PDA

View Full Version : Broncos Mailbag



Rogue
03-11-2008, 09:59 AM
Mailbag: Tenders render wonder
Mike from Washington finds free-agency jargon confusing
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 03/10/2008 11:23:54 PM MDT

Denver Post sports writer Mike Klis posted his Broncos Mailbag every Tuesday during the 2007 NFL season on DenverPost.com. This is a special offseason installment. Look for a new installment in April.

To drop a Broncos- or NFL-related question into the Broncos Mailbag click here or visit DenverPost.com's Broncos Page.

Hi, Mike. I've read several articles on The Denver Post website over the years about NFL contract "tenders." One article in late February mentioned that several Broncos players recently received low contract tenders. Can you explain exactly what a tender is and what constitutes a low tender? Thanks a million.
-- Mike, Washington

Mike - It would have been better if you said: Thanks a $927,000. Anyway, here are the four tender levels a team can offer to its restricted free agents:

1. Low tender: Player is offered a $927,000 salary (huh? huh?) and compensation would be the round in which player was drafted. This is the level the Broncos used to tender each of their four restricted free agents: Domonique Foxworth (third round); Karl Paymah (third round); Chris Myers (sixth round) and Hamza Abdullah (seventh round). Let's say another team wants to sign away Foxworth. That team would have to present an offer sheet lucrative enough to, first, entice Foxworth to sign it, and secondly, hope the Broncos won't match it. If the Broncos decline to match, it would get the third-round pick in the upcoming draft from Foxworth's new team.

2. Next-lowest tender: Second-round, draft-pick compensation, plus a $1.41 million salary.

3. First-round, draft-pick compensation, plus a $2.01 million salary.

4. Highest tender: First- and third-round, draft-pick compensation, plus a $2.56 million salary.

I would be surprised if Paymah gets much action from other teams because he didn't receive much playing time until last season, and then as a nickel back, and this would make a third-round pick fairly steep compensation.
I wouldn't be surprised if Myers, who started all 16 games at two offensive-line positions last year, and Abdullah, who started the final eight games at safety, receive offer sheets. But I also see the Broncos matching any offer because a sixth-round pick (Myers) and seventh (Abdullah) isn't much compensation.

The question would be Foxworth. I can see teams bidding for a versatile defensive back who can play both cornerback and safety, who has missed just one game in his three seasons, who has 18 starts, and who is known for his intelligence and character. Should it reach the point where Foxworth signs an offer sheet with another team, the Broncos may be tempted to let him go in exchange for a third-round draft pick knowing they, a) have plenty of safety depth after signing Marlon McCree and Marquand Manuel; b) are three-deep at cornerback with Champ Bailey, Dre' Bly and last year's emergence of Paymah; and c) currently don't have a third-round pick in the 2008.

Then again, the Broncos could also choose the relative certainty that is Foxworth over the unknown that is a third-round pick. Wouldn't you love to be inside the Dove Valley think tank when such hypothetical situations are discussed?

Mike - I just spent an hour trying to find out who the "experts" are predicting the Broncos will take with the 12th pick. Obviously all of their current picks are wrong since we addressed linebacker and safety. Is Kentwan Balmer worthy of the 12th pick, or will we most likely trade up or down? What is your best hypothesis? Any ideas on our second pick as well? Thanks, Mike.
-- Dave Elsberry, West Jordan, Utah
Dave - When it comes to "experts," give me a double-set of quote marks. But as this mailbag's ""expert,"" I present that Balmer, a 6-foot-4 1/2, 308-pound defensive tackle from North Carolina, would fill a team need. And he has been moving up some draft boards, although I haven't seen him crack the top 15. The question is whether the Broncos would want to add a rookie not named Glenn Dorsey or Sedrick Ellis to an already young defensive line.

As for the No. 12 pick, my head says they will take an offensive tackle, but my heart is tugging at DeSean Jackson, who has a chance of becoming a scoring threat as a returner and a field-stretching receiver. He's small, and at 5-9 3/4, 169, he may be too small. But as Woody Allen once explained about his bizarre love interest: "The heart wants what it wants."

If the Broncos take a tackle (Ryan Clady, Chris Williams, Jeff Otah) at No. 12, I can see them taking a receiver in the second round.

