PDA

View Full Version : No Robertson for Denver



Pages : [1] 2 3

Requiem / The Dagda
03-03-2008, 05:26 AM
Here's why. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3274297)

SoCoPoCo
03-03-2008, 06:19 AM
Wow, this is mildly upsetting especially in light of current events with our D-line. I was hopeful this would be a trade we could make, but maybe the FO is getting serious about spending $ on other team's castoffs - even though this was a trade and not a FA.

Interesting to see what impact, if any, this has on what we do in the draft.

vtroper
03-03-2008, 07:31 AM
Geez, when I heard the Jets wanted a #1 or a #2 AND a #3, I was fine with Denver's approach of "it's too expensive to make a deal" but not upgrading our line for two middle round picks, I don't like that at all.

dogfish
03-03-2008, 08:41 AM
Wow, this is mildly upsetting especially in light of current events with our D-line. I was hopeful this would be a trade we could make, but maybe the FO is getting serious about spending $ on other team's castoffs - even though this was a trade and not a FA.

Interesting to see what impact, if any, this has on what we do in the draft.

robertson's not a castoff, though. . . . he's a good young player with no injury or attitude problems-- the team wanted to move him because he was drafted by the previous regime and didn't fit their new scheme, and because he was owed a lot of money at the back end of the #4 overall pick. . . this way they got rid of his salary and got some compensation for him. . . but it's not like he was a gimp who demanded a tarde and made a big public spectacle-- on the contrary, even though he was out of position he played hard, didn't complain, and managed to put up solid numbers. . .


for that price, i'd say this was definitely a missed opportunity to upgrade a position that needs it very badly. . . oh well. . . . :noidea:

MHCBill
03-03-2008, 08:48 AM
SH!T!

WTF is going on in Dove Valley?

With two #4's and Foxy we should have made this deal right after the phone call about Thomas' arrest.

I'm sure a #4 and Foxy would have done it, and if not I would have done two #4's and our first for Robertson and their first.

7-9 this season is really looking hopeful...

Fan in Exile
03-03-2008, 08:58 AM
I'm pretty happy about this, because I wasn't so sure I wanted Robertson in the first place, and now it's much more likely that Dorsey or Ellis slides to us in the first. With so many teams before us picking up DT in free agency we may have a chance.

MOtorboat
03-03-2008, 09:21 AM
I'm pretty happy about this, because I wasn't so sure I wanted Robertson in the first place, and now it's much more likely that Dorsey or Ellis slides to us in the first. With so many teams before us picking up DT in free agency we may have a chance.

Problem is...looks like we might need two DTs now.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 09:22 AM
Did Thomas take his lie detector test yet?

Retired_Member_001
03-03-2008, 09:25 AM
Sam Adams anyone? :laugh:

Not going after Robinson was stupid. He's twice maybe even three times better than McKinley. I seriously think Shanahan needs to stop drinking and WAKE UP! The fact is while great teams are built through the draft, some FA and trade pickups are required. The need at DT is so big that a FA or Trade is needed to boost the position.

Retired_Member_001
03-03-2008, 09:26 AM
Did Thomas take his lie detector test yet?

No the lie detector has become illegal ever since David Kircus took the test.

MHCBill
03-03-2008, 09:26 AM
It wouldn't have killed us to trade for Robertson and then have an excellent dilemma if Ellis or Dorsey slide to 12.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 09:46 AM
I can't believe I get to come back from a funeral to see that Denver's big move is Keary Colbert! What the hell! Good thing our receiver core is really weak, because he wouldn't be any better than a 4th stringer on most teams.

Then we don't make any trades with all the extra picks we have to aquire a decent upgrade on the defensive line. We are pretty much going with the same exact crappy line we had last year.

The only good thing about this off season is.... the bandwagon Broncos fans... if we have any left, will surely move on to their new favorite team, whoever they are.

