PDA

View Full Version : Bowlen: Owner for life



Lonestar
02-14-2010, 02:02 AM
Bowlen: Owner for life
By MIKE KLIS


Pat Bowlen ain’t selling the Broncos. In recent years, Bowlen, who is 5 days away from his 66th birthday, has occassionally stated _ rather morbidly, come to think of it _ that he planned on dying with his boots on.

I just asked him if he was still committed to owning the Broncos until his dying day.

“What the hell am I going to do? Retire and play golf everyday?” Bowlen said. “”That would drive me nuts.’’

Last week, ProFootballTalk.com _ a website widely read within the NFL industry _ reported it had heard a rumor that Bowlen may be interested in selling the Broncos. He has owned the team the past 26 years.

Not only is Bowlen still way too young to sell, he’s fitter than most men 40 years younger.

“’Yeah, I work out every day,” he said. “I’m not in shape to do the Ironman tomorrow, but I try to keep moving.’’:salute::salute::salute::salute:


ttp://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/02/13/bowlen-owner-for-life/



Sorry non Josh fans sounds like he is going to be here for a while.

Shazam!
02-14-2010, 02:32 AM
Well... another bull**** rumor put to rest.

Broncolingus
02-14-2010, 02:50 AM
Pat Bowlen, "...will be stayin as long as ya like."

http://www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/reviews/secretofmysuccessdavenport.jpg

Lonestar
02-14-2010, 04:24 AM
Well... another bull**** rumor put to rest.

Ya But the they lied brfore so this is a LIE too crowd must be near.



Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

Northman
02-14-2010, 07:22 AM
Pat Bowlen, "...will be stayin as long as ya like."

http://www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/reviews/secretofmysuccessdavenport.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:

HORSEPOWER 56
02-14-2010, 09:41 AM
It's funny that when the story broke that everyone assumed that the Broncos were for sale. Really the original author on PFT only implied that Kroenke might try to buy the Broncos if he sells his stock in the Rams seeing as how he already owns the Avs and Nuggets. That's all that was said.

No, Bowlen was never shopping the Broncos, but that doesn't mean that they're "not for sale". Just about anything is for sale for the right price. If Bowlen got an offer from Kroenke or anyone else that was for fair market value or above, he might take it. It would be no difference than if someone offered to buy your car or house from you. For the right price, you'd sell. Anyone would.

The point is, the author was just "thinking out loud" in his article. He NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED that Bowlen was trying to sell. I guess everyone needed that reassurance straight from Bowlen's mouth.

The telling thing will be how we spend money of Free Agents in an uncapped year with all these "perceived" problems in personnel we have. O-line, D-line, and replacements for FAs that move on. All need to be somewhat addressed in Free Agency because you can't rely on the draft to fix current problems. If we think that just picking up a G in the draft will fix the supposed interior line problems, then Iupati or whoever we target isn't there when we pick... what then? Just draft some other random Guard and hope he works out? We need to fill these spots with decent FAs. If we don't look to improve at least the O-line and D-line in FA, especially in an uncapped year, then Bowlen is probably as "cash strapped" as some have said he was.

GEM
02-14-2010, 10:38 AM
Good! He may have some issues, but he's done well by our favorite team. I appreciate his efforts.

Tned
02-14-2010, 11:25 AM
I like Bowlen and I hope that what he said is true, but I wouldn't take that quote to the bank. There have been plenty of owners (of non sports clubs) that have responded with similar flippant "what am I going to do, retire?" only to announce the sale of their company weeks or months later.

If they are in the early stages of a sale, I can assure you that there would be a strong non-disclosure signed and Bowlen would not be at liberty to discuss the details.

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 11:58 AM
It's funny that when the story broke that everyone assumed that the Broncos were for sale. Really the original author on PFT only implied that Kroenke might try to buy the Broncos if he sells his stock in the Rams seeing as how he already owns the Avs and Nuggets. That's all that was said.

No, Bowlen was never shopping the Broncos, but that doesn't mean that they're "not for sale". Just about anything is for sale for the right price. If Bowlen got an offer from Kroenke or anyone else that was for fair market value or above, he might take it. It would be no difference than if someone offered to buy your car or house from you. For the right price, you'd sell. Anyone would.

The point is, the author was just "thinking out loud" in his article. He NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED that Bowlen was trying to sell. I guess everyone needed that reassurance straight from Bowlen's mouth.

The telling thing will be how we spend money of Free Agents in an uncapped year with all these "perceived" problems in personnel we have. O-line, D-line, and replacements for FAs that move on. All need to be somewhat addressed in Free Agency because you can't rely on the draft to fix current problems. If we think that just picking up a G in the draft will fix the supposed interior line problems, then Iupati or whoever we target isn't there when we pick... what then? Just draft some other random Guard and hope he works out? We need to fill these spots with decent FAs. If we don't look to improve at least the O-line and D-line in FA, especially in an uncapped year, then Bowlen is probably as "cash strapped" as some have said he was.

there is very few decent FAs to actually sign this year, so trying to build through FA wont work like it would have in the past. anyone good will require picks to get.

broncophan
02-14-2010, 12:16 PM
I think Bowlen also said ......some time ago.....that Shanahan would coach the broncos for life as well.......or something like that.....

Does anyone expect Bowlen to say....."yes I will sell this team next year".....next week, next month"........he gave the expected answer.

pnbronco
02-14-2010, 12:21 PM
Just because Kroenke has deep pockets does not mean he would spend them on the team. One of the reasons Ryan Symth is now a LA King is that he told the GM to cut the payroll of the Avs, he would no longer be paying the money out that he had been.

The Avs have been forturnate in that the rookies have produced and have had a amazing year. Most of us that follow hockey thought they would have a bad year and Kroenke was not going to spend the money the change that. The Avs have the lowest payroll in the Western division, from 5 to 13 million less.

rationalfan
02-14-2010, 01:30 PM
there is very few decent FAs to actually sign this year, so trying to build through FA wont work like it would have in the past. anyone good will require picks to get.

months ago mike lombardi wrote how he would operate as a GM given no salary cap. his most important point was that draft picks were to be viewed as gold. if that's the prevailing mindset, free agency won't be the horserace it has been in the past.

Lonestar
02-14-2010, 01:38 PM
months ago mike lombardi wrote how he would operate as a GM given no salary cap. his most important point was that draft picks were to be viewed as gold. if that's the prevailing mindset, free agency won't be the horserace it has been in the past.

If you can find this article it would be a nice read today.

I also see the tipping point was last year when most FA except for the biggies were not signed for long term and the signing bonus seemed to be tempered. There are always going to be jerry's and daniel's in the league that want to buy a lombardi and finally come to realize that the only way to do so is to build via the draft which picking up an occasional FA to plug a hole.

Or to bring stability to a young team.

rcsodak
02-14-2010, 01:59 PM
there is very few decent FAs to actually sign this year, so trying to build through FA wont work like it would have in the past. anyone good will require picks to get.

Could be lots of player for player trades, like what you see happening in the NBA.

Player X isn't producing for Team A
Payer Z isn't producing for Team B

Team A/B trade players/contracts.

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 02:01 PM
Could be lots of player for player trades, like what you see happening in the NBA.

Player X isn't producing for Team A
Payer Z isn't producing for Team B

Team A/B trade players/contracts.

in theory yea, but realistically that just doenst happen much in the NFL. i could see it happening more this year than in the past, but not much.

rcsodak
02-14-2010, 02:04 PM
in theory yea, but realistically that just doenst happen much in the NFL. i could see it happening more this year than in the past, but not much.

No, it doesn't happen much in the NFL.

Because they had the CBA.

But when 200+ players go from FA to RFA, things are going to change. More teams are going to be trying to get something for their 'trouble'.

And there are 75+ STARTERS that are RFA's.

Little to no money would necessarily be lost in such scenario if they work at it.

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 02:10 PM
hey i agree, just saying its not likely to change much, in the NFL what it amounts to with most teams is "is this player worth keeping or not?"

they keep the player as long as they can, then franchise after that, then the contract gets too big and they must become FA. trading players is logical but still, probably wont increase a LOT this year, even though i wish the broncos would make some trades this year to get a proven G or C.

rcsodak
02-14-2010, 02:48 PM
hey i agree, just saying its not likely to change much, in the NFL what it amounts to with most teams is "is this player worth keeping or not?"

they keep the player as long as they can, then franchise after that, then the contract gets too big and they must become FA. trading players is logical but still, probably wont increase a LOT this year, even though i wish the broncos would make some trades this year to get a proven G or C.

I'm sure there's a team out there that has a 'problem child' they might see trading for denver's problem child.

They might have to get them under a contract first, but that's why the FO gets paid the big bucks.

All I'm saying is this would be a good year to do this, with the cap as it is. Not saying it'd become an annual occurrence, per se.

Right now, the NFL is in a no-man's land, and we may just be in for some dealings that we're not used to seeing.

Plus, they'll have to be careful with the guaranteed money in these contracts, with next year's possible lock-out.

BroncoWave
02-14-2010, 03:41 PM
So is this like when he said, Shanahan: coach for life?

(i kid, i kid :D )

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 04:23 PM
i dont think this is a situation where its a "if i get this offer ill sell"

with a car? sure? a house? maybe, depends. with a professional football team? this is his pride and joy, his legacy in this world. whos to say he just wants money instead of owning this team? since day one pat has stated his goal in this business the same: to win championships.

unless he NEEDS the money, i dont see any reason he would, or even should, sell it.

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
02-14-2010, 04:38 PM
I told you guys it was a bullshit rumor and you went on discussing it anyway as if it were happening.

HORSEPOWER 56
02-14-2010, 04:52 PM
I told you guys it was a bullshit rumor and you went on discussing it anyway as if it were happening.

What else is there to talk about, really? Maybe we should go back to Orton, Marshall, and McDaniels bashing? You'd think anything new would be a Godsend around here!

weazel
02-14-2010, 04:59 PM
profootballtalk.com...

rubbish.

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 07:42 PM
What else is there to talk about, really? Maybe we should go back to Orton, Marshall, and McDaniels bashing? You'd think anything new would be a Godsend around here!

i like how you assume everyone bashes orton, marshall and mcdaniels. i like em all :salute:

HORSEPOWER 56
02-14-2010, 09:48 PM
i like how you assume everyone bashes orton, marshall and mcdaniels. i like em all :salute:

I didn't assume anything. Pretty much 90% of the threads here are either bashing or praising McDaniels, Orton, or Marshall. It was actually nice to talk about something new for a change.

tsiguy96
02-14-2010, 09:55 PM
I didn't assume anything. Pretty much 90% of the threads here are either bashing or praising McDaniels, Orton, or Marshall. It was actually nice to talk about something new for a change.

pretty dry time in the NFL, will be for awhile. few upswings during tagging time and free agency.

WARHORSE
02-15-2010, 02:45 PM
Bowlen aint selling, and we arent buying.


But just for the sake of discussion, wonder what it would be like to have to say, " The Los Angeles Broncos...."?


I cant even choke the words out.

GAGH!

pnbronco
02-15-2010, 03:32 PM
Bowlen aint selling, and we arent buying.


But just for the sake of discussion, wonder what it would be like to have to say, " The Los Angeles Broncos...."?


I cant even choke the words out.

GAGH!

You must go wash your mouth out with something that kills that RIGHT NOW! I would say soap, but I really like you, so your choice....;)