There is no ****ing way that Leftwich is worse than the AIDSfest that Rapelisberger is displaying tonight.

how mad is acdgi in the 2+2 afterlife right now

The Broncos would be way better off if they had a real QB (should've kept Orton for now) and only played Tebow on certain downs playing a wildcat type offense with him. It's clear he can't generate enough offense for a full game.

Leftwich on IR >>> Big Rape's performance today

I'm fairly certain Big Rape is better than Leftwich, though adgci should be temp-unbanned after this pathetic showing tonight.

No. Getting rid of Orton was the right play, he was awful this year with the team and no one sans Brandon Lloyd really cared about him. At least most of the team is playing with more passion and playing behind Tebow. Like him or not he is bringing a spotlight on the Broncos with the national media and such.

I dont think he will be the long term answer here and would like to see the team draft a QB in the first round and proceed that way. But getting rid of Orton was far and away the best option.

Leftwich is on IR. He didn't wear pads tonight.

That being said, Big Rape's performance tonight was the worst I have seen in a looooong time. So much for being able to suck it up and play when hurt.

LOL, he wasn't awful. If he cut down on the interceptions and Denver ran the ball more earlier on, then he would've been fine. Orton's numbers are not bad at all.


Oakland:
Orton - 24/46, 304 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT.
Rushing - 13 carries, 38 yards, no TDs. Clearly the reason for losing this game.

Bengals:
Orton - 15/25, 195 yards, 2 TDs, 0 INT
Rushing - 36 carries, 131 yards, 1 TD. Much better performance, and they won by 2.

Titans:
Orton - 24/39, 173 yards, 2 TDs, 2 INT
Rushing - 23 carries, 59 yards, no TDs. Another lackluster rushing game led them to Orton having to throw a few too many balls. Only ended up losing by 3.

GB:
Orton - 22/32, 273 yards, 3 TDs, 3 INT.
Rushing - 23 carries, 119 yards, no TDs. Numbers are deceptive on both sides. 3 interceptions looks bad, but the Packers are so good offensively, that Orton was probably forced to make some risky throws. Also no TDs by the rushing game is definitely odd.

Chargers:
Can't really rate him here since he didn't play the whole game. This game was all about rushing, but I'd probably say it was his worst game reflecting on his numbers.


Also, John Fox is a horrible coach, and this team was under-performing under him. Orton played 5 solid teams, and a few of them could've gone either way.

Orton is not a bad QB. He is definitely the better option. Denver has a terrible receiving core, so even more reason not to blame Orton. Plus, he had a solid game against the Packers this week. He just needs to cut down on his interceptions a little bit, and he could be a top 10 QB in the league.

Lol gus

Yes fox is terrible. Yes the receivers are terrible. Mcgahee is hurt every other game. Tebow is still 7-2 with them.

but bad teams win 7 of 8 all the time!!!

Teams they've beaten:

Miami (0-5) - Were terrible and on the way to a 0-16 season when they were beat.
Oakland (4-3) - On the decline at the time after losing Campbell.
Kansas City (4-4) - A terribly inconsistent team that has never really been good this year.
NY Jets (5-4) - A team underperforming this year, but it was a solid win.
SD (4-6) - Even more of an underperforming team. They were beat with the rush game, mostly by McGahee.
Minnesota (2-9) - A terrible team that almost won and lost from an interception. Minnesota probably would've won with AP in the lineup. Another team that was plagued with injuries.
Chicago (7-5)- Lucky win for Denver. Chicago was without Forte or Cutler. This game would not have been close if Chicago wasn't suffering from big injuries.

Teams they've lost to:

Detroit (5-2) - 45-10. Don't really need to say anything except they were outplayed.
Patriots (10-3) - Even with the worst pass defense in the league, Denver was never that close to winning this game.


So pretty much any winning team they beat were on the decline at the time because of injuries. The Jets were probably their best win, and Tebow threw 9/20 with 104 yards, no TDs, no INTs. He had a decent rushing game, but the game was really lost on an interception by Sanchez that was returned for a TD.

and if I were to make similar lists for orton the "beaten" would be a lot shorter and "lost to" doubled

Tebow is a top 5 qb right now, he just ran bad to run into one of bradys better games this year.

Yes, I can make that list right now. All the teams he lost to this season were solid teams. Oakland before they became bad, Titans have been decent, GB obviously good, and SD when they were 4-1. They also beat the Bengals who aren't too bad this year.

You can't take Orton's previous season's results and act as if they are applicable. It's a different team this year with McGahee being their main running back and obviously Von Miller making some huge plays on defense.

ITT: The Titans are better than the Jets.

I mean Gus's entire thread of argument has been to say the Broncos didn't have a chance against team X, team Y or team Z, and then once the Broncos won he then turns around and says, "LOL of course they beat that team. Why the hell are you counting that as a real win?"

You are defining a bad team as "a team that loses to the broncos" and then making your argument "The broncos have only beaten bad teams". How can you not recognize the many fallacies here?

Teams are what they are over the course of an entire season, you can't just break it into little two week intervals and say "oh they sucked then so it's not a good win." Minnesota is really bad, but everyone else ranges from below average to pretty good. This isn't college football, between the absolute worst teams and the elite ones there isn't a whole lot of difference in the NFL.

The mcgahee point also is flat out wrong because hes contributed in 3 games with tebow. He is hurt more often than not and fumbles regularly.

McGahee played in 8 of 9 of those games. The only game he did not play in was against Detroit.

Your fumble point is also incorrect. In those 8 of 9 games, Tebow has had 6 fumbles, 3 lost in those games, and McGahee has 3 fumbles, 3 lost. Please actually get some stats before saying McGahee has done nothing and has not contributed.

The Jets were underperforming up until recently.

Also, the Jets are a terrible road team. They were 1-3 on the road up until that loss. They are now 2-5.


I think the Titans would be more successful in the playoffs since the Jets can't handle playing on the road.

Umm, yes you can do this. A team can be really good and lose a bunch of star players (see Chicago Bears) and then turn out to be a pretty horrible team. Your record is not always an indicator of how good a team is.

Oakland, for example, probably could've won that game if they had Campbell playing. Instead Palmer was just getting used to the team and threw 3 picks. The Jets are obviously overrated, and Sanchez is a terrible QB. Denver has a solid defense, so shutting down a lackluster offense shouldn't surprise anyone.

SD is the best case of a team that has talent that had numerous problems with chemistry and morale. And, of course, bad coaching.

This is the NFL, not baseball, where you can't afford to have a bad stretch of games. Losing a few games causes a team to doubt themselves.

I think Gus is understating how good the teams are that Denver has beaten. I agree that variance has definitely been on Denver's side, but a lot of the teams Denver's beaten in close games are pretty good. The Minnesota and Chicago teams were plagued by injury - and as I've stated before Denver loses the Chicago/SD games at an incredible frequency. Norv gonna Norv and Barber gonna Barber. Those bonehead moves cost their teams the game and Denver deserved to lose both games.

I also think dkgo is overestimating how bad Denver was before Tebow and also not giving Tebow's supporting crew enough credit. McGahee has been really good for Denver as has the defense. Orton lost close games to good teams early in the season and didn't really get a fair chance in my opinion. Can't argue with Tebow's results, but lets not pretend Orton is some awful QB. He did just beat the Packers with a joke of a KC team with arguably worse receivers than Denver and a horrible running game.

The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, but you guys are both trying to cater to your own arguments. I don't think it's disputable that Tebow's run really hot and his true expectation in the games he's started is probably 4-5/5-4 ish at best.

At least I am providing legitimate stats. You can definitely make legit reasons for why some of these teams lost. Minnesota and Miami obviously being terrible teams (and Minnesota almost won without AP), while Oakland and Chicago suffering from important injuries. Kansas City and San Diego being inconsistent, while KC is probably just a bad team that got a few lucky wins. When it comes down to it, the Jets are basically the only completely legitimate win, and even then, you can argue that the Jets were underperforming, are a bad road team, and their offense isn't that good.


Then you can look at the 2 absolutely good teams that Denver could make a statement if they beat, and they lost to them. The Broncos have massively benefited from circumstances this season. Also, you have to remember that Tebow is only winning in the 4th quarter if he has played poorly in the other 3. Usually, the elite QBs in the league that comeback in the 4th quarter are doing so because they are cleaning up the mess the defense and the rest of the team has made. Tebow creates his own problems, and it's his team that allows him to be able to even be in it in the 4th.

Gus,
Does it ever bother you when you reflect on your own method of argumentation? Shouldn't seeking truth be the goal of an informal exchange of ideas, rather than grabbing for some imaginary brass ring that you win if you "win" an argument?

Instead you get prideful, dig in your heels, and try to for some odd reason start advocating for your side like a lawyer or something where you deliberately downplay inconvenient points and exploit convenient ones. You protect your initial position as if it's your firstborn. That's no way to go through life discussing things.

Miami is tough because at the time they were horrible and now they are probably the best 5-9 team in NFL history. KC just beat GB and has some other good wins albeit being very inconsistent (they got murdered by the Jets). Minnesota is horrible as dkgo admitted and Chicago was banged up and still should've won the game. SD is a decent team but again they only won because of lol coaching by Turner. Oakland has been decent with Palmer but a week before the game he was just counting his money while tailgating USC games so he was extremely rusty. Jet game is a decent win on paper but Sanchize arguably worse than Tebow. While all these teams have had their issues there aren't many teams in the NFL that avoid these kinds of problems, Tebow just found a perfect storm of injuries/inconsistency/bad coaching/luck that propelled him to improbable victories.