to pick a QB in the first round, what are the chances that the staff properly buys in and develops them with patience?
        So, acknowledging that is a bit of a crap shoot, is the alternative not to play the game? What you are arguing is that either Denver was operating under the philosophy of “if it’s not a sure thing then we better not do it” or they actually believed more in Sanchez, Bortles, Siemien, Flacco, Keenum and Bridgewater more than Allen, Jackson, Fields, and Jones. If the former, then that’s just not reality based drafting and if the second that’s just plain stupidity. So either they are delusional or stupid? Which are you arguing?

        I'll go a step further.

        A lot of comments have been made about how we should have gotten one this last draft because there's no good QBs in the next draft. If that turns out to be true, and come draft time next year there's no QB we believe could be our future... I don't want them to pick a QB just to pick a QB. Build up the trenches. Build the team that you will need to support the guy whenever you can get the guy, but don't go all in on a QB that you think is going to fail. Trade for a few future picks in the process to build up ammo for when a guy comes around you can actually believe in.
        You know, I could actually understand and respect that. If they stockpiled picks throughout the last few years eyeing a Trevor Lawrence, Kyler Murray etc then that would be sensible. If they built one of the best offensive lines in football that would be reasonable. That is definitely not what they did. They picked position players while neglecting these other areas. I’ll agree, a distant second to the quarterback in terms of importance are the trenches. Too bad the Broncos did none of this.

        Never for a second have I felt that Keenum, or Flacco, or etc etc. was their attempt to solidify our future at the position. They were meant as something to give us our best chance while we continue our search, because it's really hard to find those actual top-10 QBs that we all desperately want.
        .

        Hard to catch fish unless you actually cast your line in the fishing hole. In case it’s not clear, the line is the draft pick, the fishing hole for quarterbacks is the first round of the NFL draft.

        We have a GM in his first year in the position, and it feels like the detractors act as though he's at fault for us being a crappy franchise since SB XXXIII. In reality, we've only been looking for a QB for 5 years, and we've drafted a QB twice in that time period. I'm ok with them getting 2-3 years to see what they have instead of just 1, so I don't feel we're that off track.

        It feels like the level response Paton is getting for passing on 2 QBs is the same as if he'd had the first overall pick the past five years and decided against drafting a QB every single time. In reality, we looked into the cost of trading for several different QBs that we felt were upgrades to our situation, and we simply didn't believe that Fields or Jones were upgrades.
        Oh, while others don’t agree here, I don’t believe this was Paton. Paton is in his first year. And this is the same philosophy we’ve seen throughout, the exact same trash. Paton answers to Elway. Elway is responsible for the mess of the last half decade plus. This has Elways prints all over it.
        To permit irresponsible authority is to sell disaster. (Heinlein)...like Broncos season tickets!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Humberg View Post


          So, acknowledging that is a bit of a crap shoot, is the alternative not to play the game? What you are arguing is that either Denver was operating under the philosophy of “if it’s not a sure thing then we better not do it” or they actually believed more in Sanchez, Bortles, Siemien, Flacco, Keenum and Bridgewater more than Allen, Jackson, Fields, and Jones. If the former, then that’s just not reality based drafting and if the second that’s just plain stupidity. So either they are delusional or stupid? Which are you arguing?
          See, here you are taking the straw man and trying to apply it to what I said.

          I absolutely am not advocating never taking a QB.

          What I AM saying is that just because we need a QB doesn't mean we should draft ones that we think will fail.

          Let's say hypothetically that all the horrible teams below us in wins flip their season around and go on a tear and we go on a losing streak and somehow magically have the first pick in the upcoming draft. If our talent evaluators honestly believe that every single QB in the draft is going to flop, should they just pick one anyway?

          I understand why you would feel that this was an Elway move. Nothing I can say I don't think will change your mind. In the end, that doesn't change much.

          In the years since Manning, we've had one year where I've felt that we should have picked a QB that was available and we didn't. That was prior to the current GM. So I don't place the onus for that on Paton. He wasn't here.

          Yeah, we can't catch a fish if we don't cast a line. It's easy to say it was a mistake to not draft Allen and Jackson. Do you also think that it was a mistake to pass on Rosen, as many fans at the time did?

          Obviously passing on Allen and Jackson was a mistake. I don't think it was done for any of the reasons you are applying to it. They thought they had a chance to put the best pass rushing two headed monster ever, and couldn't pass it up. Obviously that didn't work out. Add in that they maybe felt that Allen/Rosen/Jackson would flop. A lot of teams did. How many teams do you think would go back and pick up Jackson now if they could? Pretty much everyone had a shot at him.

