View Full Version : I am not trying to be a jerk, but....
11-29-2000, 03:13 PM
After watching plenty of Raider games and Chiefs games over the last 2 years, I think Gannon is probably a much better qb than Grbac. In fact, I would say that Gannon is probably one of the best qbs in football right now. AND, if memory serves, all Gannon did was win games when he got to play at KC.
Don't get me wrong, I think that Grbac is a solid qb. But if you ask me, Gannon is much better. Why in the hell did KC get rid of Gannon and keep Grbac?
Gannon is a better dink & dunk, scrambling style QB. If that's your offense, great. It's pretty effective.
Grbac is the better pocket passer by far. The verticle game with Grbac is head & shoulders above Gannon's.
I think Gannon may be a more effective leader. Certainly, he's more vocal. Grbac could stand some improvement in that regard.
11-29-2000, 03:17 PM
Good Question. I've been wondering the same thing.
corn balls 28
11-29-2000, 03:19 PM
Gannon is the better with his legs and with dump passes.
Grbac has the stronger arm and is the one most likely to hit medium to longer range passes.
One is a YAC QB and the other is an arm QB.
If you can cover the back out of the back field and not give Gannon anywhere to run he will panick and make mistakes.
Gannon doesn't have faith in his arm to make the plays. Unless the defender is way off or fallen down he will normally take the safe pass short.
Grbac will let his play makers make plays and go up and get the ball.
11-29-2000, 03:24 PM
While all of this maybe true, I look at it this way. Who is the winner? Which QB finds ways to win games? The answer - Gannon.
corn balls 28
11-29-2000, 03:24 PM
morphius and kphobia:
Well said. It actually amazes me, when forced to throw downfield, just how subpar Rich Gannon's throwing arm really is. The guy can't throw a spiral more than twenty yards!! His arm strength and accuracy have both always been suspect in my book. Nonetheless, I must give him credit for the success he is experiencing in Faidahville. Gannon IS a consummate team leader, something that Oakland needed badly during the nineties.
11-29-2000, 03:27 PM
broncofan - Also look at it this way, the Raiders designed a system for Gannon, the Chiefs system is designed and the player must conform. Gannon also had a couple games here where he didn't look much better then Moon did last week, when he was here.
[This message has been edited by morphius (edited 11-29-2000).]
11-29-2000, 03:28 PM
Too much value is put on arm strength (morphius)... IMO Gannon is a better QB because of the intangibles;
*reading the defense
Elvis has all the physical ability in the world but is not close to being the total packege he may become.
If arm strength and throwing a pretty spiral were the top QB requirements, then Jeff George would be the elite QB in the NFL.
Of the two right now I would choose "noodle arm" every day of the week, simply because he reads defenses alot better than Elvis and IMO is mentally tougher.
11-29-2000, 03:33 PM
And for those who say he can't throw farther than 40 yrds thats B.S...... I was on the sideline of the Seattle preseason game where he was warming up... I saw him throw 50 yard passes with accuracy.
The Raider offense simply is not designed for high risk passes..... Gannon takes 3-5 yard drops where as Elvis takes 7 drops which allows for the longer patterns to be opened up.
11-29-2000, 03:33 PM
JQ - Can you explain the ignorance that he has shown with many of his INT's this season when Gannon has been going down and instead of taking the sack he decides to throw it up? I have seen this picked off at least 3 times doing this exact same thing, and have probably only seen 4 games with him in it. In fact a couple of those the announcers said it was a rookie mistake that they would not expect from someone like Gannon.
Not sure that not learning from mistakes is a sign for brilliance...
11-29-2000, 03:34 PM
JQ - Then why does he not have the faith in his arm during the game? I mean if he is accurate with it, why does he not use that in a game?
11-29-2000, 03:37 PM
They are both good QBs. I would probably go with Gannon. I always wanted him to start when he was here and was upset to see him go. I was glad, however to see someone give him a chance to prove himself. That is all he ever wanted/needed.
11-29-2000, 03:37 PM
WHO CARES BRONCOBILLYBOY!!!1
Put a plug in it - Grbac is here this year - Gannon is there. And if Grbac is smart he'll take the cash and leave this 3 ring circus run by Carl and company!
