2016 Sanchez or Lynch is not 2015 PMF

[nflbronco]

I hope we can sit Lynch ALL of 2016 season let him develop. I think the 2015 QB play has fans fooled to think even a rookie can match what 2015 QB's did. The reality was PFM physical skills died not his NFL playing experience to adjust at LOS. Even Oz had time to learn the NFL just lacked playing time. Do I think much of Sanchez NO but, I hope he can play well enough this season to hold off play Lynch mob.

 

[WalkerBoh]

I hope we can sit Lynch ALL of 2016 season let him develop. I think the 2015 QB play has fans fooled to think even a rookie can match what 2015 QB's did. The reality was PFM physical skills died not his NFL playing experience to adjust at LOS. Even Oz had time to learn the NFL just lacked playing time. Do I think much of Sanchez NO but, I hope he can play well enough this season to hold off play Lynch mob.

All depends on what Lynch ultimately needs. For every successful QB that sat for a little while, you can find another who started his rookie season. Each QB is different. I want Denver to start the QB who they feel gives them the best chance to win. If that turns out to be Lynch, so be it. For every Steve Young and Aaron Rodgers around there is also a Ben Roethlisberger or a Russell Wilson.

 

[iknowftbll]

At this point I genuinely believe Sanchez gives us the best chance to win. I'd rather not see the Broncos make the same mistake they made in 2006: benching the experienced starter for the unproven rookie. They finished the season 2-3 under Cutler and 9-7 overall. I firmly believe Plummer would have delivered at least one more win and a 10-6 finish and playoff spot, and who knows what may have happened at that point.

That season was the beginning of the end until Elway's return.

I am optimistic about the Broncos chances in 2016. I think they have a 12-4 team waiting to happen. But I also think a repeat with a rookie QB is simply not happening. I think Sanchez gives them a fighting chance because of his experience in the league.

The bottom line for me is whoever they start I will root for. And if it's Lynch I hope he proves me wrong. But I think Sanchez can improve the offense enough that a call for Lynch won't be an issue.

 

[randymon]

All depends on what Lynch ultimately needs. For every successful QB that sat for a little while, you can find another who started his rookie season. Each QB is different. I want Denver to start the QB who they feel gives them the best chance to win. If that turns out to be Lynch, so be it. For every Steve Young and Aaron Rodgers around there is also a Ben Roethlisberger or a Russell Wilson.

The number of rookie qbs to start and are " successful" is extremely lower than the ones that have failed. I came up with 5 in like 50 yrs that were successful. Many,many have failed miserably and finding a Ben or Wilson is very unlikely. I certainly hope Lynch could be one of those guys but from what I've been reading/hearing, all think he NEEDS time to develop. But, that said, I'm sure that was what they said regarding Wilson.

 

[Mingo]

I think the Bronco's defense could be better this year - for one reason alone. Last year the Broncos had 14 team interceptions - They should have half again as more (21) or better with their pass rush and pass defense.

 

[WalkerBoh]

The number of rookie qbs to start and are " successful" is extremely lower than the ones that have failed. I came up with 5 in like 50 yrs that were successful. Many,many have failed miserably and finding a Ben or Wilson is very unlikely. I certainly hope Lynch could be one of those guys but from what I've been reading/hearing, all think he NEEDS time to develop. But, that said, I'm sure that was what they said regarding Wilson.

The majority of the talking heads didn't have too high of an opinion of Russell Wilson either.

And you need to provide your definition of "successful". Otherwise your math (or memory) is seriously impaired.

 

[WalkerBoh]

As for the number of successful QB's being much lower than those who failed...... Well "duh". You can say that about the number of QB's who started their careers on the bench too.

 

[randymon]

The majority of the talking heads didn't have too high of an opinion of Russell Wilson either.

And you need to provide your definition of "successful". Otherwise your math (or memory) is seriously impaired.

That's what I said regarding Wilson. Guess you missed that. Successful???? I don't know? Winning record? Playoffs? Opposite of unsuccessful? Weren't you talking about a rookie qb starting? I guess you should clarify your meaning of successful. Maybe a 4-8 record for your high school football team was considered successful and your going by that? I don't know.

 

[WalkerBoh]

That's what I said regarding Wilson. Guess you missed that. Successful???? I don't know? Winning record? Playoffs? Opposite of unsuccessful? Weren't you talking about a rookie qb starting? I guess you should clarify your meaning of successful. Maybe a 4-8 record for your high school football team was considered successful and your going by that? I don't know.

Now you're just babbling incoherently.

Sorry to hear your HS football team sucked. Must have made for some lousy Homecoming weekends.

 

[randymon]

Now you're just babbling incoherently.

Sorry to hear your HS football team sucked. Must have made for some lousy Homecoming weekends.

I wouldn't know anything about Homecoming " weekends". Thought that was for girls and sissies?

 

[Mingo]

It doesn't matter what we hope for or how much we analyze the QB situation is be played out and decided by the coaches - and it will be fun to watch.

 

[WalkerBoh]

I wouldn't know anything about Homecoming " weekends". Thought that was for girls and sissies?