          The guy has had one draft and one offseason thus far, and aside from an arguable/potential mistake in not grabbing Fields/Jones (jury will be out for a while, because if neither of those two end up working out, it was the right move, regardless of how you, I or anyone else feels about it), I think he's done a pretty bang up job of putting this team in a position to win games.

          We're 5-4. We went 5-11 last year. Provided that we don't go on a 8 game slide, the team has improved. That's Paton's job. I'm just not going to crucify the guy for one 'maybe' mistake in his first draft with the team while he has thus far shown that he is doing a good job.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LordTrychon View Post

            See, here you are taking the straw man and trying to apply it to what I said.

            I absolutely am not advocating never taking a QB.

            What I AM saying is that just because we need a QB doesn't mean we should draft ones that we think will fail.

            Let's say hypothetically that all the horrible teams below us in wins flip their season around and go on a tear and we go on a losing streak and somehow magically have the first pick in the upcoming draft. If our talent evaluators honestly believe that every single QB in the draft is going to flop, should they just pick one anyway?

            I understand why you would feel that this was an Elway move. Nothing I can say I don't think will change your mind. In the end, that doesn't change much.

            In the years since Manning, we've had one year where I've felt that we should have picked a QB that was available and we didn't. That was prior to the current GM. So I don't place the onus for that on Paton. He wasn't here.

            Yeah, we can't catch a fish if we don't cast a line. It's easy to say it was a mistake to not draft Allen and Jackson. Do you also think that it was a mistake to pass on Rosen, as many fans at the time did?

            Obviously passing on Allen and Jackson was a mistake. I don't think it was done for any of the reasons you are applying to it. They thought they had a chance to put the best pass rushing two headed monster ever, and couldn't pass it up. Obviously that didn't work out. Add in that they maybe felt that Allen/Rosen/Jackson would flop. A lot of teams did. How many teams do you think would go back and pick up Jackson now if they could? Pretty much everyone had a shot at him.

            The guy has had one draft and one offseason thus far, and aside from an arguable/potential mistake in not grabbing Fields/Jones (jury will be out for a while, because if neither of those two end up working out, it was the right move, regardless of how you, I or anyone else feels about it), I think he's done a pretty bang up job of putting this team in a position to win games.

            We're 5-4. We went 5-11 last year. Provided that we don't go on a 8 game slide, the team has improved. That's Paton's job. I'm just not going to crucify the guy for one 'maybe' mistake in his first draft with the team while he has thus far shown that he is doing a good job.
            I agree with you on Paton. I think he’s done some positive things, it’s way too early to judge and, as you know but perhaps disagree with, I think he had nothing to do with our decision to pass on a quarterback at 9 this past draft.

            I see your reasoning and I guess, to me, it sounds like we mostly differ on the threshold of potential that should be used to draft quarterback in the first round. I think if you don’t have a clearly established, NFL starting quarterback leading your team, then you know the best place to find one is in the first round and the threshold should be fairly low for drafting quarterback in the first round, even year after year, until you find that guy. We had 4 chances pass through our fingers in the last few years alone to do so that would have solidified our team for years to come.

            Having the bar too high, meaning not drafting one if you don’t think they are the “right” guy, is clearly not working for us. So something needs to be adjusted. And it’s gone on long enough that it’s not attributable to just a mistake, the problem is systemic. So it’s worth taking a look and figuring out what is the systemic issue causing the team to have starting, good NFL quarterbacks fall through your grasp in the first round year after year.

            It seems like either they are too squeamish to draft one having been burned recently (in which case the Broncos need to get back on the horse) or the scouting is bad and you need someone else doing that.
            To permit irresponsible authority is to sell disaster. (Heinlein)...like Broncos season tickets!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Humberg View Post