Good for Gannon, Good for Elvis
11-29-2000, 03:38 PM
I don't think the right word is ignorance, but then your dislike of him has been apparent for awhile.
Gannon has forced passes in the Denver games... the one drawback to him is he tries to do too much at times, more so last year than this.... but that is the drawback of a playmaker. Elway did it, Young did it, and Farve does it more than anyone.
11-29-2000, 03:39 PM
I have skimmed over your list and to me only the last two are defensible positions.
*game preperation- not sure if you have been shadowing Gannon prior to every Sunday, or how it is you know this. I have heard good things about both Gannon and Grbac's pre-game study habits.
*pocket presence- could you define this one please??
*reading the defense- Hell, both these guys throw their share of dumb interceptions. I'm not gonna give Rich a free pass on this one, I've seen him toss up some real head-scratchers.
*consistency- eehh probably.
*leadership- arguable, but Rich does certainly seem to be more vocal about his leadership.
Rich Gannon had been an NFL player a long time before he became a Chief, and had never found success. His knowledge of the game and work ethic have made him into a very good QB nowadays in the NFL, but with his limited tools, in my mind he will never be top tier.
11-29-2000, 03:39 PM
Morph, with the interception thing, that may not be the best thing to compare to Grbac with. If you get my drift.
corn balls 28
11-29-2000, 03:39 PM
How many times had Grbac done the same thing? He has thrown his share if interceptions instead of taking the sack. That isn't a good comparison in my book.
11-29-2000, 03:42 PM
47Mack, Great minds think alike. :)
corn balls 28
11-29-2000, 03:42 PM
Why throw 50 yard patterns when we run a ball contol offense. Tim Browns and Andre Risons strength is not the deep post patterns anymore. Why have Gannon take a 7 step drop and let fly when the offense is not desgned that way?<P>
11-29-2000, 03:47 PM
pocket presence- Being able to feel the rush, knowing when to step up. I've always thought Grbac was an average QB when forced to move around in the pocket hece all the INT;s thrown off his back foot that led to TD's.
I'm not going to argue leadership. If KC is missing anything this year it is leadership.
Gannon has been the first one to the Raider facility and the last one to leave.
[This message has been edited by hawaiianboy (edited 11-29-2000).]
11-29-2000, 03:50 PM
As much as I hate to say it, :o the faiduh does have a point on the leadership issue.
corn balls 28
[This message has been edited by raiderhader (edited 11-29-2000).]
11-29-2000, 03:54 PM
As much as I agree here, I think that Grbac is the least of KC's concerns right now. I feel bad for all the players.
Gannon's decision to leave KC was a blessing in disguise.
[This message has been edited by 47mack (edited 11-29-2000).]
11-29-2000, 03:56 PM
Right now Gannon is the MVP in the league. He doesn't have the arm that Grbac has but he has the leadership skills and can make plays out of nothing. I still wish we had kept him. Would have more salary cap room as well. Some may scoff at the MVP status I gave him but I'll bet I know who is going to the probowl.
Still cast his vote for Grrrrbac though :p
[This message has been edited by BIG_DADDY (edited 11-29-2000).]
11-29-2000, 03:57 PM
Do you mean mobility then?? Obviously Gannon moves better, that is his style of play. Grbac is a 6 foot 5 pocket passer, so it would seem natural that he would take a few more sacks than Gannon would. The question is, how many times have I seen Gannon dance a jig in the backfield, roll out against his momentum and waft the ball into the waiting arms of a safety?? The only diff between Gannon's and Grby's Dumb INTs is Grbac tries to force it into coverage, and Gannon doesn't know when to throw it away. In both cases, that sounds like a Qb trying to do too much.
I'm tryin to remember, who was the last non-pocket passer to win the Super Bowl??
11-29-2000, 03:57 PM
I'm not trying to put Elvis down because he has developed into a fine QB. I just like my QB's with a bit more fire than he shows.IMO at a certain point he needs to step up and say this is my team, follow me or get out.
He has the protypical size and arm strength, but he should lead the offense not Gonzo.
11-29-2000, 04:02 PM
I think they both will go to the Pro Bowl if Elvis gets his *** back on the field. Screw his finger crap, Farve played with that thumb all last year... Gannon played with a bad elbow last week. Tough it out.
If he comes back to play I vote for him before Manning.
The last non pocket passer to win a SB would either be Farve or Young depending on your opinion of pocket passer.
11-29-2000, 04:08 PM
When I posted this topic, I really wasn't thinking about all the details that you all have brought up here. The difference between the two quarterbacks are obviouse. Gannon's mobility vs Grbac's arm strength... and on and on. I was not thinking about any of those things when I posted this thread. I WAS thinking about Gannon's ability to will his team to win, and Grbac's inability to do the same.
In my mind, some quarterbacks are just winners, bottom line. Both the Raiders and the Chiefs are fairly talented football teams. If the qb's were swapped, I think that the Chiefs would be winning the AFC West. I don't think Elvis is resposible for the Chiefs poor season. I don't think that he has done anything to keep the Chiefs from having a poor season either.
After watching John Elway play my entire life, I learned that you don't need to be pretty to be the best. This is the old Marino vs Elway argument. Who would you rather have?
In my mind you are all right, Grbac is definately the better looking, long ball, drop back, pocket passing, prototypical quarterback. He is NOT a winner. Gannon is.
11-29-2000, 04:08 PM
Your intentions are clear BF. It is easy to sit back and throw bombs at your enemies and then have them blame each other for it.
I will say this. The Faders didn't exactly have a stellar year last year with Gammon. As far as his passing ability is concerned, I know that he didn't even go deep in both games against KC - I don't think he even tried it - and don't try to count that buttugly duck he threw in the first game. And if you watched the Denver MN game, Gammon was chucking the ball down the field, but every time there was nobody even close. Part of throwing vertically is accuracy and I haven't seen any from Gammon...before he was here, when he was here, and after he left. Uh, and his record here in KC was average at best.
Here's one for ya BF. The Faders were right to ditch Shamaham. Gruden is a better coach and he will win more SBs. If I had to pick between the two for KC, I would shoot myself....oh, hypothetically....I'd take Gruden.
How ya like me now?
11-29-2000, 04:09 PM
Brett Favre is a pocket passer, I think most everyone would agree on that. An argument could be made to call Steve Young a scrambler, he is probably the closest you can find. Nonetheless, looking back through NFL history, it is almost invariably the classic drop back passers that have brought home the SB rings.
I think Rich Gannon is a good QB, no doubt, just talkin a little friendly smaque thats all. I do think it is ridiculous to say the man is the league MVP. The way I look at it, which player does the most for his team?? Without Gannon, the Raiders would still be a good team with a solid, run stuffing D and Tyrone Wheatley to pound it out on the other side of the ball. Without Grbac... well I think we saw last Sunday where the Chiefs would be.
11-29-2000, 04:16 PM
Don't take what I say as an arguement. I think they are both great QB's. I just get tired of the whole "noodle arm" thing... Kinda like the people who critique Shaq for having an ugly shot.... Bottom line is results. Gannon has gotten the job done.
For the record I wold probably have Eddie George as the MVP. The Titans are nowhere without him.
11-29-2000, 04:18 PM
Disco is correct, Gannon only won 50% of the time when he was in Kansas City. One season he pulled a few rabbits out of his hat and Marty decided his time was running out, so he put a Cold Grbac in the lineup and lost.
People unnaturally put the blame on Grbac. Gannon is an old wise man, but he is not an elite QB... he has proven that with every other team he has played with in the NFL and he will prove it in Oak once more before the year is out.
11-29-2000, 04:21 PM
Hawaiian - George certainly deserves it. 5th consecutive 1,000 yd season! The dude is a serious Hoss.
11-29-2000, 04:28 PM
Agreed. I hope we don't see George in the playoffs he put up 200 yards the last time we played him.
11-29-2000, 04:29 PM
Gee, another Gannon/Grbac topic. :rolleyes: :)
Gannon wouldn't do sh!t in KC. He can't throw the deep ball (i don't care what he does in warmups), which is KCs whole game right now. In Oakland he has the advantage of a top 5 running game. Elvis is helped out by having the 28th ranked. The Raiders have the 16th best passing game, the Chiefs have the 5th. Gannon's good at dinking and dunking with a good running game, but put him on this team with no help and a bad D and we wouldn't be sitting any prettier.
It's really time to get over this. We went with the guy who had more youth, more talnet, more potential, and someone who fits our system better. gannon may be more polished at this point, but he wasn't always. grbac will far surpass gannon in the future.
11-29-2000, 04:35 PM
Elvis had a top 5 running game and the #1 red zone offense last year. I know, Johnny Proctor told me a 1000 times.
Its funny before the year started everyone was saying he AFCWest had no QB's yet Gannon, Grbac and Griese have all had excellent years.
11-29-2000, 04:38 PM
Off the topic - Eddie George was selected as the 14th pick overall by the Houston Oilers in the 1996 NFL draft. Since then, he has rushed for over 1,000 yds each year he has been in the league - and he doesn't play in a dome, or on turf. Oh, and he has started every game but two, and they were during his rookie season. :eek:
See? Sometimes you can get good talent with those middle-first-round picks.
11-29-2000, 04:49 PM
Guys the INT thing is just one thing to prove that Gannon is not better, but I have not seen one person deny that the system was made for him and that we have always forced players to fit what we want and not always use them the best way possible.
JQ - If you had watched him as many years as I have, you probably wouldn't like him much either :)
Chiefs Fanatic, but a Vikes fan for a long time.
11-29-2000, 04:49 PM
It is only easy when your enemy sucks. And Disco, you guys suck! And yes, it is easy (and fun)! Maybe next year the Chiefs will have a winning record, until then, INCOMING!
11-29-2000, 04:56 PM
JQ - All 3 QB's have out performed their expectations, which is good for the NFC West. Of course the other teams more then make up for the quality by being completely inept at the position.
I would also say that I used the word ignorance because he doesn't see it as a problem, otherwise he would not keep doing it.
11-29-2000, 09:28 PM
Both QB's are having the best years of their careers and should revel in that.
Gannon may have the arm to throw the ball downfield, but doesn't have the "touch", "accuracy" or what ever you want to call it. But what he is doing this year that he hasn't done before is actually play within the confines of a developed system. He had a propensity in the past, mostly out of necessity, to do too much improvising in systems not meant for improvisation. This system thrive on his ability to be mobile, take advantage of the "dink & dunk" routes that are made for Tim Brown and his YAC abilities. He also has a real running game to help. Take the running game out of the equation and some of those close wins might be different.
The only thing i can say for Grbac is he has improved vastly and would be even better if we offered something other than the pitiful RBBC, the misfits who wouldn't start for any other team other than the Chiefs(well, T-Rich would probably start somewhere.)
Kilgore is a noun, not a verb..
11-29-2000, 09:48 PM
I've said all year that as long as the Chiefs sweep denver, I'll be happy. What might even be fun is if KC can manage to knock Denver out of the playoffs. We may indeed $UCK, but MISERY LOVES COMPANY and the Donx are not that much better no matter what their record is. *Grin*
11-30-2000, 08:32 AM
At 5-7, it is hard to understand what in the hell you are talking about. Anyway, I know that this has been a glorious season for you, the Broncos being one of your 5 wins and all. And yes, I will envy you when the Chiefs are basking in the light of a 7-9 season. And I know, I know, going to the playoffs wasn't what you had in mind anyway this year. If the Chiefs can just beat the Broncos again this year, it would be the perfect football season for the KC fans, players, and coaches. Everyone gets a raise!
KC-CHIEFS-FAN-TX, I don't think you understand. The Chiefs have 1 more win than the 49ers, and Seattle, and are probably playing worse football right now. Go talk smack with the Charger fans... oopps, they beat you guys, nevermind. Got talk smack to the Seattle fans.
11-30-2000, 08:40 AM
Broncofan - Just be happy that you will not have to meet those kings of the NFL, the bengals, if you do make the playoff's.
Not sure if someone understands the word rival...
11-30-2000, 08:48 AM
I think trying to compare the two is ludicrous at best. As the saying goes apples and organges but in this case one must also include pears (offensive systems) as well.
Gannon was not a 'star' in KC. Yes, he did an admirable job in KC, but he didnt 'dominate' or perform at an 'MVP' level as has been bandied about here.
KC has a long standing tradition of ignoring or refusing to exploit the talents that they have. As morph said, KC has a philosophy and the players must 'conform' to it. As evidence, Gannon had, at best, a 500 record with KC.
So not only are Gannon and Grbac different 'styles' of QB's, they are also in differnt systems and have different talents around them.
If you look at most of the 'scrambling' style of QB's: Gannon, Culpepper, Garcia, Stewart, McNabb most have serious Rb's behind them. Also, in Gannon's situation, it appears from watching the games that it appears to be the Raiders game plan for Gannon to line up to throw and then run around or up the field. It is uncanny the fact that no team has figured out a way to stop this, because it seems to me that the majority of the offense is predicated on Gannon's scrambling and dumping off to Brown, Wheatley, Crockett, whoever when a defender gets close.
11-30-2000, 08:53 AM
BroncoFan is right. We shouldn't be happy about beating Denver at their house for the second straight time. After all, those pussies lost to the Bengals.
11-30-2000, 08:53 AM
Titus - I think the rat figured it out pretty well, we also have the issue that Gannon knows our DC's and HC from practicing against them every day for years.
11-30-2000, 09:21 AM
BF - LOL @ #37! :) All is fair in war and football...
11-30-2000, 11:12 AM
As soon as the Bronco blow up, I'll get mine. It has happened already this season, and will probably happen again.
Getting even with fans from opposing teams is never more than a week or two away.
11-30-2000, 02:34 PM
I donít understand how either of you figure Grudenís offensive system intends that Gannon scramble. That would mean Gruden plans for pass blocking to break down or WRs to remain covered so that Gannon work more to successfully complete a play. It doesnít make sense.
Gannon improvises out of necessity, not by design. He has been quoted repeatedly regarding his desire to stay in the pocket rather than scramble and or take the ball upfield.
11-30-2000, 02:41 PM
RC: I go by what I see and what the announcers say, since Im not at the game.
Without going back and looking at all the play by plays, the vast majority of the time Gannon sets back to pass he winds up scrambling or running right up to the line and then tossing the ball over the oncoming defender. It happens with such great frequency, it cannot be by accident.
It could be one of two things. One, that as I said, the offense relies upon it. Two, that the Offensive Line and WR's are bad and, as you say, Gannon must do it all himself.
I do not discredit your OL and WR's to that degree. I believe that Brown, Jett and Rison (who's experiencing new found success) are good WR's and the OL has to be good to be top 5 in rushing offense.
Also, I mentioned I hear what the announcers say. Some of the games I have seen, the announcer, specifically Phil Simms was pointing out on many occasions that Gannon had open receivers downfield, but pulled the ball down instead.
Maybe if I can find some spare time, I'll go back and look at the play by play to get a better feel for how much Gannon's scrambling is necessitated in a game.
11-30-2000, 11:46 PM
It's EASY to understand what I'm talking about - just apply your DONX HOMER LOGIC of last year. You remember how you stated over and over again that the 6-10 Donx were better than the 9-7 Chiefs. It's the SAME math! Get it now??????????
Ok, I tell you what - I'll talk smack to the Charger fans if you talk smack to the NATTI FANS - OK?? No - wait we BEAT the DONX so I'll talk smack to you, especially IF we sweep you again! *grin*
12-01-2000, 08:34 AM
You are one crazy bastard. I guess most of the mind goes when your team decides to ruin your life. Anyway, I didn't say anything "last year" to you, or anyone else on this bb, because I didn't post here or on the KC star bb.
That said, go ahead talk smack all you want. You won't really bother anyone much with that 5-7 record that you are so pumped up about. Yes, Broncos stunk last year, but at least they had a reason, and pulled their act together quick. Your Chiefs look like they just might stink for an awful long time. Then again, maybe not, so I will enjoy them being one of the NFL's worse teams while I can.
Sorry KC-CHIEFS-FAN-TX, your just upset because the Chiefs are terrible, and I told you they would be.
Good luck against the pats, that should be an exciting one. :)<P>
12-01-2000, 08:50 AM
Yes, Broncos stunk last year, but at least they had a reason - what was that 'reason'?
12-01-2000, 08:57 AM
Hey, leave Bronco Fan alone, his defense set a record this year!
Allowing the most rushing yards in NFL history in one game! :p
[This message has been edited by stevieray (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 09:03 AM
How can you deny saying what you said?? This past off season you stated many times that your Donx, coming off a 6-10 record, were better than the Chiefs. You might have a new moniker now, but you've been around for quite some time. I'm sure that Titus has the cut and paste material. *grin*
Also, I'm not mad in the least about the Chiefs record. I predicted a 3rd palce finish and an 8-8 record - both of which are attainable. I also said that the Chiefs would sweep the Donx again this year - also very possible. I'm just hoping that the Chiefs can knock the Donx out of playoff contention so I can have more fun "smacking" you around!! You deserve a good smacking!
BTW, didn't you sort of GIVE UP on your team early in the season?? Didn't you say that they were not good and you over estimated them? I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Also, you kind of disappeared there for awhile, you know - when the Donx were losing. Then, right on "Q" you come back when you think it's safe. You are setting yourself up.....again....
Anyway, how come when someone out-smacks you, you resort to name calling??
12-01-2000, 09:49 AM
You didn't think that a team having to replace John Elway with a qb that has never started a game, as well as losing Terrell Davis and Shannon Sharp to injury for the majority of the season would give a team some pretty good reason for having a bad season?
But, Broncos have turned this team around quick. It only took one season, and the Broncos are back, and now they are Brian's team. The Chiefs... well... is anything going to every change in KC?
12-01-2000, 10:03 AM
Oh, Broncofan, you disappoint me. I distinctly remember a rather long lecture about how 'true' fans dont make excuses about their teams failure.
The injury excuse is particularly putrid and has zero weight with me--it's part of football.
Secondly, and more important, you are the first bronco fan that I have seen state that the loss of Elway might have been a reason for the teams troubles last year. As a matter of fact I have quite a few little quotes about how Bubby was as good as Elway in running 'The System'.
Lastly, You can thank your 8-4 record on your 2000 schedule. I would contend that were the broncos actually 'back' they would be 10-2. Or are you going to tell me that we wont see a sub-500 next year when the schedule is intensified after this years performance?
12-01-2000, 10:05 AM
You are right, I did say (during the preseason of this year) that the Broncos coming off their 6-10 seaons were a better team than the chiefs. And your Chiefs have proved me right. I did not say that the Broncos were a better team than the Chiefs last year.
And no, I did not ever "give up" on this team. Even though the Broncos are a pretty good team right now, they are not near the team I thought they would be. And because they are not, I have been, and continue to be, dissapointed. That said, I believe that with Brian and Terrell that this team can take a shot at the super bowl. I have also been very impressed with the Broncos depth at the skill positions. How many other teams lose their starting qb and rb for the season and remain one of the better teams in the league. The Saints? If they can do it for more than one game, they would fall into this catagory.
Enough explaining, we have both watched the Chiefs and the Broncos play football this year. And I was right, Broncos are a better football team even coming of a 6-10 season than the Chiefs are aftera 9-7 season. Sure some Chief fans will deny it, but the rest of the football world doesn't. This year anyway, I am getting the last laugh, and you are stuck with "we beat you in Denver". Thank god you are here KC-CHIEFS-FAN-TX, all the rest of the Chief fans have been pretty gracious about the Broncos playing well. Without you I wouldn't be able to rip into a single Chief fan. Chiefs suck, and even the Chiefs know it!
12-01-2000, 10:15 AM
I realize that you and I hold the Broncos to a higher standard than we do the Chiefs. And you are right, if they Broncos were truly "back" they would be 10-2 right now, tied for the best record in the league.
There are no excuses in football, but there are always factors which contribute to a teams successes or failures. Injury and retirement are pretty obvious factors. I can't image a Bronco fan that would deny the impact that Elway had on this team. Elway WAS the Broncos, and lossing him was nothing short of catastrophic (superbowl to 6-10).
No, you are right, Broncos are not completely "back". They are not the most dominant team in the league yet. But they have turned a 6-10 team into a playoff team, and they did it while losing most of their starters at the skill posistions. It really is pretty impressive. They are not the best team in football yet, but they could be in the future.
Sorry there is no "could" in KC. Keep it coming boys, I am loving this.
[This message has been edited by BroncoFan (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 10:24 AM
BF: you are the only person I know that loves dropping his pants and showing his a$$ in front of God and everybody.
First off, I expect Denver to win with an easy schedule. Is that holding them to a high standard? No. When your out of conference competition is a combined 39-59, you should have a winning record.
Second, the injury excuse is just that, call it a 'factor' or whatever you want, you're making an excuse. It's lucky for you that your team has had such an easy schedule (It comes with finishing last in one's division) otherwise, you'd be back in the cellar again.
As far as cant imagine a Bronco fan denying the impact of Elway on the team, it was the preseason mantra from most of the Bronco Fans on the BB. Lucky for you, you werent around.
Last, I dont know it's what the Broncos have done or what their opponents havent that got Denver into their current situation.<P>
12-01-2000, 10:46 AM
That was some lame, I am not even interested in responding.
The Chiefs stink, and I love typing it.
12-01-2000, 10:50 AM
You dont wish to discuss this? Not suprising, I'd run and hide before you paint youself into a corner.
12-01-2000, 11:00 AM
You guys crack me up....
It's a pointless discussion. KC of '99 and Denver of '00 entered the NFL seasons with presumably easy schedules, b/c both teams sucked in the previous seasons.
KC actually had a pretty tough record in '99 and Denver appears to have a pretty soft record in '00. Denver didn't get the job done against Cincy or the Pats ... that's to be somewhat expected from a team with young talent and maturing leadership. They also swept Oak and won at the Jets.
The 2000 Broncos are somewhat of a mystery... they play up and down to the levels of their opponent. Especially, on defense.
Yes, it's great to see them at 8-4 and Oakland is probably the only playoff bound team they can beat... unless you count the Jets.
I'm happy about it. Denver has been able to take advantage of their situation when KC was not able to for different reasons. Now, all Denver has to do is go to below .500 KC and win a tough division road game to put an end to a lot of this. At least between us on the BB. :D
Denver should end with at least a 10-6 record which means they will have a 'presumed' tough schedule next year... that is when we will know if we truly have a *great* team or a team that hovers around 9-7 for the next few years.
Denver, with their players and coaching staff is better positioned to perform well and transform into a consistent playoff bound team compared to KC right now. I will say that without hesitation.
12-01-2000, 11:01 AM
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but
12-01-2000, 11:03 AM
That statement comes from a man with 'ozarks' in his moniker....
Settle down there Ned Beatty. You know what, you sure got a pretty smile... done any prayin' lately. (oink, oink)
12-01-2000, 11:16 AM
You're entitled to your opinion - but I have a question for ya - What happens IF the Chiefs sweep the Donx again? Will the Chiefs be better than the Donx the same way that the Donx are better than the Raiders??? If I were you, I'd save my smack for after the game. No matter what you say, or how you try to deny it, somewhere in the back of your mind you're thinking....What IF the Chiefs do sweep us again - then what????
While your playing the excuse game for last year, let me offer mine for this year - You didn't think that a team having a staff consisting of Gun, Raye, Schotz and Stock would give a team some pretty good reason for having a bad season?
The Chiefs will turn things around next year in "Bronco fashon" by feasting on an easier schedule. Remember, fortunes change very quickly in the NFL. I thought you had learned your lesson....Obviously I was wrong and I hope I will have the opportunity to remind you. That is of course if you don't disappear when things get bad, like you did for a period of time this year. *grin*<BR>
12-01-2000, 11:21 AM
I'll tell you this, despite losing Blake and Williams ... the Saints are still a tough team and Denver's defense will make their offense look pretty good. Plus, the Saints have a great defense.
However, I still think Denver can win this one on Sunday. And, if Denver can win in fairly convincing fashion on the road this weekend... I'd say that was a quality win and that this team is definitely moving in the right direction. Despite what happened with the Bengals and Pats.
This is one of those late season gut check games to see exactly what they're made of, especially coming out of the month of November when they've gone down to the wire against some mediocre teams.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.