Guess you couldn't get a date for the dance either?

Also, since the vast majority of Homecoming Kings usually are also football players, it's sad your HS had a bunch of sissies playing. Explains a lot though.

 

[randymon]

Guess you couldn't get a date for the dance either?

Also, since the vast majority of Homecoming Kings usually are also football players, it's sad your HS had a bunch of sissies playing. Explains a lot though.

Great! Now I'm up against the former captain of the debate team ! Uncle!

 

[58crash]

lol ohhh mmmmmmmmy god............................................smoked ....

 

[Mingo]

Can you tell - we are all jonesing for some real football to talk about?

 

[iknowftbll]

Can you tell - we are all jonesing for some real football to talk about?

One thing we haven't discussed much is how the Broncos seemed interested in Bradford in the days after the Eagles traded into the 2nd pick just before the draft. I groaned when I saw the rumors and hoped they were just rumors. We still don't know if the Broncos were genuinely interested and the Eagles price too high and Elway had to tell them to suck a fart out of his ass or if maybe the Broncos were truly never interested to begin with. I'd say the team has positioned itself perfectly as they possibly could in the aftermath of a super star QB like Manning retiring. It is almost unfair to expect Lynch to come in on Manning's heals. I think a guy like Sanchez will treat it for what it is: a chance to revive his career and audition for a big mid-career contract in 2017 with another team. (I'd laugh if that team turned out to be the Jets.) And if Sanchez does that, by him looking out for his long term best interests it is going to help the Broncos in 2016.

Right now is an exciting time to be a Broncos fan, gang. This may just be the best run organization in the NFL. The next couple years will confirm this.

 

[cdumler7]

I`m still just flabbergasted by how some think the run game can work without the threat of a Qb that can make a D pay if they commit to stopping the run. I`m totally on board with CEH that you can kiss your run game good bye if the Qb play isn`t worthy. Enough of this Peyton's "stats" being any dictation as to how this offense can be run by "any " Friggin qb and all we have to do is run,run,run. As bad as Peyton's stats were, he more than made up for in reading the D and putting people in the right spots, made them ( defenses) guess on their alignments and assignments, saw weaknesses that enabled him call a run play that got crucial first down, a quick out to Sanders because he saw the S playing off,etc,etc,etc,etc! He made crucial first downs and moved the team into scoring position. Yes, because of his diminished physical talents, he failed in converting scoring opportunities into Tds but he certainly gave McManus plenty of opportunities for 3 pts that by the way we won a lot of games by. Why are some so blind to think that any `ol Joe at Qb is better or just as good as Peyton Manning, and that he really had nothing to do with a SB and the D won every game . Jesus! Good post CEH. Glad to see someone has a grasp on what it really takes to make the whole machine work, despite " THE STATS " baloney. I`m retired. I listen to everything and anything football related every day and have for years now and 90% of all the info I listen to says the exact opposite of many of you that think Joe Smoo can Qb this team as well as, or as bad as according to some, as Manning did and lead Denver to a repeat. They all say Sanchez or even Lynch ( which is about 10 % ) " COULD " guide Denver to a repeat but whoever is at the helm, better have a very good passing threat or no matter how improved or devoted Denver is to the running game, they will not have sucsess in their attempt to go back to SB. The secondary is getting bigger and stronger. Big guys that are very physical ( like Lbs but with speed ) and if they want to crowd the line of scrimmage and play the run, I don`t care who you are they will stop you. Even if you don`t watch/listen to any of the noise out there, you would think that those that have watched the game long enough, paid attention to what it is that the teams that continually compete year in and year out have working for them.... A very capable QB who instills a threat to beat them thru the air if they over commit. I`m done. Once again, good job CEH and the others on here that at least recognize the recipe. Hate me all you want.

Few quick points...

1) Peyton's mind was nowhere near as deadly this past year as it has been in the past. Teams knew he couldn't throw deep so they could keep all 11 players close to the LOS making passing and running the football just about impossible. It is why so many of his passes were intercepted because they could stick guys into his quick passing lanes. How many times did Manning try to throw a quick slant pattern or a quick come back play to then have it picked off and turned into a defensive touchdown? You talk about how he helped the team pick up crucial 1st downs but he also threw some crucial interceptions that should have cost us games. Thankfully in many of those games the defense responded with their own touchdown to help the offense out.

2) Manning had the highest % of interceptable passes this year. His interception total honestly should have been higher than it was. Defenses actually dropped more of his interceptions than any other QB in the league. So don't sit here and tell me Manning was doing anything but being down right terrible this past year.

3) Our run game was greatly improved with Osweiler in the game than that of Manning. So you sit here and say Manning was able to get the offense into better formations to attack a defense yet the "stats" don't play that out. Our run game was much more dangerous when Osweiler came in as defenses backed off a bit more plus the ability to run from under Center was huge for our OL finally doing some damage and our RB's having some room to run.

