Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who would you bring in at QB during the offseason, and why?

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

  • Originally posted by broncolee View Post
    You can’t just keep drafting a quarterback.

    You do have to try to support the one you have.

    While I’m fine with moving on from Lock , if that’s what they decide to do, I’m also okay with them giving him another year.
    And why can't they, especially considering the situation they're in? Lock hasn't shown substantial improvement in his areas of weakness. He still has mechanics issues, he still doesn't understand defenses, he still takes chances on forcing plays that result in turnovers. That's not proving worth of committing to him. You can still draft another guy in the first round, and try to work with them both. Let them figure it out who gets the job. It isn't like the Broncos QB room is stocked. If anything, it's the opposite. In fact, itt's devoid of quality NFL QBs. The Broncos can pick up decent replacements for other positions later in the draft: CB, LB, maybe an EDGE or RB.

    The Broncos have tried the limp-along mode with their QB's then drafting BPA, and it hasn't worked. Even if you go back to the day Elway retired, it hasn't worked. Why not try a different approach?
    Last edited by DiveInstructor; 01-26-2021, 03:04 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

      And why can't they, especially considering the situation they're in? Lock hasn't shown substantial improvement in his areas of weakness. He still has mechanics issues, he still doesn't understand defenses, he still takes chances on forcing plays that result in turnovers. That's not proving worth of committing to him. You can still draft another guy in the first round, and try to work with them both. Let them figure it out who gets the job. It isn't like the Broncos QB room is stocked. If anything, it's the opposite. In fact, itt's devoid of quality NFL QBs. The Broncos can pick up decent replacements for other positions later in the draft: CB, LB, maybe an EDGE or RB.

      The Broncos have tried the limp-along mode with their QB's then drafting BPA, and it hasn't worked. Even if you go back to the day Elway retired, it hasn't worked. Why not try a different approach?
      Like I said, I’m fine with them moving on from Lock.

      However, the next guy needs a chance to at least show that he can be the guy. You can’t expect all pro performance in year one.
      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

        Like I said, I’m fine with them moving on from Lock.

        However, the next guy needs a chance to at least show that he can be the guy. You can’t expect all pro performance in year one.
        I don't, which is why I'm ok with keeping Lock to see if he can make the progression to being a better QB. I wouldn't expect the next guy to do that, either. But, you might get someone who shows signs of being good. Again, it's pretty much a crap shoot, which is why I'm in favor of increasing the number of guys you're looking at instead of sitting on one guy and hoping for the best. Wouldn't hurt to use that 1st round pick to get a QB, even if it means somehow trading up to do so. More of a play the odds approach at that position, which is the one position worth doing that. Nothing on a team is as key as filling that QB slot.

        Comment


        • We have a starting quarterback, whether he's good or bad he is under contract and he's our starter for now . So we keep drafting mid round quarterbacks until somebody can beat out the current starter. I believe we kinda need 2 decent quarterbacks on the roster. This is only my opinion, and there's so many different opinions on which way is the best way to go.

          Comment


          • I would try to trade for Gardner Minshew. I think he's the perfect guy who could add real competition for Lock and be a viable starting option if Lock doesn't improve, and also wouldn't break the bank as far as salary or draft capital in a trade.
            A book I wrote

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

              And why can't they, especially considering the situation they're in? Lock hasn't shown substantial improvement in his areas of weakness. He still has mechanics issues, he still doesn't understand defenses, he still takes chances on forcing plays that result in turnovers. That's not proving worth of committing to him. You can still draft another guy in the first round, and try to work with them both. Let them figure it out who gets the job. It isn't like the Broncos QB room is stocked. If anything, it's the opposite. In fact, itt's devoid of quality NFL QBs. The Broncos can pick up decent replacements for other positions later in the draft: CB, LB, maybe an EDGE or RB.

              The Broncos have tried the limp-along mode with their QB's then drafting BPA, and it hasn't worked. Even if you go back to the day Elway retired, it hasn't worked. Why not try a different approach?
              Here's the problem in my opinion. You keep expending draft capital, and good capital at that for QBs, and you keep missing out on highly talented players in other positions. Someday you look back and realize that you used maybe a couple of firsts and maybe a few seconds, who never secured the job....all on QBs. And then you match those picks with pro bowlers, even all pros, and those players were available to us had we not kept searching for a QB.