CoachChaz
03-03-2008, 09:56 AM
Good grief. Thomas is in a car with the wrong person, we don't trade for a mediocre DT and we do sign a WR that was buried behind a superstar WR on a team with a mediocre QB. Must be the end of the world. Get a grip people

BigDaddyBronco
03-03-2008, 10:00 AM
I pretty much think that last friday (leap day) was a pretty ****** up day...

1. Boss was going through emotional turmoil
2. DC loses his internet access at work
3. We lose Walker and Gold without getting anything in return
4. All of the FA's that would have filled positions of need and helped our draft we didn't sign, DT (Robertson, Rogers, etc.), S (M. Williams, Coleman, etc).
5. Let Elam become a FA (turning a stable position into a position of need unless they resign him)
6. Re-signed back ups and special teamers like Engleberger and Nate Jackson

I'm just going to take it as a shitty day and move on. Shanny better hit a few home runs in the draft since it is our only hope now. I always felt it was going to take 2-3 years to rebuild the team though.

CoachChaz
03-03-2008, 10:04 AM
REBUILDING

re·build (rē-bĭld') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. re·built (-bĭlt'), re·build·ing, re·builds

To build again.
To make extensive structural repairs on.
To remodel or make extensive changes in:

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 10:05 AM
Good grief. Thomas is in a car with the wrong person, we don't trade for a mediocre DT and we do sign a WR that was buried behind a superstar WR on a team with a mediocre QB. Must be the end of the world. Get a grip people

Delhomme was a pretty darn good QB for awhile in Carolina. Just the past two seasons have been bad ones for him. He is starting to decline. And your who super star receiver theory should of help Colbert, not hurt him. Colbert doesn't have to worry about game plans against him, or double teams. Smith takes that pressure off of him. Heck, Colbert couldn't even pass up Drew Carter on the depth chart, and to show you how much the Panthers though of Carter and Colbert, they went out and drafted Dwayne Jarrett. Colbert had a decent rookie year and has been on the decline ever since. What on earth makes you think he will be a legit #2 in Denver?

As for Thomas, I'm getting sick and tired of hearing about how it isn't a big deal, just because a guys was at the wrong place at the wrong time. You have no idea what happened and neither do I... It could of been his "buddies" stash, or it could of been Thomas' stash. We may never know. Even if his buddy takes the rap, who knows if Thomas doesn't pay him off for taking the rap? Problem is that guys with bad character lables surround themselves with bad character friends. Marcus Thomas should of learned from Travis Henry, a guy who also was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Give me a break!

CoachChaz
03-03-2008, 10:17 AM
Yep, it's the end of the world. Thomas got busted for smoking pot in college...not running a drug cartel. If that's a character issue, then I stand corrected. Rod Smith smacked his wife around, Brandon Marshall acted a fool...but none of them were in the presence of a baggie that had a TRACE of drugs in it, so I guess they are ******* angels.

...and Delhomme's 84 rating over the last 4 seasons is completely Pro Bowl caliber. During that time 67% of all pass attempts have gone to the primary receiver. In his 2004 rookie season, Colbert did fine with Muhammed, in 05, Smith got by far the majority of the pass plays...in 06, the Panthers brought in Keyshawn and last year they had Testaverde running the show. Smith has 273 receptions in the last 3 years...somehow I don't think the double teams are working.

***********EDIT*************

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 10:28 AM
Yep, it's the end of the world. Thomas got busted for smoking pot in college...not running a drug cartel. If that's a character issue, then I stand corrected. Rod Smith smacked his wife around, Brandon Marshall acted a fool...but none of them were in the presence of a baggie that had a TRACE of drugs in it, so I guess they are ******* angels.

...and Delhomme's 84 rating over the last 4 seasons is completely Pro Bowl caliber. During that time 67% of all pass attempts have gone to the primary receiver. In his 2004 rookie season, Colbert did fine with Muhammed, in 05, Smith got by far the majority of the pass plays...in 06, the Panthers brought in Keyshawn and last year they had Testaverde running the show. Smith has 273 receptions in the last 3 years...somehow I don't think the double teams are working.

