If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Anthems and Protests ---
While we certainly understand the frustration by fans on all sides of the discussion, we have decided to keep the Broncos Country message boards separate from politics. Recent events have brought the NFL to the forefront of political debates, but due to the highly emotional and passionate discussion it tends to involve, we think it’s best to continue to keep politics and this forum separate. Yes, the forum is meant for discussion, but we’d like to keep that discussion to football as much as possible.
With everything going on in our country, it would be nice to keep our complaints and cheers purely related to football here. If you feel passionately, there are plenty of other outlets available to you to express your opinions. We know this isn’t the most popular decision, but we ask that you respect it.
Thank you for understanding.
--Broncos Country Message Board Staff
I think someone said it in a thread a few weeks ago....this was like debating which stinks worse: dog or cat droppings.
Bridgewater stunk, then got hurt.
Darnold stunk, then got hurt. I guess I will say Bridgewater was better than Darnold, but it wasn't by much.
Winston was injured early on.
Lock was a non-factor until the last 4 games.
Fields, not surprisingly, struggled as a rookie and also dealt with injuries.
Don't know if there's any winners in this debate.
The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.
If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.
I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…
The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.
If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.
I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…
He was undoubtedly better, but once again this was a much different situation. Joe was the starter on day one and the offense was built around him. Nagy didn't want Fields to start, he didn't get 1st ream reps until many weeks into the season, and the offense was designed for Dalton.
He was undoubtedly better, but once again this was a much different situation. Joe was the starter on day one and the offense was built around him. Nagy didn't want Fields to start, he didn't get 1st ream reps until many weeks into the season, and the offense was designed for Dalton.
I would give Burrow having Taylor develop him and the offense is better than Fields with Nagy.
That said Burrow took over a 2-14 team. Fields inherited an 8-8 team. The Bears have been better when Fields hasn't played, they look like they will go 5-2 without him. That is a fact. Hopefully the Bears bring in a coach who can develop the kid, no one questions his physical talents.
I would give Burrow having Taylor develop him and the offense is better than Fields with Nagy.
That said Burrow took over a 2-14 team. Fields inherited an 8-8 team. The Bears have been better when Fields hasn't played, they look like they will go 5-2 without him. That is a fact. Hopefully the Bears bring in a coach who can develop the kid, no one questions his physical talents.
FACT - The Bengals staff and coaches were focused on Burrow. The game planning, all of the camps, etc. The Bears were not.
FACT - Fields had the highest QB PFF score week 9 and, he received the highest of all rookies multiple weeks. Now I'm not saying he was great, but ALL of the cards were stacked against him being successful.
You can keep bootlicking the staff, but by all measures, this was a poor choice. Look at the dollars going to Bridgewater vs. the highest paid CB in the league...
The flaw in your thinking here is assuming all teams and situations are static.
If Fields is drafted his season most likely wouldn’t mirror what’s transpired in Chicago. They’re a terrible team, with the one of the worst offensive lines, he didn’t get first team reps until weeks into the season, etc. etc.
I’m pretty sure Joe Burrows rough rookie campaign ended in injury too…
The thread was simply to compare how the quarterbacks did this year. Obviously their situations were different. But, especially with Bridgewater, Darnold and Winston, there was the chance to see how good they could be as the starter. None really impressed and all 3 eventually got injured.
FACT - The Bengals staff and coaches were focused on Burrow. The game planning, all of the camps, etc. The Bears were not.
FACT - Fields had the highest QB PFF score week 9 and, he received the highest of all rookies multiple weeks. Now I'm not saying he was great, but ALL of the cards were stacked against him being successful.
You can keep bootlicking the staff, but by all measures, this was a poor choice. Look at the dollars going to Bridgewater vs. the highest paid CB in the league...
I agree on the Bengals staff focused on Burrow. He also has played well and made a huge leap from last year.
Fangio loves Teddy. But I do not think Paton got a true evaluation of Lock and looking at a young player with 2 OCs does not help. I think Lock will remain unless he is packaged for a trade of a big name QB. If we draft a new QB Lock will
likely be incumbent. I think Lock on roster was why Fields was not drafted but Fangio screwed up the evaluation by doing anything to give Teddy the starting job that Lock. I know
Lock had his issues and after 1st preseason game I thought it looked like he took big strides in progressing as a QB. Teddy was Teddy.
Tweet
Comment