What to do at QB?

[AKRNA]

1 hour ago, jolly red giant said:

I think it is pretty clear so far that Teddy is miles ahead of Lock in the QB stakes. Bridgewater has picked up the offence quickly and Lock still can't get beyond his first read and seems to panic when it is not available.

And it is already being suggested that Jeudy will be elite with Bridgewater throwing the ball because he is so much better at the timing of the passes which plays directly into Jeudy's strengths.

I think Bridgewater can be a pro-bowler in this offence.

[jsthomp2007]

3 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Everyone in this room is now dumber from having read this I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

Totally Old School

[UnitedInOrgange]

2 hours ago, AKRNA said:

I think Bridgewater can be a pro-bowler in this offence.

Yeah I don't, but we will see soon enough.  I feel Bridgewater's best would still not be good enough to get us to the SB.  If we are looking to just get in the playoffs then yes he will be great to have.  I would rather just stick with Lock and get a good pick next year.  Now we will probably end up with a middle of the round 1st pick and trying to grab a QB in the later rounds.  Hopefully I am wrong.  

[thebestever6]

2 minutes ago, UnitedInOrgange said:

Yeah I don't, but we will see soon enough.  I feel Bridgewater's best would still not be good enough to get us to the SB.  If we are looking to just get in the playoffs then yes he will be great to have.  I would rather just stick with Lock and get a good pick next year.  Now we will probably end up with a middle of the round 1st pick and trying to grab a QB in the later rounds.  Hopefully I am wrong.  

I don't understand why people say next year's qb class is bad I think it looks super strong we're going to be able to get a guy it's deep next year.

[broncofan48]

10 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

I don't understand why people say next year's qb class is bad I think it looks super strong we're going to be able to get a guy it's deep next year.

We have no way of knowing one way or the other.   It’s pure speculation but there’s no one with the pedigree of Lawrence (doesn’t mean there won’t be a great one)

 

However I do think with Teddy we are a borderline playoff team, meaning picking at 20+ so odds are good an expensive trade up would be needed to get a top tier prospect 

[jolly red giant]

Oh boy - Justin Fields is ‘balling’ it in Chicago - and ‘the receivers are loving it’.

[thebestever6]

1 hour ago, broncofan48 said:

We have no way of knowing one way or the other.   It’s pure speculation but there’s no one with the pedigree of Lawrence (doesn’t mean there won’t be a great one)

 

However I do think with Teddy we are a borderline playoff team, meaning picking at 20+ so odds are good an expensive trade up would be needed to get a top tier prospect 

Idk I see 5 or 6 first round QBs there may not be a Lawrence but there's some talented guys who are more proven than even a guy like trey Lance who went at 3.

[broncofan48]

20 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

Idk I see 5 or 6 first round QBs there may not be a Lawrence but there's some talented guys who are more proven than even a guy like trey Lance who went at 3.

Yeah but that’s before a full season of flops, risers, injuries and decisions to stay in school.   

[Cutler06]

2 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

Oh boy - Justin Fields is ‘balling’ it in Chicago - and ‘the receivers are loving it’.

Just curious, are we gonna be getting Justin Fields updates from you often ?? I mean, this IS a Broncos forum, perhaps the CHI fanbase will accept you as one of their own, seeming like it's already in the making. 😍

[jolly red giant]

9 hours ago, Cutler06 said:

Just curious, are we gonna be getting Justin Fields updates from you often ?? I mean, this IS a Broncos forum, perhaps the CHI fanbase will accept you as one of their own, seeming like it's already in the making. 😍

As if people on here never comment about players they think the Broncos should have drafted 

[Cutler06]

11 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

As if people on here never comment about players they think the Broncos should have drafted 

There’s a big difference between commenting on a player and harping to the whole forum complaining over your disappointing over the player you’re obsessing about that the Broncos DIDNT draft. Either get over it and move on or bite your tongue, MAN UP

[BroncoBruin]

13 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

As if people on here never comment about players they think the Broncos should have drafted 

I know it doesn't apply in this case because he was available with our pick, but if your stance is "nothing matters until we get a QB", why were you also adamantly against tanking in the past? If it's true that nothing matters without a QB, why did you care about losing regular season games in lost seasons? Or did you change your stance on that. 

[jolly red giant]

13 hours ago, BroncoBruin said:

I know it doesn't apply in this case because he was available with our pick, but if your stance is "nothing matters until we get a QB", why were you also adamantly against tanking in the past? If it's true that nothing matters without a QB, why did you care about losing regular season games in lost seasons? Or did you change your stance on that. 

The title of this thread is 'what to do at QB?' - there are other threads dealing with other aspects of the team. 

I want the Broncos to win every game they play -

I want the Broncos to go out and fight hard and compete in every game they play -

I want to see the Broncos become the dominant team in the NFL -

I hate to see the Broncos losing -

I cannot understand fans who want to see their team lose to get a better draft pick -

I would be upset if my team consciously attempted to lose to get a higher draft pick -

I want a GM, when he has the opportunity, to throw a dart at a player in a position who is the most crucial in any team sport globally, in the hope and expectation that he finds a QB who can play for 15 years and have the team as competitive as possible.

