Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 142
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Derby, Kansas, United States
    Posts
    26,903
    Quote Originally Posted by blackchild View Post
    Maybe you need to rewatch Brees the guy throws alot of dump off passes and int.... His stats are actually comparable to Romo Brees is overrated he's good but overrated while Romo gets hate just for being a Cowboy and Romo has far more talent then Brees and he's younger.... But you Broncos fans are even trying to convince yourself Flacco is better than Cutler even though he hasnt thrown for 300 yards yet and he's only thrown for 200 yards and over like twice.... How is Mcnabb not above Palmer and Romo on this guys list.... Mcnabb is an HOFer....


    oh and by the way. REALLY??

    Lets look at last year
    Brees
    5,069 Yards (OVER 5000!!!)
    316.8 YPG
    34TD
    17 INT
    66 passes that are 20+ yards
    16 that are 40+ (best in the league)
    QB rating of 96 and a 65% completion rate

    Romo
    3,448 yards
    265.2 ypg
    26td
    14int
    48 that are 20+
    11 40+
    91.4 QB rating and 61% completion rate

    Now lets look at career (to be fair we'll compare ONLY the years that romo was playing taking out the other years brees has been in the league)

    Brees
    13,910 yards
    88TD
    46 INT
    289.7 ypg
    174 passes that were 20+
    42 that were 40+
    93.93 qb rating and
    65.6 completion rating


    Romo
    10,562 yards
    81TD
    46 int
    157.6 YPG
    145 passes that were 20+
    31 that were 40+
    94.7 rating and
    63.6 completion rating.

    I'm gonna have to stick to my original statement and proclaim brees better than romo.

    oh and finally we'll put the career marks for brees up

    26,258 yards
    245.4 ypg
    168TD
    99INT
    332 passes of 20+
    65 of 40+
    88.9 rating and
    63.9 completion rating over a 9 year career. I'd say he deserves higher marks than a qb who's only got 3 years starting experiance under his belt.

    EXPECIALLY since almost HALF of his career stats came in the last 3 years when he has been amazing and one of the best in the league.
    Last edited by Freyaka; 06-27-2009 at 11:00 AM.


  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    www.SuperMcSmashieLand.com
    Posts
    10,476
    Journalists today write what they KNOW and not what they THINK. Writers have lost the huevos to write something to may end up not happening. Gone is the time when writers take the chance on being wrong.

    Right now, NO ONE knows how Denvers offense is going to be. New coach, new QB, new system, new everything. No other team has reshaped so dramatically as us this offseason.

    So these "writers" and talking heads take the safe route and rank low. This way, when we do surprise people, they can say we overachieved to save face.

    Bunch of pansies if you ask me.


    I adopt andrewmlb.


  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CAMP CRYSTAL LAKE, CO
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by since1977 View Post


    While Orton is 21-12 as an NFL starter and nearly pushed Chicago to the playoffs a year ago, he lacks the elite skillset of a Cutler.
    This article is right on point. I'm glad Broncos fans are optimistic but most of you aren't accepting reality and are too optimistic. Kyle Orton isn't a good QB. We will all soon find this out and trading for him was one of the worst trades in NFL history. . .
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    MILE HIGH TIL I DIE!!!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    www.SuperMcSmashieLand.com
    Posts
    10,476
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyVoorhees View Post
    This article is right on point. I'm glad Broncos fans are optimistic but most of you aren't accepting reality and are too optimistic. Kyle Orton isn't a good QB. We will all soon find this out and trading for him was one of the worst trades in NFL history. . .
    Im sorry, but for someone pushing for Vick and his erratic skills and horrible passing to be Denvers QB, I just cant put much faith in your quarterback evaluations.

    Im not trying to be mean or put you down, please understand that. But if Vick is what you think a QB in this offense needs to be, then I cant put much value in your view on Orton. Sorry.
    Last edited by McSmashie; 06-27-2009 at 11:09 AM.


    I adopt andrewmlb.


  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Derby, Kansas, United States
    Posts
    26,903
    Quote Originally Posted by McSmashie View Post
    Im sorry, but for someone pushing for Vick and his erratic skills and horrible passing to be Denvers QB, I just cant put much faith in your quarterback evaluations.

