Following Sunday’s 31-3 loss to the New Orleans Saints, many Denver Broncos left the field asking themselves the same question.

Why wasn’t the game postponed?

All four of the Broncos’ quarterbacks unavailable Sunday, after third-stringer Jeff Driskel tested positive for COVID on Thursday and Drew Lock, Brett Rypien and Blake Bortles were ruled ineligible by the NFL on Saturday for being “high-risk close contacts.” And with the NFL postponing the Baltimore-Pittsburgh game that was originally scheduled for Thursday to Tuesday, some believed the same should have been done for the Broncos who had a clear disadvantage.

But what makes the Broncos’ situation different than the Ravens’ — who has had over 14 positive cases — is that they didn’t have an “outbreak.” And the NFL made it clear in their COVID guidelines that they would not postpone games for competitive imbalances.

Still, many Broncos thought the game should be pushed back.

“Definitely don’t have the explanation,” safety Kareem Jackson said. “I feel like maybe it could have been moved, but at the same time, maybe the league (was) just making an example of us as far as us not doing the things we need to do in that particular room, that quarterback room. Obviously, guys didn’t follow the protocols so for them to see that, I guess they felt like they had to make an example.”

What Jackson is alluding to is that when the quarterbacks came into the facility Tuesday — an off day — to put extra time in, they were videoed not wearing masks for a brief period, according to coach Vic Fangio.

The league saw the tape and ruled all three, who were in close contact with Driskel, ineligible. This forced the Broncos to play undrafted rookie practice squad wide receiver Kendall Hinton at quarterback, along with running backs Phillip Lindsay and Royce Freeman.

“I was disappointed on a couple levels. That our quarterbacks put us in this position and that our quarterbacks put the league in this position,” Fangio said. “We count on them to be the leaders of the team and leaders of the offense and those guys made a mistake and that is disappointing. Obviously, I haven’t done a good enough job of selling the protocols to them when they are on their own so part of that could fall on me. I thought I was.”

Many players took to Twitter on Saturday evening when it was reported they would have to play without a quarterback Sunday. And after the game, every player the media spoke to was asked about whether or not the game should have been played.

Most of their frustration stems from the fact that the league had video of the quarterbacks Thursday, but weren’t notified that they couldn’t play until Saturday.

“It’s tough because week in and week out, we prepare to go out and we want to give ourselves a chance,” Jackson said. “Then, we get put in a situation where, obviously, it’s guys’ fault for not wearing their mask, but at the least, maybe move the game to the next day or whenever just so we’re given a fighting chance.

“I’m not sure why it wasn’t moved. I have no clue. I didn’t ask any questions. I have no clue. Obviously, nothing was told to us.”

Moving forward, the three quarterbacks who were close contacts have to test negative five days in a row before they can return to the facility and be allowed to play. That means Lock, Rypien and Bortles could be back Tuesday at the earliest.

But if they don’t, the Broncos may be in for another long Sunday next week at Kansas City.

“We have to find out the status of our quarterbacks,” Fangio said. “That’s going to be important moving forward. Hopefully they will keep passing their tests every day and stay negative.”