(the NFL is peculiar in comparison to soccer for example - where teams who lose get relegated to a lower division - it means every team has to fight for every game, which is not the case in the NFL. In my view this clouds the view of American NFL fans. Of course this all comes down to money - the NFL is a highly lucrative and profitable franchise - and the owners would not give up their revenue stream. The opposite is the situation in soccer where the vast majority of teams require a generous backer to keep them financially afloat).

There is no conflict between wanting to win every game and wanting a solution at QB. I don't care how Paton manages to sort out the problem - be that trading for a QB, signing a free agent (maybe Wilson next year - maybe Burrow in 4 years), or drafting the QB. All carry a risk but sometimes you have to take risks to compete.

At the moment it appears pretty clear that Lock is a busted flush - he appears so far behind Bridgewater that it looks like, at best, he will be a journeyman back-up bouncing around from team to team. 

We know what we have with Bridgewater - a good, but limited, game-manager - who could produce very well given the roster that Denver now have. He might even go deep into the play-offs - but it is very unlikely he is the long-term answer at QB. 

Paton's job is to build a roster capable of being a contender every year and hopefully winning a SB or two - that is why he was given a six year contract. He was fortunate that Elway had two very good drafts before he took over - and now has the benefit of some good offensive weapons, a good and young OL, and a HC who is a genius with the defence. However, to be a long-term success he needs to fix the lack of a franchise QB - something that has been a basket-case since the SB win. And the biggest problem is that there are a lot of teams who look like they have found heir long-term QB - so without one there is no way that the Broncos can compete every year.

If Paton manages to get Rodgers then it immediately makes the Broncos real SB contenders for the next 2/3 years - and it is a perfect window given the age profile and talent of the current roster. It gives him 3 years to find the long-term solution to the QB position. If he doesn't get Rodgers then he will have an opportunity to get Watson - who would be the long-term solution, but only at expense of utterly tarnishing the long-term image of the Broncos in the eyes of an awful lot of people. 

If Paton doesn't get either of the above two, then it rolls back to the fact Fields fell into his lap and he chose to pass on him. PS2 looks like he is going to be a great CB - but he is not a QB. And if Fields develops into a franchise QB then Paton's standing as a GM is utterly shot - he is left with a team that doesn't have a good QB and has to compete with teams who have the likes of Mahomes, Herbert, Murray, Jackson, Allen, Prescott, Mayfield, Burrow, Rodgers, Watson, Lawrence, Wilson, Brady, even Tannehill, Stafford, Ryan, Carr and possibly Tua, Lance, Fields, Jones, Wilson starting at QB (and I'm sure I've missed a couple). His tenure as GM is a bust - the Broncos become a team of also-rans - and it would come down to a decision to take a CB over a QB in his first draft. If Fields (and Jones) turn out to be busts then he looks like a smart GM who knew what he was doing. Time will tell what kind of a GM Paton will be seen as and what impact that decision will have on the long-term fortunes of the Broncos.

[Broncofan]

2 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

 

I want the Broncos to win every game they play -

I want the Broncos to go out and fight hard and compete in every game they play -

I want to see the Broncos become the dominant team in the NFL -

I hate to see the Broncos losing -

I cannot understand fans who want to see their team lose to get a better draft pick -

I would be upset if my team consciously attempted to lose to get a higher draft pick -

 

Here's the thing - no (or really very few fans) actually want to see their team not compete, or try hard.   But if it's a lost season, finishing 4-12 vs. 6-10 IMO makes no difference long-term.    It's the culture of perpetual losing that you're worried about with CLE - get a QB, and that's not an issue.   As long as the players are trying hard, going all out - a L in a lost season isn't going to bother me.  

Saying you don't understand it makes it sound like the thought process has to be binary.  It doesn't.    If we're not making playoffs, I want my guys to play hard and be unhappy with losing - but I have no problem if the team goes 4-12, and gets the spot to get their guy.   It doesn't make me any less of a fan.   Frankly, I don't understand how it's hard to understand the perspective, either. 

Like many discussions, a lot of choices are seldom truly binary.  This is one of them.

Back to the thread....  if Bridgewater wins the competition, that's pretty much curtains on Lock in Denver IMO.   There are really no excuses this year - it's year 2 in the system, full offseason, no health issues.    If you thought this past offseason was QB-dominant driven, if it's Bridge/Lock, and Bridgewater wins....this year will be small potatoes compared to next offseason.

PS - FWIW, the Fields callouts are fine...just hard to crown anyone in OTA's, or even preseason.  If he shows the guy in regular season this year or next (as really next year is the deadline, given rookie QB's rarely succeed year 1) though, well.....

Edited June 12, 2021 by Broncofan

[BroncoBruin]

"Nothing matters unless you have a QB" and "these meaningless games in a lost season matter" are absolutely incongruent ideas. Either live with the swing of every result or zero in on the big picture. It doesn't make sense to do both. 

I think Fields is going to be great, but the OTA progress report is probably not worth much.