Originally Posted by denverdanchiefsfan (Post 5635829)

You really are ignorant. Just because a team got RAPED does not mean that ****ler is a franchise qb. I had the misfortune of watching him most weeks - there is a reason he has never had a winning record in college or pros and it is not poor defenses.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy (Post 5635849)

Didn't you hear? Mecca has a crystal ball and knows what players suck and which players are awesome before they even play for us.

Originally Posted by tk13 (Post 5635822)

No. It sounds a lot more like some people want this whole thing to fail just so they can be proven right. Which, that's fine, you're entitled to act however you want, but let's just call it like it is and quit using passive aggressive 4 year old stuff to make your point. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Originally Posted by Messier (Post 5635850)

I don't know, it tells me something that two people( Pioli and McDanials) that were around Cassel last year, wanted him badly. Maybe they know more about what Cassel has as far as leadership and intangibles than anyone here. If Sanchez turns out to be an all pro great. I'm not betting he will be, no one knows. He hasn't played in the NFL and as far as I can tell he's had a pretty easy time of it on a team that is very talented with all day to find receivers. I don't doubt his arm or his athleticism, but he's no sure thing. Nether is Cassel but both men that were with the Patriots last year wanted him, I'll go with them.

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 5635862)

We are building a team. We are not like the Bears that are adding a QB to hopefully put us over the top. What would be wrong with having both Sanchez and Cassel for a year, and building this thing right for a change? 40 years between Super Bowls is a pretty good indicator the other ways we have been trying it have not exactly been the right way.

Originally Posted by tk13 (Post 5635822)

Interesting deal. Don't think the Broncos got ripped off, got a lot of good stuff out of it... but that comes with the caveat that they now don't have a QB.

The Bears are obviously going all-in. I wouldn't call Cutler close to a local product though, Santa Claus is about 6+ hours away from Chicago. Chicago's about as far away as Atlanta is, and that's really not an exaggeration. Nashville would be a lot closer.

Only skimmed most of the thread, you knew the Cassel stuff was coming, despite how mentally imbalanced it is. Seriously, I think some of it is borderline mentally ill, I don't know why I even bother to post... to argue that Cassel obviously isn't good enough because we didn't give up enough to get him. What the heck is that? I hate saying this, but you can call me a true fan, I don't care, complaining that we didn't get fleeced in a trade, how in the bleep can you be a fan of a team and hope to get bent over in a trade? That is stupid. Despite the fact that the only reason Cutler was traded was because the Broncos wanted to trade Cutler FOR Cassel to begin with.

So, they wanted to trade Cutler away to get Cassel.... Cassel goes for a 2nd, Cutler goes for much more... therefore, instead of using logic and common sense to say the Bears gave up more than they should've, or that Cassel was really worth a 1st and 3rd or whatever, the Chiefs screwed up by not giving more value for Cassel. Brilliant!

No. It sounds a lot more like some people want this whole thing to fail just so they can be proven right. Which, that's fine, you're entitled to act however you want, but let's just call it like it is and quit using passive aggressive 4 year old stuff to make your point. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5635853)

That why I've yet to hear a single analyst - in close to 4 hours since the trade was announced - say that the Broncos got the better of the deal.

It's not 70/30. Or even 50/50.

It's universal among NFL experts that Chicago won this trade.

As Mike Mayock said:

Chicago has a franchise QB.

Denver doesn't.

But please, let your dislike toward anything Bronco continue to bias your opinion.

Originally Posted by Jethopper (Post 5635867)

Too many needs to spend a first rounder on a QB

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 5635862)

We are building a team. We are not like the Bears that are adding a QB to hopefully put us over the top. What would be wrong with having both Sanchez and Cassel for a year, and building this thing right for a change? 40 years between Super Bowls is a pretty good indicator the other ways we have been trying it have not exactly been the right way.

Originally Posted by Nightfyre (Post 5635840)

Exactly.

Originally Posted by stevieray (Post 5635858)

Mainly because Sanchez has been annointed by the mob rule...

Originally Posted by denverdanchiefsfan (Post 5635877)

Gee - I'll use the same arguement that the asshat drafubators used - I WATCHED him. He sulks, he doesn't lead, he wines, if things go wrong it's not his fault and he sits on the bench alone crying.

The qb should be a leader. I don't care that he can throw it out of the length of the field - he doesn't make good decisons.

I live here and hear this shit all the time. There are a lot of people in this town that are glad the whiner baby is gone.

Originally Posted by Messier (Post 5635881)

The Bears are more than a QB away. Sanchez and Cassel together wouldn't work unless we planed on letting one or the other go in a few years. And why waste, and yes it would be a waste of a pick in the first round when, as you said, we are more than one player, and position away. That fist pick needs to be on the D or O-line.

Originally Posted by denverdanchiefsfan (Post 5635829)

there is a reason he has never had a winning record in college

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 5635879)

Your one of the "solid double" with the #3 pick crowd huh? I want a HR from my #3 pick.