PDA

View Full Version : Football Would the Broncos be 6-0 with Cassel at QB?


Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 07:36 AM
Fair question...considering that Cassel was the QB McDaniels originally wanted....

Mile High Mania
10-20-2009, 07:38 AM
Dunno... if they did all the other things (defense, etc) then I think there is a good chance it would have happened. But, you never know. It's more than just the QB, although... some of the best plays Orton has made are the ones where he has thrown away the ball. Too many times in the past, I've seen Cutler (Plummer, etc) force a play only to have it result in a turnover...

Orton is making great decisions.

Demonpenz
10-20-2009, 07:40 AM
we don't even know what orton is yet, he had trash at WR with the bears, and was a stud in college.

Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 07:44 AM
we don't even know what orton is yet, he had trash at WR with the bears, and was a stud in college.

Well, i wouldnt say hes Peyton Manning, but hes certainly capable.

Dude is playing lights out right now. McDaniels is a genius.

smittysbar
10-20-2009, 07:54 AM
Orton still makes some bad throws, I would say there is a good chance that they still would be. Marshall has made some great plays when the ball looked to be intercepted. I do think Orton will get better and better the longer he plays this year.

Von Dumbass
10-20-2009, 07:57 AM
I don't think so. Cassel holds onto the ball way to long. Cassel can make more plays with his feet but he isn't as cerebral as Orton is.

ClevelandBronco
10-20-2009, 08:11 AM
Dunno... if they did all the other things (defense, etc) then I think there is a good chance it would have happened. But, you never know. It's more than just the QB, although... some of the best plays Orton has made are the ones where he has thrown away the ball. Too many times in the past, I've seen Cutler (Plummer, etc) force a play only to have it result in a turnover...

Orton is making great decisions.

Couldn't agree more. I love to see him sail one into the bench when that's his best choice.

vailpass
10-20-2009, 08:35 AM
Hell no.

hawkchief
10-20-2009, 08:47 AM
They'd be 7-0 with Cassell!

LaChapelle
10-20-2009, 08:50 AM
Blue and orange gives him hives.
Brown and yellow and he takes lives.

InChiefsHell
10-20-2009, 08:56 AM
I'd think that they would be, mostly because Orton is not the reason for the winning. He's definitely a game manager and doesn't do stupid things, and I think given time in the pocket Cassel would perform at least as well.

I mean, is the transverse true? If we had Orton, would we be 5-0?

I don't think so...

John_Wayne
10-20-2009, 09:01 AM
Yes. And the games they barely won would not have been so close. Cassel, with Denver's supporting cast, is better than Orton. So, yes.

Garcia Bronco
10-20-2009, 09:11 AM
I'd think that they would be, mostly because Orton is not the reason for the winning. He's definitely a game manager and doesn't do stupid things, and I think given time in the pocket Cassel would perform at least as well.

I mean, is the transverse true? If we had Orton, would we be 5-0?

I don't think so...

Orton is doing his part. It's a team game.

InChiefsHell
10-20-2009, 09:17 AM
Orton is doing his part. It's a team game.

RIght, I agree. What I'm saying is, Cassel brings a little more to the table than Orton, so yes, the Donkeys would still be 6-0 with Cassel.

Von Dumbass
10-20-2009, 09:18 AM
Yes. And the games they barely won would not have been so close. Cassel, with Denver's supporting cast, is better than Orton. So, yes.

Cassel is not as accurate as Orton and he is not as smart as Orton. Both have poor accuracy on deep balls. The only thing Cassel is better than Orton at is scrambling.

Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 09:21 AM
A few of you are saying they are basically the same QB. But does Cassel have more upside than Orton?

We paid 60 million for a game manager??

CupidStunt
10-20-2009, 09:30 AM
They're comparable in their current situations. It wouldn't be close if Cassel had 10 seconds to throw with 3 WRs getting open.

Brock
10-20-2009, 09:40 AM
A few of you are saying they are basically the same QB. But does Cassel have more upside than Orton?

We paid 60 million for a game manager??

You're looking at Orton's upside now. You haven't yet seen Cassel's upside, at least I hope.

orange
10-20-2009, 09:48 AM
They're comparable in their current situations. It wouldn't be close if Cassel had 10 seconds to throw with 3 WRs getting open.

Of course he's dropped a notch with the Chiefs, BUT Matt Cassel was IN that offense last year. He was considerably less effective than Orton is.

http://www.nfl.com/players/mattcassel/profile?id=CAS541133
http://www.nfl.com/players/kyleorton/profile?id=ORT716150


It's not even close. I have no idea what you mean by "they're comparable."

wild1
10-20-2009, 09:51 AM
There's no way to judge Cassel in the situation he's in.

Von Dumbass
10-20-2009, 10:05 AM
Kyle Orton projected stats 2009

Yards 3906
Yards Per game 244
Yards per attempt 7.6
Comp% 63.9
TD's 24
Int's 2.6
QB Rating 100.1

Matt Cassel stats 2008
Yards 3693
Yards Per game 230.18
Yards per attempt 7.2
Comp% 63.4
TD's 21
Int's 11
QB Rating 89.4

And Matt Cassel spent 4 years in that system learning it. While Kyle Orton only had 6 months and played the first 4 games with an injured finger on his throwing hand.

JohnnyV13
10-20-2009, 10:10 AM
Kyle Orton projected stats 2009

Yards 3906
Yards Per game 244
Yards per attempt 7.6
Comp% 63.9
TD's 24
Int's 2.6
QB Rating 100.1

Matt Cassel stats 2008
Yards 3693
Yards Per game 230.18
Yards per attempt 7.2
Comp% 63.4
TD's 21
Int's 11
QB Rating 89.4

And Matt Cassel spent 4 years in that system learning it. While Kyle Orton only had 6 months and played the first 4 games with an injured finger on his throwing hand.

And Orton had 2 years as an NFL starter and starter's reps in camp. Cassel hadn't started a game since HS. And, the Broncos have a better O line, since they got Clady.

But, Orton and the Broncos have surprised me. You are very much vindicated after we all laughed at your positive outlook (at least so far. I'm still hoping the Broncos suffer an epic crash).

Ralphy Boy
10-20-2009, 10:25 AM
Cassel is not as accurate as Orton and he is not as smart as Orton. Both have poor accuracy on deep balls. The only thing Cassel is better than Orton at is scrambling.

You can't be serious. Orton is not more accurate than Cassel, not that you can actually compare given their past. Orton arguably played with no talent in Chicago, though Thomas Jones rushed for 1,300+ yards in 2005 & 2008 while Orton started 15 games. Cassel is playing with no talent now.

Orton in 2009, behind your line, is much improved but prior to this year, his career high in completion % for a season was 58.5% with a 79.6 QB rating.