4) While a good passing game does help out the run game it is not necessarily needed to have a good run game. Tampa Bay is a great example in they played a rookie QB this past year that didn't really light the world on fire and yet they finished top-5 in rushing. Look at the LA Rams. Only team to maybe have worse QB play than us this past year and they finished 7th in the league in rushing. Of the top-10 teams this past season 5 of the top rushing teams had subpar QB play. Heck if great QB play helped out a rushing attack as much as you say then why was NE maybe the worst rushing team in the league? I mean they were down right terrible yet they had/have Tom Brady at the helm. So yes a team can have a great rushing attack with subpar QB play.

5) Still on the QB play but it does come down to does a defense respect a team to complete a pass over the top? There is nothing more that a defense doesn't want to happen than to be crowding the LOS and then get beat by a pass over the top. This is why I do think Lynch stands a chance to play as a rookie and find success. His deep ball is one of his best passes so a safety still has to respect the fact that he can beat them over the top especially with our speed at the WR position.

 

[cdumler7]

One thing we haven't discussed much is how the Broncos seemed interested in Bradford in the days after the Eagles traded into the 2nd pick just before the draft. I groaned when I saw the rumors and hoped they were just rumors. We still don't know if the Broncos were genuinely interested and the Eagles price too high and Elway had to tell them to suck a fart out of his ass or if maybe the Broncos were truly never interested to begin with. I'd say the team has positioned itself perfectly as they possibly could in the aftermath of a super star QB like Manning retiring. It is almost unfair to expect Lynch to come in on Manning's heals. I think a guy like Sanchez will treat it for what it is: a chance to revive his career and audition for a big mid-career contract in 2017 with another team. (I'd laugh if that team turned out to be the Jets.) And if Sanchez does that, by him looking out for his long term best interests it is going to help the Broncos in 2016.

Right now is an exciting time to be a Broncos fan, gang. This may just be the best run organization in the NFL. The next couple years will confirm this.

Here is my thought on the Bradford interest. The Broncos were seeing the Kaep talks stall and didn't want to have to make a panic decision say they didn't get Lynch in the draft like they wanted. They needed to explore other options and weigh the cost of each to what the player brings to the team. So I would bet the Broncos made the phone call and listened to what the Eagles wanted and said thank you for your time and hung up. From what I understand they wanted a 1st or 2nd round pick for Bradford. I don't blame the Broncos for hanging up in such a situation. That is ridiculous for a QB with a big contract and major injury history that had proved nothing in his time in the NFL. Kaep at least had some winning seasons and some great stats at one time.

 

[randymon]

Few quick points...

1) Peyton's mind was nowhere near as deadly this past year as it has been in the past. Teams knew he couldn't throw deep so they could keep all 11 players close to the LOS making passing and running the football just about impossible. It is why so many of his passes were intercepted because they could stick guys into his quick passing lanes. How many times did Manning try to throw a quick slant pattern or a quick come back play to then have it picked off and turned into a defensive touchdown? You talk about how he helped the team pick up crucial 1st downs but he also threw some crucial interceptions that should have cost us games. Thankfully in many of those games the defense responded with their own touchdown to help the offense out.

2) Manning had the highest % of interceptable passes this year. His interception total honestly should have been higher than it was. Defenses actually dropped more of his interceptions than any other QB in the league. So don't sit here and tell me Manning was doing anything but being down right terrible this past year.

3) Our run game was greatly improved with Osweiler in the game than that of Manning. So you sit here and say Manning was able to get the offense into better formations to attack a defense yet the "stats" don't play that out. Our run game was much more dangerous when Osweiler came in as defenses backed off a bit more plus the ability to run from under Center was huge for our OL finally doing some damage and our RB's having some room to run.

4) While a good passing game does help out the run game it is not necessarily needed to have a good run game. Tampa Bay is a great example in they played a rookie QB this past year that didn't really light the world on fire and yet they finished top-5 in rushing. Look at the LA Rams. Only team to maybe have worse QB play than us this past year and they finished 7th in the league in rushing. Of the top-10 teams this past season 5 of the top rushing teams had subpar QB play. Heck if great QB play helped out a rushing attack as much as you say then why was NE maybe the worst rushing team in the league? I mean they were down right terrible yet they had/have Tom Brady at the helm. So yes a team can have a great rushing attack with subpar QB play.

5) Still on the QB play but it does come down to does a defense respect a team to complete a pass over the top? There is nothing more that a defense doesn't want to happen than to be crowding the LOS and then get beat by a pass over the top. This is why I do think Lynch stands a chance to play as a rookie and find success. His deep ball is one of his best passes so a safety still has to respect the fact that he can beat them over the top especially with our speed at the WR position.

All I can say to that..... You use probably the best QB/Coach tandem to ever play the game and a rookie that threw for over 4000 yds and 22 tds. Not your most endearing examples. You can do better Cd. Give me some playoff teams from 2015 that had the subpar qb/good running game scenario my friend.

 

[randymon]

PS. Denver's run to the SB and how they did it is`nt exactly the formula your going want to use or to be able to sustain. It was an amazing conundrum of scenarios that had to happen for them to achieve that. Your "formula" isn`t going to have the end results like Denver achieved this past year with any consistency. It was a unbelievable accomplishment. Rare indeed.