              So, acknowledging that is a bit of a crap shoot, is the alternative not to play the game? What you are arguing is that either Denver was operating under the philosophy of “if it’s not a sure thing then we better not do it” or they actually believed more in Sanchez, Bortles, Siemien, Flacco, Keenum and Bridgewater more than Allen, Jackson, Fields, and Jones. If the former, then that’s just not reality based drafting and if the second that’s just plain stupidity. So either they are delusional or stupid? Which are you arguing?
              You seem to be ignoring that most of those quarterbacks are also first-round picks, just first-round picks that didn't quite work out on the first team they were on. Sanchez was taken #5 overall. Bortles was taken #3 overall. Flacco was #18 overall. Bridgewater was #32nd overall. The decision the front office made was in essence that the gamble that a failed first-round pick could work out with a change of scheme, team and coaching was a marginally smaller gamble than that an untested first-rounder with major question marks wouldn't bust, with the additional gamble of the opportunity cost of trading away a lot of draft picks to move up enough to grab someone higher in the first round that they thought might have fewer question marks for which the bust potential would be smaller. If a QB isn't going in the very first few picks of the draft, as with Fields and Jones, there are major question marks.

              I don't think the answer is obvious in the general case, and you pretty much have to look at the particulars of each situation. Kyle Shanahan took the other fork in the road this season, trading away a lot of draft capital to move up to #3 to get Trey Lance...who has not played except for when Garoppolo was injured and he had to, with pretty terrible stats albeit on a smallish sample size. So there are still major question marks about that.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Humberg View Post

                I agree with you on Paton. I think he’s done some positive things, it’s way too early to judge and, as you know but perhaps disagree with, I think he had nothing to do with our decision to pass on a quarterback at 9 this past draft.

                I see your reasoning and I guess, to me, it sounds like we mostly differ on the threshold of potential that should be used to draft quarterback in the first round. I think if you don’t have a clearly established, NFL starting quarterback leading your team, then you know the best place to find one is in the first round and the threshold should be fairly low for drafting quarterback in the first round, even year after year, until you find that guy. We had 4 chances pass through our fingers in the last few years alone to do so that would have solidified our team for years to come.

                Having the bar too high, meaning not drafting one if you don’t think they are the “right” guy, is clearly not working for us. So something needs to be adjusted. And it’s gone on long enough that it’s not attributable to just a mistake, the problem is systemic. So it’s worth taking a look and figuring out what is the systemic issue causing the team to have starting, good NFL quarterbacks fall through your grasp in the first round year after year.

                It seems like either they are too squeamish to draft one having been burned recently (in which case the Broncos need to get back on the horse) or the scouting is bad and you need someone else doing that.
                It's *possible* that Elway pressured Paton not to draft a QB this year, but I find it unlikely. Granting that though, the good news is that it does seem that Paton is in charge of at least everything else and you agree he's done an admirable job. I trust him with the future of the position, and there's more offseasons in the future. Glad we still have games to play this year though.

                Heck, maybe Elway WAS partially involved in this draft, so he told Paton to wait to go after a QB, because he's bad luck.

                I do understand where you're coming from.... the QB position is so fundamentally important, it's almost just worth throwing at the wall until it works. But you would be the first GM ever to throw 4 1st round picks in a row at the position, I think. Eventually you have to be willing to give more than a year to a QB to see if they'd be any good, or drafting Allen wouldn't have worked for us. (And I'm not one who thinks we would have ruined Allen). We *maybe* should have given up on Lynch after one year. Based on what we know now, it seems that the signs of his failure were probably already there for those who worked with him closely. Us fans got much less of a view of him. Lock absolutely should have gotten more than 1 year before being deemed a failure... and while I believe he deserved at least one more offseason, I can understand those who didn't, particularly given our draft position.

                Going back for fun....

                If we started searching for another QB in 2015....

                2015 we could have had Garrett Grayson, Sean Mannion, Bryce Petty, or Brett Hundley (though Siemian we did get, and who performed at lest admirably considering)

                2016 we DID draft a QB. If we'd passed on Lynch, we could have instead had Dak Prescott, but it is more likely that we end up with Hackenberg, Brissett, Kessler, or Cook.

                2017 if we gave up on Lynch, instead we could have passed on Bolles, and gotten the boon of Kizer, Webb, Beathard, Dobbs, Peterman, or Kaaya... though we did snag Swag, so we took a flyer at least.

                2018 Here everyone agrees we could have done better than Chubb. Though there's the chance that we screw the pooch and get Rosen here, this one was a flub.

                2019 If we pass on Fant and take the next QB off the board we get...... Lock. Ok... other options available include Grier, Finley, Stidham, Stick, Thorson, Minshew, and McSorley.

                2020 We pass on Fant and get... Love, Hurts, Eason, Morgan, Fromm, Luton etc etc. Love or Hurts may end up working out... we'll see.