    Im not trying to be mean or put you down, please understand that. But if Vick is what you think a QB in this offense needs to be, then I cant put much value in your view on Orton. Sorry.
    Agreed. No offense ricky but you lost all credibility with your signature alone. Vick will never fit in a McD run offense. I have no doubt that if the right team picks him up he'll be a playmaker again but he belongs in someplace like miami or some other team that plans on making use of the wildcat offense (a system I think vick could thrive in) Denver is going spread shotgun all year we won't be able to use vick properly as anything other than a running back and we already have enough of those.


  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyVoorhees View Post
    This article is right on point. I'm glad Broncos fans are optimistic but most of you aren't accepting reality and are too optimistic. Kyle Orton isn't a good QB. We will all soon find this out and trading for him was one of the worst trades in NFL history. . .
    Considering our franchise was in it's worst tenure in the last 25 years or so with him as the starting QB, I'd say you're opinion is slightly exaggerated.....

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CAMP CRYSTAL LAKE, CO
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by McSmashie View Post
    Im sorry, but for someone pushing for Vick and his erratic skills and horrible passing to be Denvers QB, I just cant put much faith in your quarterback evaluations.

    Im not trying to be mean or put you down, please understand that. But if Vick is what you think a QB in this offense needs to be, then I cant put much value in your view on Orton. Sorry.
    I'll say it yet again. Just a few years ago Vick was regarded as one of the best players in the entire NFL. So me wanting to give him a chance is crazy? Seems to me everyone on this board has too short of a memory. Almost anyone would be an upgrade over Orton. Let alone Vick. I'm not saying Vick is the answer but it sure would be a smart move in my opinion. If Vick could play even 75% up to his previous level teams would have a hard time stoppin Denver. They'd have to account for Vick passing to 4 good WR. Marshall, Royal, Stokely and Gaffney. And also stop Vick from making plays with his feet. Not to mention if Knowshon and Hillis can give a 1-2 punch from the backfield. So yeah, Give Vick a chance. Orton is slow, has no arm strength and no ability to scramble or make plays when there wasn't one. I am not optimistic about Orton one bit. But if you want to say my opinion isn't as viable as someone else's because I like Vick you must be crazy lol. Like I said just a few years ago Vick was regarded as one of the best players in the NFL. . .
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    MILE HIGH TIL I DIE!!!

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    7,430
    Worst quarterbacks in the NFL huh. Sanchez is already in the Pro Bowl. Guess we should have moved up. When they mix cool aid in New York, they don't mess around.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyVoorhees View Post
    I'll say it yet again. Just a few years ago Vick was regarded as one of the best players in the entire NFL.
    Vick was 19-36 or something to that extent against teams with winning records, and that was with an average to above average defense and one of the NFL's most potent rushing attacks.

    He was an average QB in the NFL and that's it. "The best of the lousiest, and the lousiest of the best".

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CAMP CRYSTAL LAKE, CO
    Posts
    326
    Well I am glad we can all agree to disagree and that there is a forum for us to do so on but the fact that you guys would rather have Kyle Orton over Michael Vick blows my mind. I realize some will say he doesn't fit into McDaniels system. Which may be be true but to be honest. I don't like McDaniels either lol. I still think Vick is too talented to be over looked when our starting QB is Kyle Orton and throws 5 picks in a minicamp. There is a reason the entire league is shaking their heads at what McDaniels is doing. Because it makes no sense. . .
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    MILE HIGH TIL I DIE!!!