Cassel completed 63.4% of his passes last season with a 89.4 QB rating.

Cassel has thrown only 717 passes, in his 5 years in the league, completing 61.6% with a career 86.8 QB rating.

Orton has been given more opportunity, not playing behind Tom Brady and completed 56.8% of his 1,107 passes, with a career 76.2 QB rating, over his 5years in the league. He has certainly got better every year and that is great for you.

I'm glad you love your QB, but you really can't compare.

CoMoChief
10-20-2009, 10:26 AM
Orton sucks.

ClevelandBronco
10-20-2009, 10:28 AM
You can't be serious. Orton is not more accurate than Cassel, not that you can actually compare given their past. Orton arguably played with no talent in Chicago, though Thomas Jones rushed for 1,300+ yards in 2005 & 2008 while Orton started 15 games. Cassel is playing with no talent now.

Orton in 2009, behind your line, is much improved but prior to this year, his career high in completion % for a season was 58.5% with a 79.6 QB rating.

Cassel completed 63.4% of his passes last season with a 89.4 QB rating.

Cassel has thrown only 717 passes, in his 5 years in the league, completing 61.6% with a career 86.8 QB rating.

Orton has been given more opportunity, not playing behind Tom Brady and completed 56.8% of his 1,107 passes, with a career 76.2 QB rating, over his 5years in the league. He has certainly got better every year and that is great for you.

I'm glad you love your QB, but you really can't compare.

Thanks for the comparison.

Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 10:30 AM
Orton sucks.

I wish he did, but he does not. Hes made himself into a solid QB.

orange
10-20-2009, 10:33 AM
Mark Kriegel writing about Orton:

So now I wonder: Is he a better quarterback than anyone knew in Chicago, or did McDaniels make him better?

"I don't want to take anything away from what I did in Chicago, but to get to Denver with Coach and work on my craft the last six or seven months has done some great things for me."

Garcia Bronco
10-20-2009, 10:34 AM
Orton still makes some bad throws,

No he doesn't. You have to realize he is either putting the ball where on the receiver can get it, or throwing it away because nothing is there.

Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 10:38 AM
Orton is living proof the Preseason means absolutely nothing.

keg in kc
10-20-2009, 10:41 AM
Midnight will toll on Orton. He looks all bright and shiny now, but he'll eventually turn back into the pumpkin he's always been. It will probably happen about the same time that reality comes crashing down on the entire Denver team. Might happen the second half of the season, might happen early in the playoffs. Either way, it will happen.

TinyEvel
10-20-2009, 10:42 AM
Hell NO! Denver would be 9-0 right now with Cassel!

Cassel is 150% WIN!

Garcia Bronco
10-20-2009, 10:43 AM
Midnight will toll on Orton. He looks all bright and shiny now, but he'll eventually turn back into the pumpkin he's always been. It will probably happen about the same time that reality comes crashing down on the entire Denver team. Might happen the second half of the season, might happen early in the playoffs. Either way, it will happen.

So if he makes the playoffs and loses he sucks? Really? LMAO. That means that every QB since Dawson was a pumpkin.

King_Chief_Fan
10-20-2009, 10:49 AM
Fair question...considering that Cassel was the QB McDaniels originally wanted....

yes....McDaniels would trade for him today if the Chiefs made Cassel available

keg in kc
10-20-2009, 10:53 AM
So if he makes the playoffs and loses he sucks? Really? LMAO. That means that every QB since Dawson was a pumpkin.I believe everything you're seeing is a mirage. That's what I'm saying. Orton's not a good quarterback and Denver's not an especially good team. What they have been is a fortunate one, and things will probably balance out eventually. They won't get every bounce and they won't eek it out every week, not over the course of a whole season. Now, they'll still make the playoffs, in this division. I mean, shit, Denver could go 2-8 the rest of the way and still win it. 1-7 might even do it. And they have had a good start, no denying that, but I think it's smoke and mirrors.

Just my opinion, of course. I've certainly misread things before.

DaWolf
10-20-2009, 10:56 AM
Probably. That OL gives him time to throw and produces a running game that will keep the D honest, and those receivers get open. Plus the defense is the reason they are 6-0.

I guess it all depends on the first game. Maybe Cassel doesn't throw the ball that should have been picked that instead bounced to the receiver who took it all the way for the winner. Or maybe Cassel has them ahead at that point anyway.

Either way, if we're going to start calling McDaniels a genius now, well the fact is that he wanted Cassel as his first option, so dude can't be that bad of a QB if we're going to say that McD knows his stuff now...

Buehler445
10-20-2009, 10:58 AM
Interesting discussion, but it is impossible to tell. Completely different situations.

Generally speaking, I would have to say yes. Orton has had success because he hasn't turned the ball over. Cassel has 2 INTs (albiet bad ones) this year despite having a piss fucking poor sack of motherfucking horseshit line and WRs that play pattycake with the ball instead of fucking catching it. And this isn't Hutard that is barely completing wheel routes to Kris Wilson and shutting his eyes and firing the wobble launcher in the general direction of Tony G.

With Dungver's running game and protection, I think he could provide the type of performance necessary for THAT team to be 6-0. An on the accuracy bit, if he's not as accurate as Orton he can make some more plays with his feet, or push the ball down the field a little farther than Orton to make enough plays that it would be reasonable to assume they would still be 6-0.

It is also a fair question if Orton would put up the performance of Cassel with our motherfucking shitbox team. I'd probably say no. Orton would die.

DaWolf
10-20-2009, 11:00 AM
It is also a fair question if Orton would put up the performance of Cassel with our mother****ing shitbox team. I'd probably say no. Orton would die.

Hell, can you imagine Ben Roethlisberger on this team? You want to talk about a QB who holds the ball, Big Ben would be getting pounded behind our line...

Buehler445
10-20-2009, 11:02 AM
Midnight will toll on Orton. He looks all bright and shiny now, but he'll eventually turn back into the pumpkin he's always been. It will probably happen about the same time that reality comes crashing down on the entire Denver team. Might happen the second half of the season, might happen early in the playoffs. Either way, it will happen.

So if he makes the playoffs and loses he sucks? Really? LMAO. That means that every QB since Dawson was a pumpkin.

Remember, Caotain Checkdown and his wobble launcher had the second highest passer rating behind Manning one year. And he was a sack of shit the ENTIRE time.

Even relating back to Grossman when he was in Chicago. They started out undefeated and everybody had decided to "crown their asses". And he suddenly took his retard pill and despite making it to the Super Bowl, was a complete jackass that did nothing to help the team.

I'm not at all saying that Orton will do these things, but it has happened before. It isn't outside the realm of possibility.

Buehler445
10-20-2009, 11:04 AM
Hell, can you imagine Ben Roethlisberger on this team? You want to talk about a QB who holds the ball, Big Ben would be getting pounded behind our line...

He gets abused behind Pitt's line. Fuck me, he'd die. Especially since we played the Ravens this year. They may have 9,000 late hit calls, but still, Roethisberger would be a dead man.

RINGLEADER
10-20-2009, 11:55 AM
Well, i wouldnt say hes Peyton Manning, but hes certainly capable.

Dude is playing lights out right now. McDaniels is a genius.


He's doing a good job behind a decent line with a great receiving corp.

I think Cassel would be doing just as well.

DaWolf
10-20-2009, 11:57 AM
He's doing a good job behind a decent line with a great receiving corp.

I think Cassel would be doing just as well.

Some are calling the Donx line the best in football (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jim_trotter/10/20/bolts.broncos.5things/index.html?eref=sihp):

The Broncos offensive line might be the best in football. Moving left to right, Ryan Clady, Ben Hamilton, Casey Wiegmann, Chris Kuper and Ryan Harris are playing like a human force field, allowing no one to get close to QB Kyle Orton, who should have been embarrassed by the significant chunks of time he had to throw the ball. At times, it looked like he could go through his entire read progression a second and third time. Overall, the unit has allowed just nine sacks, tying for seventh fewest in the league. It surrendered just one Monday, to rookie linebacker Larry English.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jim_trotter/10/20/bolts.broncos.5things/index.html?eref=sihp#ixzz0UUoxK5NS
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

DaWolf
10-20-2009, 12:01 PM
I think the real key right now to them being 6-0 is Mike Nolan:

They've made a habit of dominating after intermission, and they needed to do it again on Monday after Philip Rivers put up 172 yards passing to send San Diego to a 20-17 halftime lead.

Mike Nolan, the veteran coordinator hired by McDaniels last offseason, met with his defense and planned more blitzes up the middle and more man coverage on the outside. Voila!. In the second half, Denver sacked Rivers four times, recovered a fumble and held the Chargers to 104 yards. Orton went 11 for 16 with two TD passes in the second half, and now the Broncos have outscored foes 76-10 after halftime.

Players on both teams said Nolan's tweaking made the difference.

"Mike Nolan dialed it up," Broncos linebacker Andra Davis said.

"They double-mugged us," Chargers center Scott Mruczkowski said.

Pressuring Rivers throughout the second half, Denver sent each middle linebacker in its 3-4 defense toward an A gap -- between Mruczkowski and a guard.

"Whatever guy I slid to, the other guy came in," said Mruczkowski, who was making his fourth career start. "They schemed it so whatever side I'd slide to, they'd go through the other gap. Obviously it cost us."
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12389878

tk13
10-20-2009, 12:05 PM
Even if Cassel holds onto the ball, he'd get much more time to throw in Denver. Kyle Orton is not out there running for his life every week. Plus he'd be working with 3 quality WR's and a running game. You probably shouldn't make generalizations like that, but they'd probably still be pretty good with Cassel.

That's the funny thing though, after seeing literally tens of thousands of posts about how this team and that team needs a QB... and all the bickering over the three guys who were the best choices, Kyle Orton is the one who is undefeated, haha.

PunkinDrublic
10-20-2009, 12:08 PM
Donk fans have their homer glasses on and that's fine. There's a reason why Denver tried to get Cassell first and had to settle for Orton. Orton is in the right place at the right time and is a good game manager. What kind of adversity has Orton had to overcome in Denver? The guy walked into the perfect situation. How accurate would Orton be if he had been sacked as many times as Cassell has. We know what happened when he did face adversity in Chicago, he ended up being benched for Rex Grossman.

Buehler445
10-20-2009, 12:11 PM
I think the real key right now to them being 6-0 is Mike Nolan:


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12389878

Truth. Could you imagine how bad ass that team would be if you saddled last years offense with this year's defense? They'd be winning by 50 points each week instead of 3.

DaWolf
10-20-2009, 12:14 PM
Even if Cassel holds onto the ball, he'd get much more time to throw in Denver. Kyle Orton is not out there running for his life every week. Plus he'd be working with 3 quality WR's and a running game. You probably shouldn't make generalizations like that, but they'd probably still be pretty good with Cassel.

That's the funny thing though, after seeing literally tens of thousands of posts about how this team and that team needs a QB... and all the bickering over the three guys who were the best choices, Kyle Orton is the one who is undefeated, haha.

A lot of it is situation. You look at Orton last year, 15 starts, 6.4 YPC, under 3000 yards passing, 18 TD's, 12 INT's, 79 rating. Of course, he didn't have the supporting cast he does in Denver.

I mean look, Steve Bono went 13-3 as a Chiefs starter and at one time was the winningest QB in the NFL in terms of win percentage. He could manage a game for the most part. Even made a pro bowl. But when it was put on his shoulders to win a game, that wasn't him. Whether Orton would be able to do that against solid teams in the playoffs, we'll see. Right now that team is firing on all cylinders, and Orton is doing his part. Essentially, I think that's the type of team McDaniels prefers, and that's the type of team Haley is trying to build...

Deberg_1990
10-20-2009, 12:14 PM
Truth. Could you imagine how bad ass that team would be if you saddled last years offense with this year's defense? They'd be winning by 50 points each week instead of 3.

I dont know? Cutler is talented, but he has a tendency to just "wing it" at times. McDaniels knew that.

Maybe Cutler will mature...maybe not.

Cutler reminds me some of Jeff George. Decent stats, but doesnt always play smart and do the little things that win.

Demonpenz
10-20-2009, 12:18 PM
Here is where I messed up. 3-4's boo boo's can be helped by a good pass rush. Dawkins can still play at a mind boggling 37 (when chiefs players are on the downside to their career at like 28-29) playmakers at both wide recievers. tough runners

OctoberFart
10-20-2009, 01:01 PM
KC should trade Cassel for Orton.

Sure-Oz
10-20-2009, 01:11 PM
Orton is the next manning, look out NFL!111111

Taco John
10-20-2009, 01:19 PM
Midnight will toll on Orton. He looks all bright and shiny now, but he'll eventually turn back into the pumpkin he's always been.


This is what I don't get... Pumpkin he's always been? He had a winning record before coming to Denver.

He's not a flashy guy, but what he lacks in flash, he makes up for in patience and determination. The guy flat goes out and does his job without making too many mistakes.

Every time I've said "this is Orton's situation here, he needs to show his quality," he's always delivered. Every single time this season that I've said that during a game, he does his part to drive the team.

If he's going to turn into what he was before he came to Denver, so long as it comes with the wins that he was racking up then, I'm ok with it.

ChiefsCountry
10-20-2009, 01:35 PM
KC should trade Cassel for Orton.

It was discussed in the offseason on here.

Mile High Mania
10-20-2009, 01:54 PM
I'd think that they would be, mostly because Orton is not the reason for the winning. He's definitely a game manager and doesn't do stupid things, and I think given time in the pocket Cassel would perform at least as well.

I mean, is the transverse true? If we had Orton, would we be 5-0?

I don't think so...

Enh, KC doesn't have the online... receivers or defense that Orton has right now. They're not winning because of Orton, but they're not winning in spite of Orton either... which couldn't be said back in the days of Plummer.

Orton is doing his job... as is nearly every other member of the team.

Mile High Mania
10-20-2009, 01:58 PM
Donk fans have their homer glasses on and that's fine. There's a reason why Denver tried to get Cassell first and had to settle for Orton. Orton is in the right place at the right time and is a good game manager. What kind of adversity has Orton had to overcome in Denver? The guy walked into the perfect situation. How accurate would Orton be if he had been sacked as many times as Cassell has. We know what happened when he did face adversity in Chicago, he ended up being benched for Rex Grossman.

You're comparing two different scenarios... everyone agrees that Cutler is the better passing QB, but he's 3-2 with Orton's old team and Orton is 6-0 with his new team.

You don't think Orton has had to overcome adversity? Replacing Cutler... dealing with the doubters, especially those in preseason... dealing with the issues and naysayers claiming that he's a poor QB?

He's no relative of the Manning family, but he's not a relation of Dilfer either. Orton has played well... it's not easy to go through 6 games with your only INT being a hail mary at the end of a half. Orton deserves credit for playing smart. Every QB makes bad throws and he's had a few, but he's played incredibly well.

CupidStunt
10-20-2009, 02:11 PM
KC should trade Cassel for Orton.

McDaniels can have the QB he wants if he's prepared to send that OL back in return for him. KC can roll with Brodie Croyle, who'll suddenly look like Joe Montana behind said line.

PunkinDrublic
10-20-2009, 02:11 PM
You're comparing two different scenarios... everyone agrees that Cutler is the better passing QB, but he's 3-2 with Orton's old team and Orton is 6-0 with his new team.

You don't think Orton has had to overcome adversity? Replacing Cutler... dealing with the doubters, especially those in preseason... dealing with the issues and naysayers claiming that he's a poor QB?

He's no relative of the Manning family, but he's not a relation of Dilfer either. Orton has played well... it's not easy to go through 6 games with your only INT being a hail mary at the end of a half. Orton deserves credit for playing smart. Every QB makes bad throws and he's had a few, but he's played incredibly well.

I'm judging from the bad situation he was put into in Chicago he was unable to overcome that. Again he has a lot of offensive weapons and a stout offensive line to help him turn things around so all he has to be is a game manager.

Mile High Mania
10-20-2009, 03:07 PM
I'm judging from the bad situation he was put into in Chicago he was unable to overcome that. Again he has a lot of offensive weapons and a stout offensive line to help him turn things around so all he has to be is a game manager.

Well, he doesn't have to be Peyton or Drew Brees of recent memory... putting up 350 yard games with 3-4 TDs a game. But, he's not just getting by with 19 pass attempts, 180 yards and 1 score now and then.

Orton is completing nearly 64% of his passes... with attempts of 28 / 37 / 23 / 29 / 48 / 29 in the six games. Orton ranks 7th in passing yards, 10th in TD passes, 9th in attempts and his QB rating of 100.1 ranks 8th best in the league.

The Broncos haven't been coasting on leads ... they've been fighting well towards the final seconds in most of their games. Orton has been asked to do more than just be a generic game manager. A guy like Kerry Collins, say from 2008, that was your classic game managing QB... just don't screw up, hand it off and make a pass when you have to make a pass.

That's just a tag people want to use because he's not flashy and they don't want to give him credit. That's fine though... it's more than Orton, much more... but he's not some robotic spare at QB that could easily be replaced by Simms.

Is he Rivers, Brady, Manning... maybe not, but he doesn't have to be in order for them to win, but I'm certain he's more than a game manager.

smittysbar
10-24-2009, 04:37 PM
No he doesn't. You have to realize he is either putting the ball where on the receiver can get it, or throwing it away because nothing is there.

BS he has made several bad passes. One should have been picked but Marshall went over the top and took it away, went down the field for a TD. Don't tell me that he doesn't make bad throws, all QB's do.

OnTheWarpath58
10-24-2009, 04:40 PM
Well, he doesn't have to be Peyton or Drew Brees of recent memory... putting up 350 yard games with 3-4 TDs a game. But, he's not just getting by with 19 pass attempts, 180 yards and 1 score now and then.

Orton is completing nearly 64% of his passes... with attempts of 28 / 37 / 23 / 29 / 48 / 29 in the six games. Orton ranks 7th in passing yards, 10th in TD passes, 9th in attempts and his QB rating of 100.1 ranks 8th best in the league.

The Broncos haven't been coasting on leads ... they've been fighting well towards the final seconds in most of their games. Orton has been asked to do more than just be a generic game manager. A guy like Kerry Collins, say from 2008, that was your classic game managing QB... just don't screw up, hand it off and make a pass when you have to make a pass.

That's just a tag people want to use because he's not flashy and they don't want to give him credit. That's fine though... it's more than Orton, much more... but he's not some robotic spare at QB that could easily be replaced by Simms.

Is he Rivers, Brady, Manning... maybe not, but he doesn't have to be in order for them to win, but I'm certain he's more than a game manager.

IIRC, Orton leads the league in 4th quarter QB rating.

Considering they haven't been sitting on leads in the 4th, and often needing to come back, that's pretty damn impressive.

Not "game manager-like" at all, IMO.

Von Dumbass
10-24-2009, 04:49 PM
IIRC, Orton leads the league in 4th quarter QB rating.

Considering they haven't been sitting on leads in the 4th, and often needing to come back, that's pretty damn impressive.

Not "game manager-like" at all, IMO.

Yep his 4th Quarter QB Rating is 26 points higher than the next closest guy.http://sports.kdka.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2009&type=Passing&range=NFL&rank=110

He also has a QB Rating of 104 on 3rd down.

Count Alex's Losses
10-24-2009, 04:51 PM
It's pretty tough to argue otherwise.

Cassel is more physically talented and he would have hit the ground running with their system.

Touchdown Bowe
10-24-2009, 04:57 PM
With Cassel..I'd say they'd be 5-0..

milkman
10-24-2009, 05:01 PM
IIRC, Orton leads the league in 4th quarter QB rating.

Considering they haven't been sitting on leads in the 4th, and often needing to come back, that's pretty damn impressive.

Not "game manager-like" at all, IMO.

QB rating might be the most overrated, useless stat in all of sports.

Von Dumbass
10-24-2009, 05:06 PM
QB rating might be the most overrated, useless stat in all of sports.

What about DYAR and DVOA?

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Deberg_1990
10-24-2009, 05:10 PM
QB rating might be the most overrated, useless stat in all of sports.

Basically if you thow TD's your QB rating will be decent.

vailpass
10-24-2009, 05:16 PM
It's pretty tough to argue otherwise.

Cassel is more physically talented and he would have hit the ground running with their system.

Not true.

Count Alex's Losses
10-24-2009, 05:18 PM
Not true.

Orton moves like he's standing in mud.

Von Dumbass
10-24-2009, 05:18 PM
Not true.

I would say Cassel is more physically talented as an athlete. He just isn't a better QB.

milkman
10-24-2009, 05:20 PM
What about DYAR and DVOA?

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Once again, stats mean jack to me.

My opinions are formed by watching.

Drew Brees is putting up huge numbers right now, and one could argue that it's because he's playing behind one of the best O-Lines in the league right now.

But the reality is, he's playing as well as he is because he makes reads and decisions as quickly as any QB I've ever seen, and is probably the most accurate, as well.

Orton is putting up the numbers he is because he is getting great protection and has playmakers to get the ball to.

Brees is a franchise QB who makes the offense go, and makes the players around him look better than they are.

Orton is a game manager whose offense allows to him to look like a good QB.

Count Alex's Losses
10-24-2009, 05:21 PM
I would say Cassel is more physically talented as an athlete. He just isn't a better QB.

Fuck off.

:rolleyes:

Von Dumbass
10-24-2009, 05:25 PM
Orton is a game manager whose offense allows to him to look like a good QB.

Would you say Cassel is a game manager?

DeezNutz
10-24-2009, 05:26 PM
Would you say Cassel is a game manager?

At this point, I don't think anyone knows what the hell Cassel is or what he could become.

Might be good, average, or shit.

milkman
10-24-2009, 05:28 PM
Would you say Cassel is a game manager?

Yes, at best.

milkman
10-24-2009, 05:29 PM
At this point, I don't think anyone knows what the hell Cassel is or what he could become.

Might be good, average, or shit.

Based on his season with the Pats last year, he has all the tools to be a good game manager.

chiefzilla1501
10-24-2009, 05:31 PM
Based on his season with the Pats last year, he has all the tools to be a good game manager.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with being a good game manager. Would rather have a QB that can make plays late than an aggressive QB who plays average under 4th quarter pressure.

Von Dumbass
10-24-2009, 05:41 PM
Yes, at best.

I still think Orton is not a game manager. He gets the ball out quickly, gets the ball where it is supposed to go, he gets us out of bad plays and into good ones, he is one of the smartest QB's in the NFL, takes care of the ball and is very accurate. It is not hard to see why Orton has one of the best career winning percentages in the NFL right now.

DeezNutz
10-24-2009, 05:44 PM
Based on his season with the Pats last year, he has all the tools to be a good game manager.

I'm far from an expert on Cassel, and I haven't seen all of his games from last year.

But based on everything I've seen thus far this season, it would appear that his biggest "tools" were Moss and Welker.

I see a very tough QB who is inaccurate at all levels, and the latter is worrisome.

Count Alex's Losses
10-24-2009, 05:46 PM
I see a very tough QB who is inaccurate at all levels

ROFL

You're smoking crack.

DeezNutz
10-24-2009, 05:47 PM
ROFL

You're smoking crack.

Nope. He is tough; it's true.

Deberg_1990
10-24-2009, 05:52 PM
I still think Orton is not a game manager. He gets the ball out quickly, gets the ball where it is supposed to go, he gets us out of bad plays and into good ones, he is one of the smartest QB's in the NFL, takes care of the ball and is very accurate. It is not hard to see why Orton has one of the best career winning percentages in the NFL right now.

We will see in the playoffs. Steve Bono once had one of the best winning percentages too.

Mr. Laz
10-24-2009, 07:08 PM
probably

OnTheWarpath58
10-24-2009, 08:28 PM
QB rating might be the most overrated, useless stat in all of sports.

Yeah, well, when that stat fails, he always has 6 and fucking 0 to fall back on.

Not necessarily directed at you, Milk, but it's amazing the lengths people will go to dis-credit what the Broncos have done.

HerculesRockefell
10-24-2009, 09:11 PM
Orton moves like he's standing in mud.

And you're defending a guy who was sacked 47 times last year behind a good OL in NE, and is on pace for 51 sacks in only 15 games in KC. You've gotten really desperate when your pimping the mobility of a guy who might be sacked over 100 times in 2 seasons.

But it's ok, we know, you've posted both here and on the Mane that you think KC's future is brighter simply because KC has Cassel and Denver has Orton.

What a great debate too, would Denver still be undefeated with Cassel? As a Bronco fan, who cares? They're undefeated now, and that's all that matters.

chiefzilla1501
10-24-2009, 10:28 PM
I'm far from an expert on Cassel, and I haven't seen all of his games from last year.

But based on everything I've seen thus far this season, it would appear that his biggest "tools" were Moss and Welker.

I see a very tough QB who is inaccurate at all levels, and the latter is worrisome.

Based on everything I've seen, I've seen a QB who has 3 seconds to get rid of the ball or else he's popped or there's a defender in his face.

I think he benefited quite a bit from having Moss or Welker. But the question isn't whether he can survive without Moss or Welker. The question is how he'd survive with average talent. We don't know that yet. The offensive line blows all their blocks. And we have one of the bottom 10 receiving corps in the NFL.

DeezNutz
10-24-2009, 10:32 PM
At this point, I don't think anyone knows what the hell Cassel is or what he could become.

Might be good, average, or shit.

Based on everything I've seen, I've seen a QB who has 3 seconds to get rid of the ball or else he's popped or there's a defender in his face.

I think he benefited quite a bit from having Moss or Welker. But the question isn't whether he can survive without Moss or Welker. The question is how he'd survive with average talent. We don't know that yet. The offensive line blows all their blocks. And we have one of the bottom 10 receiving corps in the NFL.

As the above demonstrates, I largely agree. But his general lack of accuracy has been disconcerting.

Let's see if better protection creates a domino effect that obviates this concern.

Raised On Riots
10-24-2009, 11:08 PM
A few of you are saying they are basically the same QB. But does Cassel have more upside than Orton?

We paid 60 million for a game manager??

HELLO! MCFLY!

Fuck me...

Von Dumbass
10-25-2009, 07:06 AM
Midnight will toll on Orton. He looks all bright and shiny now, but he'll eventually turn back into the pumpkin he's always been. It will probably happen about the same time that reality comes crashing down on the entire Denver team. Might happen the second half of the season, might happen early in the playoffs. Either way, it will happen.

This was written by Pro Football Outsiders before the preseason started.

For all the missteps Josh McDaniels may have taken this offseason, acquiring Orton in the Jay Cutler deal may prove to be a masterstroke. Orton was en route to an excellent year before hurting his ankle and coming back too early; he had a DVOA of 18.5% before the injury and -22.9% afterwards. It's admittedly difficult to reconcile Orton's pre-2008 persona with the performance level of a franchise quarterback, but ask yourself this: How would Orton be perceived had he not been rushed into action as a rookie? He'd be an emerging star, not a punchline with a half good season to his name. Credit goes to McDaniels and Brian Xanders for judging the player for what he is, not what he once was.

Von Dumbass
10-25-2009, 07:09 AM
Truth. Could you imagine how bad ass that team would be if you saddled last years offense with this year's defense? They'd be winning by 50 points each week instead of 3.

Actually last years offense put up 23.1 points per game. This years offense is putting up 22.2 points per game

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 08:57 AM
As the above demonstrates, I largely agree. But his general lack of accuracy has been disconcerting.

Let's see if better protection creates a domino effect that obviates this concern.

His inaccuracy seems to be based on a general discomfort with his protection. When his protection is consistent, I don't see as much of the accuracy issues.

Based on what I've seen, I think what's more realistic is that his upside isn't to be a Drew Brees type QB, but a Big Ben type QB. I called Big Ben the best game manager in football a week ago. And I said that because Ben typically plays to the defense's level. I think people have a negative viewpoint of what a game manager is. Maybe Big Ben isn't a game manager like Trent Dilfer was, but he's a guy who isn't going to consistently put up 300+ yards and win games that way, but he plays well when he needs to and at the end of games, he does exactly what he needs to do to win games.

I think it's possible Cassel has a Big Ben like upside. That doesn't mean he'll be as good as Big Ben, but I can see them playing a very similar type of game. And I'd be okay with that.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:06 AM
His inaccuracy seems to be based on a general discomfort with his protection. When his protection is consistent, I don't see as much of the accuracy issues.

Based on what I've seen, I think what's more realistic is that his upside isn't to be a Drew Brees type QB, but a Big Ben type QB. I called Big Ben the best game manager in football a week ago. And I said that because Ben typically plays to the defense's level. I think people have a negative viewpoint of what a game manager is. Maybe Big Ben isn't a game manager like Trent Dilfer was, but he's a guy who isn't going to consistently put up 300+ yards and win games that way, but he plays well when he needs to and at the end of games, he does exactly what he needs to do to win games.

I think it's possible Cassel has a Big Ben like upside. That doesn't mean he'll be as good as Big Ben, but I can see them playing a very similar type of game. And I'd be okay with that.

Uhh....The Steelers aren't running the ball nearly as effectively this year as they have in the past, and the Steelers O-Line is pretty bad.

Even with that, Roethlisberger has thrown for over 330 yards in 3 of 6 games, including a 400+ yard game, all while getting sacked 16 times this season.

Get a fucking clue.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:11 AM
Uhh....The Steelers aren't running the ball nearly as effectively this year as they have in the past, and the Steelers O-Line is pretty bad.

Even with that, Roethlisberger has thrown for over 330 yards in 3 of 6 games, including a 400+ yard game, all while getting sacked 16 times this season.

Get a ****ing clue.

The Steelers beat the Chargers and the Browns. They barely squeaked by the Titans and the Lions. And they've lost to Chicago and Cincinnati, the only two legit teams he's played all season.

The Steelers are 4-2. But don't for a second think this Steelers team is nearly the force they were last year. Big Ben is a top 5 QB. But this concept of winning games in Peyton Manning "light up the scoreboard" fashion is not something he's used to. With a tougher schedule, he could easily be 2-4.

Mile High Mania
10-25-2009, 09:13 AM
Actually last years offense put up 23.1 points per game. This years offense is putting up 22.2 points per game

I haven't looked at the stats, but are the ST/DST scores figuring into that number... if so, you should rephrase to 'team ppg' and not 'offensive ppg'. It's not a big difference (Denver only has 2 TDs scored by non-offense), but just wanted to the stats to be clear.

DeezNutz
10-25-2009, 09:19 AM
His inaccuracy seems to be based on a general discomfort with his protection. When his protection is consistent, I don't see as much of the accuracy issues.

Based on what I've seen, I think what's more realistic is that his upside isn't to be a Drew Brees type QB, but a Big Ben type QB. I called Big Ben the best game manager in football a week ago. And I said that because Ben typically plays to the defense's level. I think people have a negative viewpoint of what a game manager is. Maybe Big Ben isn't a game manager like Trent Dilfer was, but he's a guy who isn't going to consistently put up 300+ yards and win games that way, but he plays well when he needs to and at the end of games, he does exactly what he needs to do to win games.

I think it's possible Cassel has a Big Ben like upside. That doesn't mean he'll be as good as Big Ben, but I can see them playing a very similar type of game. And I'd be okay with that.

The problem with the Ben Roethlisberger comparison is that he's a guy who can pretty much do whatever is asked of him.

If that means he has to air it out, throw for a shit ton of yards and win a game, he's proven he can do this. Play a more conservative game, eat clock, run the ball? No problem. He'll still be productive. Be asked to hold the ball longer to increase the likelihood of a big play, while also increasing the likelihood of taking hits? Who cares. No problem.

A game manager, IMO, is a player who isn't nearly as versatile, and this label can never be applied to a player who can literally put a team on his back, which Roethlisberger has proven he can do.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:20 AM
The Steelers beat the Chargers and the Browns. They barely squeaked by the Titans and the Lions. And they've lost to Chicago and Cincinnati, the only two legit teams he's played all season.

The Steelers are 4-2. But don't for a second think this Steelers team is nearly the force they were last year. Big Ben is a top 5 QB. But this concept of winning games in Peyton Manning "light up the scoreboard" fashion is not something he's used to. With a tougher schedule, he could easily be 2-4.

Who the fuck cares?

You said he wouldn't be able to put up 300 yards consistently.

You're wrong.

He's doing it.

Mile High Mania
10-25-2009, 09:20 AM
The problem with the Ben Roethlisberger comparison is that he's a guy who can pretty much do whatever is asked of him.

If that means he has to air it out, throw for a shit ton of yards and win a game, he's proven he can do this. Play a more conservative game, eat clock, run the ball? No problem. He'll still be productive. Be asked to hold the ball longer to increase the likelihood of a big play, while also increasing the likelihood of taking hits? Who cares. No problem.

A game manager, IMO, is a player who isn't nearly as versatile, and this label can never be applied to a player who can literally put a team on his back, which Roethlisberger has proven he can do.

Very true with Big Ben.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:22 AM
The problem with the Ben Roethlisberger comparison is that he's a guy who can pretty much do whatever is asked of him.

If that means he has to air it out, throw for a shit ton of yards and win a game, he's proven he can do this. Play a more conservative game, eat clock, run the ball? No problem. He'll still be productive. Be asked to hold the ball longer to increase the likelihood of a big play, while also increasing the likelihood of taking hits? Who cares. No problem.

A game manager, IMO, is a player who isn't nearly as versatile, and this label can never be applied to a player who can literally put a team on his back, which Roethlisberger has proven he can do.

It's stupid fucking comparison.

DeezNutz
10-25-2009, 09:24 AM
It's stupid ****ing comparison.

It's not an apt comparison, especially for a person, like myself, who considers Roethlisberger the third best QB in the league by a wide margin.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:29 AM
The problem with the Ben Roethlisberger comparison is that he's a guy who can pretty much do whatever is asked of him.

If that means he has to air it out, throw for a shit ton of yards and win a game, he's proven he can do this. Play a more conservative game, eat clock, run the ball? No problem. He'll still be productive. Be asked to hold the ball longer to increase the likelihood of a big play, while also increasing the likelihood of taking hits? Who cares. No problem.

A game manager, IMO, is a player who isn't nearly as versatile, and this label can never be applied to a player who can literally put a team on his back, which Roethlisberger has proven he can do.

I think that's one of the flaws of the "game manager" label. I want to call Ben a game manager, but I also realize that he does what he does minus a running game.

But what has made Ben successful to this date is that he has almost always had a defense that creates key turnovers and consistently gives the offense great field position. In exchange, Ben typically engineers an offense that usually doesn't put up a lot of points, but stays on the field. Even if they don't run the ball well, they run the ball often. They won the TOP game by at least 6 minutes in every single playoff game last year.

I do agree that in games where Ben needs to put up 30 points, he generally does. That's what separates him from the Trent Dilfers. But for the most part, his role is to dominate the TOP game, and then play unbelievable 4th quarter football. If he was consistently asked to do what Drew Brees does, he wouldn't be an elite QB. Just as if Brees was asked to do what Big Ben does, he wouldn't be an elite QB either. Two completely different styles. And Big Ben's last few games playing in Drew Brees fashion hasn't looked great for the Steelers. They have been barely competitive against the worst teams in the league.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:32 AM
Who the **** cares?

You said he wouldn't be able to put up 300 yards consistently.

You're wrong.

He's doing it.

Big Ben doesn't have the reputation he has because he throws for 300 yards and lights up scoreboards. Of course he can pull off a 300 yard game. Actually, the year the Steelers didn't make the playoffs was his most productive year to date. I believe he put up over 3,500 yards that season. He built a reputation by being the most clutch player in the game.

But that's not his game. That's not his comfort zone.

If he's asked to put up 300 yards consistently, that's not in the best interest of the Steelers. The Steelers would much rather the defense play a solid game, the offense control the clock, and put the ball in Big Ben's hands to make some big plays in the 4th quarter.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:38 AM
Big Ben doesn't have the reputation he has because he throws for 300 yards and lights up scoreboards. Of course he can pull off a 300 yard game. Actually, the year the Steelers didn't make the playoffs was his most productive year to date. I believe he put up over 3,500 yards that season. He built a reputation by being the most clutch player in the game.

But that's not his game. That's not his comfort zone.

If he's asked to put up 300 yards consistently, that's not in the best interest of the Steelers. The Steelers would much rather the defense play a solid game, the offense control the clock, and put the ball in Big Ben's hands to make some big plays in the 4th quarter.

I have no idea what to say to this, except you clearly don't have a clue what a game manager is.

A game manager isn't someone you consistently ask to go out and make plays to win the game in the clutch.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:38 AM
It's not an apt comparison, especially for a person, like myself, who considers Roethlisberger the third best QB in the league by a wide margin.

The only 2 QBs that can do what Big Ben does as well as he does are Brady and Manning. And I would argue that Peyton isn't nearly as good in late game situations as Big Ben is.

I don't see why there's such a negative stigma behind a game manager. If Drew Brees were on the Steelers, he would light up the scoreboard, but I don't think he would put the Steelers in the kind of position to win that Big Ben does. With fantasy football, people seem convinced that the best way to win games is by a QB who can put up 30 points. Big Ben is at his best when he's asked to put up 200 yards, dominate the Time of Possession game, and then make big plays in the end. The Steelers are 4-2 right now, but anyone who has watched them will agree that right now, they are half the team they were last year. Once Polamalu comes back to full form, I guarantee Ben will be back to 200-yard performances again, and that this form of Big Ben is going to lead to the Steelers being a dominant team again.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:41 AM
The only 2 QBs that can do what Big Ben does as well as he does are Brady and Manning. And I would argue that Peyton isn't nearly as good in late game situations as Big Ben is.

I don't see why there's such a negative stigma behind a game manager. If Drew Brees were on the Steelers, he would light up the scoreboard, but I don't think he would put the Steelers in the kind of position to win that Big Ben does. With fantasy football, people seem convinced that the best way to win games is by a QB who can put up 30 points. Big Ben is at his best when he's asked to put up 200 yards, dominate the Time of Possession game, and then make big plays in the end. The Steelers are 4-2 right now, but anyone who has watched them will agree that right now, they are half the team they were last year. Once Polamalu comes back to full form, I guarantee Ben will be back to 200-yard performances again, and that this form of Big Ben is going to lead to the Steelers being a dominant team again.

Brees and the Saints are socring points almost at will, but with the way that Brees makes reads and decisions so quickly, and with his uncanny accuracy, the idea that he wouldn't make plays in the clutch is absolutely assinine.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:43 AM
I have no idea what to say to this, except you clearly don't have a clue what a game manager is.

A game manager isn't someone you consistently ask to go out and make plays to win the game in the clutch.

To me, the definition of a game manager is a quarterback whose top priority is to extend drives and dominate Time of Possession. They aren't explosive quarterbacks and typically throw for 200 yards and maybe a TD per game. But they put their team in a position to win in mostly close games. And they win more 13-10 games than any other QB can.

I don't know why there's such a negative stigma around being a game manager. When did this become associated with a QB who just dinks and dunks? I always pictured game managers as QBs who aren't explosive, but put their team in a position to win games. I'd much rather that kind of a game manager than an explosive QB who doesn't put the team in the best position to win.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:44 AM
Brees and the Saints are socring points almost at will, but with the way that Brees makes reads and decisions so quickly, and with his uncanny accuracy, the idea that he wouldn't make plays in the clutch is absolutely assinine.

You think he could do it as consistently and as seamlessly as Big Ben?

I have a lot of respect for Brees. But I don't think he's on the same level as Big Ben.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:50 AM
To me, the definition of a game manager is a quarterback whose top priority is to extend drives and dominate Time of Possession. They aren't explosive quarterbacks and typically throw for 200 yards and maybe a TD per game. But they put their team in a position to win in mostly close games. And they win more 13-10 games than any other QB can.

I don't know why there's such a negative stigma around being a game manager. When did this become associated with a QB who just dinks and dunks? I always pictured game managers as QBs who aren't explosive, but put their team in a position to win games. I'd much rather that kind of a game manager than an explosive QB who doesn't put the team in the best position to win.

It's not a negative stygma.

My definition of a game manager is a guy who plays within a system, but struggles when asked to do more.

Trent Green was a game manager.

Big Ben is a guy that can adapt to different circumstances and excel.

That's not a game manager.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:51 AM
Brees and the Saints are socring points almost at will, but with the way that Brees makes reads and decisions so quickly, and with his uncanny accuracy, the idea that he wouldn't make plays in the clutch is absolutely assinine.

I'll also say that you don't see a lot of explosive offenses winning Super Bowls. The teams that typically win play outstanding defense, play the Time of Possession and field position game, and have QBs who make big plays late in the game. Most of the explosive QBs like Brees and Manning or Trent Green (back in the day) in the league are not known to be big-time playoff QBs.

And I'd say a big reason for that is that these explosive QBs do a disservice to the defense. They score quickly and they don't keep the defense off the field. These are also teams that are so reliant on their QB that anything but a perfect game by the QB will amount to a loss. Big Ben can have a bad game where he throws 2 or 3 picks, but his team will pick him up, and he'll respond by pulling it together for a huge 4th quarter win.

That's what makes Big Ben a great QB. He complements the defense, and his defense complements him. Big Ben makes the Steelers a much better team. When the Steelers ask him to be Superman consistently, that makes them a much worse football team.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:51 AM
You think he could do it as consistently and as seamlessly as Big Ben?

I have a lot of respect for Brees. But I don't think he's on the same level as Big Ben.

Yes, I do, especially with prevent defenses in so much widespread use.

He'd tear it up.

milkman
10-25-2009, 09:56 AM
I'll also say that you don't see a lot of explosive offenses winning Super Bowls. The teams that typically win play outstanding defense, play the Time of Possession and field position game, and have QBs who make big plays late in the game. Most of the explosive QBs like Brees and Manning or Trent Green (back in the day) in the league are not known to be big-time playoff QBs.

And I'd say a big reason for that is that these explosive QBs do a disservice to the defense. They score quickly and they don't keep the defense off the field. These are also teams that are so reliant on their QB that anything but a perfect game by the QB will amount to a loss. Big Ben can have a bad game where he throws 2 or 3 picks, but his team will pick him up, and he'll respond by pulling it together for a huge 4th quarter win.

That's what makes Big Ben a great QB. He complements the defense, and his defense complements him. Big Ben makes the Steelers a much better team. When the Steelers ask him to be Superman consistently, that makes them a much worse football team.

That has more to do with the fact that teams rarely build complete teams on both sides of the ball.

The Colts D through most of Manning's years have been mediocre at best.

The Chiefs D was just horrible.

I haven't looked up the stats, but I'd be willing to bet that the Saints this year, wven with an offense that is more explosive than it already has been, have won or been close to equal the TOP battle because they've put together a solid defense to complement thier explosive offense.

That whole "Well the offense puts the defense on the field too much" is a mtyh.

Those defenses were simply not good.

chiefzilla1501
10-25-2009, 09:58 AM
It's not a negative stygma.

My definition of a game manager is a guy who plays within a system, but struggles when asked to do more.

Trent Green was a game manager.

Big Ben is a guy that can adapt to different circumstances and excel.

That's not a game manager.

I think that's an odd definition of a game manager to include a guy who put up 30 points per game consistently in that group. You're talking about a system quarterback, and Big Ben is definitely not a system QB.

Yes, Big Ben can adapt outside the system, but he has at his absolute best when he's asked to manage games. The Steelers would rather he put up a 200 yard game where they score only 13 points, but win the TOP game by 10 minutes than a game where they put up 30 points in a 300-yard game. To me, that's the definition of a game manager and Big Ben is maybe the best game manager in the history of the NFL.

milkman
10-25-2009, 10:00 AM
Unless I'm reading it wrong, it appears that the Saints are averaging over 33 mins in TOP this season.

milkman
10-25-2009, 10:01 AM
I think that's an odd definition of a game manager to include a guy who put up 30 points per game consistently in that group. You're talking about a system quarterback, and Big Ben is definitely not a system QB.

Yes, Big Ben can adapt outside the system, but he has at his absolute best when he's asked to manage games. The Steelers would rather he put up a 200 yard game where they score only 13 points, but win the TOP game by 10 minutes than a game where they put up 30 points in a 300-yard game. To me, that's the definition of a game manager and Big Ben is maybe the best game manager in the history of the NFL.

We'll have to disagree on game manager definitions.

milkman
10-25-2009, 10:02 AM
I have to run a couple of errands before the games start.

I'll get back to calling you names later.

Deberg_1990
10-25-2009, 10:04 AM
Milk, i know you love Brees, and i do too, but the past couple of seasons hes made alot of mistakes as well. Turnovers, fumbles, etc.....(probably trying to do too much in fairness)

Until he proves it by winning a Super Bowl, id put Brees just a notch below Big Ben.

milkman
10-25-2009, 11:22 AM
Milk, i know you love Brees, and i do too, but the past couple of seasons hes made alot of mistakes as well. Turnovers, fumbles, etc.....(probably trying to do too much in fairness)

Until he proves it by winning a Super Bowl, id put Brees just a notch below Big Ben.

I'm not saying that Brees has proven that his game has evolved to that level.

I'm saying that he's playing as well as any QB right now, and the things he's doing, and how he's doing it, leads me to believe that he is capable of being that kind of QB.

He still has to prove it.

And I was one that thought that he'd ever be anything other than a mediocre QB in the NFL.

He's well on his way to proving me wrong.

Von Dumbass
10-25-2009, 11:28 AM
And I was one that thought that he'd ever be anything other than a mediocre QB in the NFL.

He's well on his way to proving me wrong.

Kyle Orton will change your mind by the end of the season too.:)

milkman
10-25-2009, 11:37 AM
Kyle Orton will change your mind by the end of the season too.:)

We all have a dream, but don't hold your breath on that one.