                Of course if we go this path, everything else about who we draft and where changes pretty quickly, and maybe we could have had some better options available, because we probably end up with even worse records along the way.

                Eh.

                I hold that in the past 6 drafts, we screwed up once in our approach to the QB position. Everyone loves to blame us for not getting 'the guy' in any of these drafts, but we really haven't been in a position to do so that often. 1 screw up in 6 drafts, and the current GM wasn't a part of that.

                So I feel we were justified in not taking all of these mostly failed options above, and had we drafted many of them, the team is in a worse spot.

                The jury will be out on this year (and last year really) for another few years.

                Edit: If I had gone back a year further, we could have snagged Bridgewater instead of Roby. I really wanted him badly. Sits behind Manning for a few years, and doesn't likely have the near career ending injury that derailed him. Man... now I'm a bit depressed.


                Last edited by LordTrychon; 11-12-2021, 06:31 AM.

                Comment


                • You know what, after today, I'm calling it all a tie. Bridgewater is not better than Darnold or Winston....today proves it. Mahomes, Herbert and Carr destroyed this Eagles defense....Bridgewater? Nothing...a big fat zero.

                  Bridgewater, Darnold, Winston....all 3 are garbage. No one was right.

                  The only one to be determined is Fields.

                  This thread is done.

                  Comment


                  • Jones should have been the choice.
                    My Opinion isn’t determined by what the Popular Opinion is. Sometimes I agree with the Majority, Sometimes I Don’t. If My Opinion is Different than Yours, I have to Ask One Question:
                    You Mad Bro?
                    Don’t Be A Mean Girl

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by broncolee View Post
                      Jones should have been the choice.
                      Jones is limited. Dude looks good in an offense that is designed to make QBs look good. There’s no reason to believe he’s any better than Matt Cassel at this point yet.
                      Eternal Broncos Optimist

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post

                        Jones is limited. Dude looks good in an offense that is designed to make QBs look good. There’s no reason to believe he’s any better than Matt Cassel at this point yet.
                        Missing the point. Question is, would you rather have rolled with Jones or Fields to see what you got or go the route we did with Teddy? I know my preference and who I think had a bigger upside.
                        To permit irresponsible authority is to sell disaster. (Heinlein)...like Broncos season tickets!

                        Comment


                        • No crow eating for this guy....Teddy is trash will always be just a backup. Denver needs to be all in on another QB via trade or draft. I am going to have the boxing gloves on ready to argue with anybody who says we don't need or should go another route

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Humberg View Post

                            Missing the point. Question is, would you rather have rolled with Jones or Fields to see what you got or go the route we did with Teddy? I know my preference and who I think had a bigger upside.
                            I don’t want to see any young QB in Denver until Shurmur is gone. He’s been here a year and a half and every QB he’s had looks like utter garbage. At some point you need to stop blaming the talent you have and take a serious look at how they’re being used.
                            Eternal Broncos Optimist

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post

                              Jones is limited. Dude looks good in an offense that is designed to make QBs look good. There’s no reason to believe he’s any better than Matt Cassel at this point yet.
                              If the Broncos were to have drafted a quarterback, Jones is the one they should have drafted. He is the only one of the first rounders that had a chance to succeed in Denver with this coaching staff.

                              Going into the draft, I thought Lock was going to get a legitimate chance to be the starter so I wanted Micah Parsons. If I thought they had given up on Lock, I would have wanted Fields or Jones. Realizing now just how inept Shurmur is as a coach, Jones would have been the better choice of the two, even though Fields has the greater upside.
                              My Opinion isn’t determined by what the Popular Opinion is. Sometimes I agree with the Majority, Sometimes I Don’t. If My Opinion is Different than Yours, I have to Ask One Question:
                              You Mad Bro?
                              Don’t Be A Mean Girl

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post

                                I don’t want to see any young QB in Denver until Shurmur is gone. He’s been here a year and a half and every QB he’s had looks like utter garbage. At some point you need to stop blaming the talent you have and take a serious look at how they’re being used.
                                Maybe. I know you and I have disagreed on this before. To be clear, I agree Shurmer should have been on his way out of town in the off season. On the other hand…

                                Daniel Jones did okay under him. And in the end you can’t make chicken soup out of chicken poop. And poop is all Shurmer has to work with right now. He is not working with a quarterback room that has starting NFL talent, so….
                                To permit irresponsible authority is to sell disaster. (Heinlein)...like Broncos season tickets!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X