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyVoorhees View Post
    Well I am glad we can all agree to disagree and that there is a forum for us to do so on but the fact that you guys would rather have Kyle Orton over Michael Vick blows my mind. I realize some will say he doesn't fit into McDaniels system. Which may be be true but to be honest. I don't like McDaniels either lol. I still think Vick is too talented to be over looked when our starting QB is Kyle Orton and throws 5 picks in a minicamp. There is a reason the entire league is shaking their heads at what McDaniels is doing. Because it makes no sense. . .
    McDaniels system requires a QB that makes good decisions. Something Michael Vick has been completely terrible at on the field. Lets not completely change our offensive philosophy because of Mike Vick, a mere average QB that struggles against teams with winning records.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    www.SuperMcSmashieLand.com
    Posts
    10,476
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyVoorhees View Post
    I'll say it yet again. Just a few years ago Vick was regarded as one of the best players in the entire NFL. So me wanting to give him a chance is crazy? Seems to me everyone on this board has too short of a memory. Almost anyone would be an upgrade over Orton. Let alone Vick. I'm not saying Vick is the answer but it sure would be a smart move in my opinion. If Vick could play even 75% up to his previous level teams would have a hard time stoppin Denver. They'd have to account for Vick passing to 4 good WR. Marshall, Royal, Stokely and Gaffney. And also stop Vick from making plays with his feet. Not to mention if Knowshon and Hillis can give a 1-2 punch from the backfield. So yeah, Give Vick a chance. Orton is slow, has no arm strength and no ability to scramble or make plays when there wasn't one. I am not optimistic about Orton one bit. But if you want to say my opinion isn't as viable as someone else's because I like Vick you must be crazy lol. Like I said just a few years ago Vick was regarded as one of the best players in the NFL. . .
    Vick was concerned by some, but not all as the NEW type of QB. And seeing as there arent anymore of him running around the NFL these days, Im thinking that fade has passed.

    He is polar opposite what a system QB is. Denver is now a system offense. Vick couldnt scan the field, cant stand in the pocket, couldnt check down, if he didnt have a TE open, he ran. It is not a fit here. The SYSTEM needs a pocket passer with the ability to make quick decisions, quick scans and looks at multiple receiving options. Vick has none of those skills, unless you count RUN LIKE HECK as a quick decision.

    My point is this. You have looked at Vicks skills and think that he is a fit in an offense completely opposite from his skillset and with a coach that does not value a QB like Vick. You look at Orton who is a system QB and obviously fits with the coach since the coach traded for him and you say that isnt a fit.

    You are entitled to feel how you want. Im all for that. Im just saying that Im going to take your viewpoint with a huge grain of salt, thats all.


    I adopt andrewmlb.


  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Latrobe, PA
    Posts
    1,260
    I don't think Big Ben deserves to be in #2 spot.

    I watch a lot of Steeler games because I live very close to Pittsburgh and even though he has two rings, his defense carries that team. I'm not trying to say that I think the Steelers should be low on the list, but i think 2 is to high.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by broooks77 View Post
    I don't think Big Ben deserves to be in #2 spot.

    I watch a lot of Steeler games because I live very close to Pittsburgh and even though he has two rings, his defense carries that team. I'm not trying to say that I think the Steelers should be low on the list, but i think 2 is to high.
    Normally I would agree, but considering he has more come from behind wins in the 4th quarter in a 2 year span than even Elway at his prime did, there probably isn't another QB in the NFl that you want with the ball then Ben when the game is on the line, withthe exception of Manning or Brady, who both will probably go down as the greatest to ever play the game when all is said and done.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Annoying Bills Fans
    Posts
    4,563
    Quote Originally Posted by since1977 View Post
    They'd be close. If you'd listened to the criticism of the Bears it was clearly the QB position. Grossman and Orton and ?. I honestly think it would be near the bottom. Personally, I think we should have gotten both in the deal.

    Also, it factors in every QB on the lineup and Chris Simms...hasn't played in a year and looks like a little kid.
    Actually, last season in Chicago there was general amazement at the fact that the much vaunted (and overpaid) Defense was doing so horribly.

    There was even greater amazement that Orton was having such an outstanding year (until he was hurt). In fact, there were predictions of a Pro Bowl appearance and possible "Offensive Player of the Year" honors for Kyle - right up until he got hurt.

    So yeah, a #32 ranking for Orton & Simms is asinine. There's no way that the Lions have a better QB situation going into the season. Or the 49ers. Or the Rams. Or the Bucs. Or the Jags. Or the Jets. Or... ...well, you get the idea.
    "That's a crap question."
    - Kyle Orton

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •