That is a good point. I do think Plummer should get some credit for taking both the Broncos and Cardinals to the playoffs and winning games, however. The friggin' Cardinals...
There's a big difference between "leading the team" and "tagging along with the team" to the playoffs. Plummer falls in the latter of the two categories IMO. There was plenty of talent in each of Plummer's playoff teams (Arizona included).
Nah. You can't even give him a bit of credit. Nevermind... He had a QB rating of 90.2 last season, that's not tagging along. He was a hell of QB under Kubiak.
i'm sorry, i just don't think that's true. particularly in denver. yeah, he had good players around him. but to suggest that just any QB could step in and put up those kinds of numbers is silly to me.
It's not like he put up Manning-like numbers. The NFL is full of mediocre to above average QBs on good teams that would look awful on a team with a line like the Texans have had the last five seasons.
Uhhh... he had a 68.8 QB rating last year. I can certainly give credit to Plummer for 3 very good years with the Broncos, but he was wretched last year. If you're thinking he'll be his same old 2005 version, I'd think again. In 2005, Plummer had the 2nd best rushing offense, 4th best rushing defense and the 5th best defense in causing turnovers. He certainly won't have the same luxuries here. It is very easy to blame Plummer's performance on Kubiak's departure, but I think it's probably more plausible that it has something to do with the performance of the rest of the team.
He was doing such a bang up job beforehand that they felt the need to bench him while they still had a winning record.
I think that it is a much easier job to be Denver's QB in 2003-2005 compared to being Texan's QB in 2003-2005. Those Denver teams have one of the best rushing attacks in the NFL and causes quite a few turnovers on the defense. Not to mention, Plummer had quite a few receivers to throw to on those offenses. Sure, not ANY QB can step in and put up those numbers, but if DC had the same job, I think he could do the same if not better.
but isn't that the kind of thinking that brought him to denver in the first place? i mean, did you see his numbers in his final season in arizona? and if he was anything beyond a serviceable QB in denver, why did the team deal two #1s for an upgrade? coming off a pro bowl season and the broncos coming within a game of playing in the SB, btw.
Was it all about his performance? Not that you don't have a valid argument here, but do you think any percentage of Denver's thinking may have been around Plummer's age and the fact that if they trade up they can get one of the three potentially very special quarterbacks--for the future? Plummer's no spring chicken, is why I ask. The Titans had McNair--a superb QB--and didn't consider holding on to him more important than the chance to get one of the three great QBs in the draft. (This line of thinking has me sounding like a VOF.)
Plummer is certainly no spring chicken and is declining. Judging with last year's stats along with his regression, is he the best option we have at QB next year? It's possible, but it is also very possible DC would outplay Plummer if they were in the same scenario. I mean, if the price is right, I certainly won't mind getting Plummer to compete with DC. A draft pick at 5th round or higher is a deal breaker, and a long-term contract is DEFINITELY deal breaker IMO. Also, I think that replacing DC with Plummer is a wash, and it'd be nothing more than putting a new face on mediocrity.
Not sure, but not likely. I didn't mean to argue that he was, just questioning whether Plummer, in terms of poor performance or limited capacity and talent, was Denver's main motivation or whether perhaps Cutler was the reason they went and got Cutler (of course it's not so cut-and-dried).
except, they deemed that "future" to be 12 weeks into the season. yeah, i think they were champing at the bit to find a way to jettison plummer.
for you guys who keep reiterating jake was benched. if the texans had cutler, do you think they would have benched carr? I'm not in favor in bringing in plummer, but a benching on another team has nothing to do with the texans.