It looks like it's possible that there will be a run on OT in the top 10 picks and that Darren McFadden could slide, a la Randy Moss. If this should happen, will the Broncos pick McFadden? Or should they trade the pick to the Cowboys for more picks? Can the Broncos afford another character risk?
-- Tony Ellsworth, Papillion, Neb.

Tony - McFadden is not falling to No. 12. I don't see him slipping past the Jets at No. 6. If by some miracle he gets to No. 12, then yes, the Broncos should try to ransom Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. After spending big money on Travis Henry last year, it doesn't make sense for the Broncos to make an enormous financial commitment on another running back this year, especially with this draft class deep at that position.

Why is it so many "sports experts" forget to mention Warren Moon (check his stats) when listing the top 10 quarterbacks. It takes a team to win a Super Bowl, so his individual accomplishments should not be overlooked because of the lack of a ring.
-- Vivian Taylor, Aurora

Vivian - This is one ""expert"" who says you make a valid point. When combining his Canadian Football League stats with the NFL, Moon's 70,553 passing yards dwarf Brett Favre's NFL record of 61,655. Even if the CFL is discounted, Moon's 49,325 passing yards and nine Pro Bowls are astounding considering he didn't take his first NFL snap until he was nearly 28 years old.

However, Moon never did reach the AFC Championship Game, much less the Super Bowl, much less win the Super Bowl. He was the victim of two heartbreaking postseason comebacks by John Elway's Broncos in 1991 and Frank Reich's Buffalo Bills in 1992. Still, eligibility for most top 10 quarterback lists begins with at least one Super Bowl win, with the exception of Dan Marino. And that's because Marino held all the significant career passing records until Favre wound down his career.

Moon is generally grouped with Dan Fouts - great quarterbacks but never considered among the greatest because they never played in the Big One. Moon was a first-ballot Hall of Famer. That's plenty.

I think a great deal of Tom Brady's success may have to do with offensive scheme. He will play an entire game where at least one receiver is open by 5 yards. I have seen the Broncos play a game where nobody seems to get clearly open the entire game. What do you think? Can't most QBs throw to wide-open receivers? How much is offensive scheme?
-- Mark, Boulder

Mark - Keeping the Broncos out of this for now, you're dead on about the Pats' scheme. Watching their offense operate during the postseason from the bird's flight path in the Gillette Stadium press box, the Pats appear to be running a fast-break basketball offense with the way their receivers cut in, out and off each other. It looks like a four-man weave. Brady even once alluded to feeling like a point guard dishing to any number of open men after one of his bigger games last season.

The Pats love to run those pick plays, especially in the red zone. This is where the darting Wes Welker is so dangerous. (As an aside, it was the old basketball "switch" defensive play, where Champ Bailey took Darrent Williams' man in the end zone during the 2005 AFC second-round playoff game, that led to Bailey's game-deciding interception and 100-yard return).

Randy Moss, meanwhile, is often double-covered deep, but his athleticism allows Brady to throw a low-risk jump ball.

As for the Broncos, I agree there were times last season when their receivers struggled to get open, particularly in their game against Gary Kubiak's Houston Texans. But I don't blame the Broncos' scheme. Javon Walker understandably couldn't beat anybody off the line after he returned from midseason knee surgery. And Brandon Marshall admitted late last season he needs to work on separation, especially now that he's no longer a secret.

This is also why I believe the Broncos' primary offensive need is a deep-threat receiver who can stretch the field and thin the herd that figures to otherwise gather around Marshall in 2008.

It's unbelievable that Pro Bowler John Lynch is taking a big pay cut when less talented and unproven players are being paid more. Why, Mike? Why? Thanks.
-- Joe Francis, Chicago

Joe - You Chicagoans stick together (Lynch was born in the Chicagoland area). One reason why Lynch took a pay cut is the Broncos have been pinching millions this offseason. They lost their top two coaching assistants - Jim Bates and Mike Heimerdinger - and made the cost-saving choice of filling those positions from within, deserving as Bob Slowik and Jeremy Bates were of promotions.

The team's biggest free-agent deal went to Boss Bailey, who will average a decent, but hardly eye-popping $3.5 million a year.

The Broncos spent big money last year. No team, other than Dan Snyder's Redskins, spends extravagantly every year. And even Snyder has become budget conscious this year.

Lynch's cut from $3.12 million to $2 million seems drastic until you see how running back Travis Henry was trimmed from $6.7 million to $1 million. Ouch!

Finally, the 38.5 percent cut Lynch took in pay, coupled by the recent signings of Marlon McCree and Marquand Manuel, leaves the assumption Lynch is going to have change opinions if he is to play on third down this year.

Hey, Mike. Do you think the Broncos have a chance at the playoffs this year, and what positions do they need to improve on? Thanks.
-- Tyler, Denver

Tyler - I believe the Broncos will finish 10-6. I just can't imagine Mike Shanahan missing the playoffs for a third consecutive season. The offense was pretty good last season in terms of moving the ball. Improvement will come through another year's experience from quarterback Jay Cutler and return to health by center Tom Nalen, Henry and tight end Tony Scheffler.

The defense will be better because, one, it can't get much worse, and two, returning to the more familiar scheme of an eight-man box and zone coverages will enable the defenders to play instinctively instead of first thinking about their assignments.

MHCBill
03-11-2008, 12:10 PM
If we draft Desean Jackson at #12 I might break something.

dogfish
03-11-2008, 03:02 PM
If we draft Desean Jackson at #12 I might break something.

if we draft that scrawny little cupcake, i will probably break EVERYTHING. . . .


i don't want a 1st day receiver at all, but if they just have to take one i would vastly prefer devin thomas at 42 to jackson-- or kelly or sweed, for that matter-- at 12. . .

mclark
03-11-2008, 03:26 PM
If we take a receiver in the first or second round, I will break something with a SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECH!

shank
03-11-2008, 03:41 PM
this guy uses money as the reason we wouldn't take a 1st round RB...

after henry's restructure, depth would be the only reason we wouldn't take another running back.


i wonder if shanny knows that teams may be willing to sign foxy, and signed 2 safeties for when we get our third round pick

(oh yeah, i would enact a mutiny if we take deshaun jackson)

broncohead
03-11-2008, 03:44 PM
A first day reciever wouldnt be bad IMO. It all depends on value and who is left on the board at that time. A reciever is as much of a need as RB IMO.

Lonestar
03-11-2008, 03:50 PM
A first day reciever wouldnt be bad IMO. It all depends on value and who is left on the board at that time. A reciever is as much of a need as RB IMO.


which means NEITHER are issues with this team.. the real issue is winning at LOS . RB or WR serves neither purpose..

Hoshdude7
03-11-2008, 04:23 PM
Deshaun Jackson for President!!





















:withstupid:

Rogue
03-11-2008, 04:53 PM
personally i would rather we concentrate on O-line more than anything else

broncohead
03-11-2008, 05:04 PM
which means NEITHER are issues with this team.. the real issue is winning at LOS . RB or WR serves neither purpose..

I do not dissagree with you but the value at 12 (unless someone falls) isn't very good for us as far as need. It's a tough call.

Needs
Otah
Balmer

Value
Stewart
Mendenhall

jhns
03-11-2008, 05:30 PM
I think we should go BPA at #12 just for the fact that we are finally drafting that high again. Now most likely that is going to be an OT IMO. I do not really care for any specific position unless we happen to have a shot at one of the top two DT's. That being said, there are a couple receivers I would love to get in the first, Jackson is just not one of them. If Kelly was there at #12, I would love to take him. Bringing in another playmaker at receiver would not hurt the team.

broncohead
03-11-2008, 08:54 PM
I agree BPA would probably be the best bet at 12. There really isn't an OT that would be there at 12 in round 1 that would be much of an upgrade then in round 2. Same with DT.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-11-2008, 09:15 PM
my heart wants fish's avy

Hoshdude7
03-12-2008, 05:24 PM
my heart wants fish's avy

You sure its your heart that wants it? :eek:

SmilinAssasSin27
03-12-2008, 05:47 PM
yes...that and my junk

shank
03-12-2008, 05:48 PM
yes...that and my junk

allison angel

SmilinAssasSin27
03-12-2008, 05:48 PM
purrrrrr.....