              I think you are not for trading this year to acquire a good QB, which is fine, but at some point I would prefer to solidify and move on. I am not big on saying we can find a CB or LB or Edge or Oliner later in the draft, BECAUSE we used up yet another chunk of capital on a QB. I respect all positions, and therefore I say do your best to acquire your long term starter, and then spend the next years searching for top talent at every other position.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                Here's the problem in my opinion. You keep expending draft capital, and good capital at that for QBs, and you keep missing out on highly talented players in other positions. Someday you look back and realize that you used maybe a couple of firsts and maybe a few seconds, who never secured the job....all on QBs. And then you match those picks with pro bowlers, even all pros, and those players were available to us had we not kept searching for a QB.

                I think you are not for trading this year to acquire a good QB, which is fine, but at some point I would prefer to solidify and move on. I am not big on saying we can find a CB or LB or Edge or Oliner later in the draft, BECAUSE we used up yet another chunk of capital on a QB. I respect all positions, and therefore I say do your best to acquire your long term starter, and then spend the next years searching for top talent at every other position.
                To play devil's advocate, arnt you just wasting all those first round picks anyway If you don't have a QB to build around? You think we have a snowballs chance in hell to win the division with Mahomes and Herbert with out a STAR QB? Do you think a stellar defense with a game manger type QB beats the chiefs consistently? Like the 49ers?

                We need a QB, Lock can complete but we need a contender, it's like a lottery ticket and we need to keep buying tickets. Spend alllll the other draft picks on defense and all FA money on defense cause our offense is set other than QB.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by S037474 View Post

                  To play devil's advocate, arnt you just wasting all those first round picks anyway If you don't have a QB to build around? You think we have a snowballs chance in hell to win the division with Mahomes and Herbert with out a STAR QB? Do you think a stellar defense with a game manger type QB beats the chiefs consistently? Like the 49ers?

                  We need a QB, Lock can complete but we need a contender, it's like a lottery ticket and we need to keep buying tickets. Spend alllll the other draft picks on defense and all FA money on defense cause our offense is set other than QB.
                  While the QB is the most important player and his play compared to the opposing QB has about 88% correlation to victory, the only way to win that battle is to keep the scoring down. Like with Tom Brady in the past you were not going to win a shootout, and so to speak all the losses he has are when opposing defenses keep the score down. If you kept Brady under 24 you could win otherwise not. That is the same with Mahomes. It is a pipe dream that we draft a QB that outplays Mahomes on a regular basis. A formula like Titans had last year in the playoffs is good if your defense holds, and Ryan Tannehill is no Patrick Mahomes!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

                    While the QB is the most important player and his play compared to the opposing QB has about 88% correlation to victory, the only way to win that battle is to keep the scoring down. Like with Tom Brady in the past you were not going to win a shootout, and so to speak all the losses he has are when opposing defenses keep the score down. If you kept Brady under 24 you could win otherwise not. That is the same with Mahomes. It is a pipe dream that we draft a QB that outplays Mahomes on a regular basis. A formula like Titans had last year in the playoffs is good if your defense holds, and Ryan Tannehill is no Patrick Mahomes!
                    The past few years, the Broncos could barely score 20 points a game. Even when the defense held the opponent to 24 or less, the offense could not score enough points to win. I think there are playmakers on offense, but they need a better quarterback to get them to the 24 points you refer to in your post.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • One thing to consider is that the one time Rodgers got to the Super Bowl is when the Packers had a top ten defense.

                      The offense does need to be more productive and that starts with the quarterback. The Broncos either need Lock to get better quickly or they need to find a better quarterback.

                      They still need to get better elsewhere also.

                      I believe I even heard that Brady has had a top ten defense supporting him in 9 of his 10 Super Bowl appearances, including the upcoming one.
                      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
                        One thing to consider is that the one time Rodgers got to the Super Bowl is when the Packers had a top ten defense.

                        The offense does need to be more productive and that starts with the quarterback. The Broncos either need Lock to get better quickly or they need to find a better quarterback.

                        They still need to get better elsewhere also.

                        I believe I even heard that Brady has had a top ten defense supporting him in 9 of his 10 Super Bowl appearances, including the upcoming one.
                        Excellent point. Elway didn't win Super Bowls until his Defense was outstanding in the regular season, and the Super Bowl. Brady is in this Super Bowl because his defense stepped up in the second half when Brady was average.

                        Our Defense, healthy, resigned to full strength is pretty good. But Kelce, Hill, and Oakland's TE, kill us every time we play them. If you get someone that improves those three defensive coverage's and much better QB play, you have a division contender that makes the playoffs, and then who knows week to week there.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by qbronco View Post

                          The past few years, the Broncos could barely score 20 points a game. Even when the defense held the opponent to 24 or less, the offense could not score enough points to win. I think there are playmakers on offense, but they need a better quarterback to get them to the 24 points you refer to in your post.
                          Duuuh!

                          We are not discussing the need for abetter QB than Lock - it is how to get him and what to pay! Basis is to win the SB the lecture of the last 20 years is that you pretty much have to have a cheap QB. Except for 2015 and this year SB has been won on rookie contracts and by Tom Brady taking millions less than ex. Peyton.

                          Yes we need a better QB but you take an Alex Smith or the like and we do not have to suffer Lock. Interceptions and lost balls giving opponents short fields are killers. A Jake Plummer type would be brilliant. Lock for all the hype is one one of the worst starting QBs we have had for decades.

                          Just to put things in perspective Elway in SB32 and Manning in SB50 and Tebow in the divisional round of 2011 were statistically on par. Strong supporting staff and defense is essential. Our defense underperforms at the moment because there is no way to make them feel like their effort will result in wins.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                            Here's the problem in my opinion. You keep expending draft capital, and good capital at that for QBs, and you keep missing out on highly talented players in other positions. Someday you look back and realize that you used maybe a couple of firsts and maybe a few seconds, who never secured the job....all on QBs. And then you match those picks with pro bowlers, even all pros, and those players were available to us had we not kept searching for a QB.

                            I think you are not for trading this year to acquire a good QB, which is fine, but at some point I would prefer to solidify and move on. I am not big on saying we can find a CB or LB or Edge or Oliner later in the draft, BECAUSE we used up yet another chunk of capital on a QB. I respect all positions, and therefore I say do your best to acquire your long term starter, and then spend the next years searching for top talent at every other position.
                            The Broncos fans pine for the "dynasty" they knew under Pat Bowlen. Tell me what that dynasty really was. It wasn't the Brian Griese year. It wasn't Kyle Orton years. Hell, if it was Jake Plummer only, that wouldn't be considered a "dynasty". No, it was the Elway and Manning years. That HOF QB is the foundation of a dynasty. There's really no way around it. The infrequent, lightning in a bottle times that a team goes to the SB and wins with anything else is a flash in the pan.

                            Now, which first round draft picks created a "dynasty" here, outside of the QBs I mentioned? None. Hell, even Miller needed a whole defense to help them squash Newton. Miller couldn't do it alone, and it only happened once. And, take away Manning, chances are that SB50 team wouldn't exist, and the Broncos would've been fighting to go 9-7 and win a wild card game on a good year. That's no dynasty. The Broncos have been using the "best player available" model more often than not, and it alone got them nowhere near being a dynasty without an HOF QB behind center. It's the closest thing to a failed model of building a team to dominate year after year.

                            My point about drafting in the first round isn't throwing every single first round draft pick away on junk QBs. My point is (which I wrote in another post) to seek QB draft candidates that are considered top of their field, and worthy of top 10 draft picks. This year they have a #9 pick. That's way too close to the top draft QBs to piss away on some other position. Leverage that, trade up, and get one of the top 3-4 guys. Throw it away on "building your roster" for the future is nonsense, because without a QB capable of top of the league play, you're going nowhere.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by WYBRONCO View Post

                              Excellent point. Elway didn't win Super Bowls until his Defense was outstanding in the regular season, and the Super Bowl. Brady is in this Super Bowl because his defense stepped up in the second half when Brady was average.

                              Our Defense, healthy, resigned to full strength is pretty good. But Kelce, Hill, and Oakland's TE, kill us every time we play them. If you get someone that improves those three defensive coverage's and much better QB play, you have a division contender that makes the playoffs, and then who knows week to week there.
                              Take away Rodgers and the Packers would be lucky to make the playoffs. For the millionth time, go look through SB championship history of at least the past 20 years, and 75% of the wins, which is considered to be team dynasty, are with an HOF QB under center. The few without are a flash in the pan.

                              Yes, to win a Super Bowl, it takes a whole team. But, when you have a HOF capable QB, you can do it much easier, and you can do it year after year.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DiveInstructor View Post

                                Take away Rodgers and the Packers would be lucky to make the playoffs. For the millionth time, go look through SB championship history of at least the past 20 years, and 75% of the wins, which is considered to be team dynasty, are with an HOF QB under center. The few without are a flash in the pan.

                                Yes, to win a Super Bowl, it takes a whole team. But, when you have a HOF capable QB, you can do it much easier, and you can do it year after year.
                                Yep. The Bucs hadn't made the playoffs in 13 years prior. A 43 year old GOAT strolls in and puts them in the Super Bowl immediately.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X