Take off the Orange tinted glasses Coach. If you really think Colbert is a good #2, you are truely viewing this with you oranged tinted glasses on. As for the Marcus Thomas debate... sure if funny how a 1st round talent slides down the draft boards like he did just because of a simple pot issue in college.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 10:41 AM
Yep, it's the end of the world. Thomas got busted for smoking pot in college...not running a drug cartel. If that's a character issue, then I stand corrected. Rod Smith smacked his wife around, Brandon Marshall acted a fool...but none of them were in the presence of a baggie that had a TRACE of drugs in it, so I guess they are ******* angels.

...and Delhomme's 84 rating over the last 4 seasons is completely Pro Bowl caliber. During that time 67% of all pass attempts have gone to the primary receiver. In his 2004 rookie season, Colbert did fine with Muhammed, in 05, Smith got by far the majority of the pass plays...in 06, the Panthers brought in Keyshawn and last year they had Testaverde running the show. Smith has 273 receptions in the last 3 years...somehow I don't think the double teams are working.

His numbers the past three years combined declined (62-670-2). That is 2, count em two TD's the last three years.
Colbert is not the answer.

HolyDiver
03-03-2008, 10:44 AM
We need to trade back in the first round picking up another 2nd and taking both Trevor Laws and Pat Sims, both DT's.

BigDaddyBronco
03-03-2008, 10:46 AM
His numbers the past three years combined declined (62-670-2). That is 2, count em two TD's the last three years.
Colbert is not the answer.

We'll see how Colbert plays and how he reacts to advirsity. As long as he doesn't get hurt all of the time, doesn't pout on the bench, and doesn't complain about getting the ball all of the time he is an upgrade over Walker.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 10:50 AM
We'll see how Colbert plays and how he reacts to advirsity. As long as he doesn't get hurt all of the time, doesn't pout on the bench, and doesn't complain about getting the ball all of the time he is an upgrade over Walker.

I hope he doesn't pout on the bench cuz thats where he's going to spend most of his time.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 10:50 AM
We'll see how Colbert plays and how he reacts to advirsity. As long as he doesn't get hurt all of the time, doesn't pout on the bench, and doesn't complain about getting the ball all of the time he is an upgrade over Walker.

Colbert is not an upgrade over Walker... it is a serious downgrade. Walker might of been a problem in the locker room, or even off the field as far as running his mouth... it wasn't like he was actually doing something bad, except using his right to freedom of speech. Sure he should of been smart and keep his mouth shut, but as far as playing football on the field goes... Walker was a Pro Bowl caliber player and now we have a scrub that couldn't hack it on the Panthers even with Steve Smith taking away all the pressure off the rest of the wide outs on the squad.

BigDaddyBronco
03-03-2008, 10:53 AM
Colbert is not an upgrade over Walker... it is a serious downgrade. Walker might of been a problem in the locker room, or even off the field as far as running his mouth... it wasn't like he was actually doing something bad, except using his right to freedom of speech. Sure he should of been smart and keep his mouth shut, but as far as playing football on the field goes... Walker was a Pro Bowl caliber player and now we have a scrub that couldn't hack it on the Panthers even with Steve Smith taking away all the pressure off the rest of the wide outs on the squad.
Walker is a pro-bowl caliber player with a seriously bad knee. I don't care how good a player he is if he never plays. Walker might be a team cancer as well. Thus Colbert is an upgrade over Walker as is, not as what Walker could be.

silkamilkamonico
03-03-2008, 10:55 AM
You guys are funny...

1)Did you really think we were going to find "the answer" to WR through free agency?

2)Did you really think we were going to replace Javon Walker?

The answer to the smart Denver fan on both of these is "no".

Bowlen has already stated he isn't going to let Shanahan sign any costly free agents.

And considering Shanahan's track record, and him being the cause of the current state of the team, Bowlen di the right thing.

Denver has likely already called the upcoming season "what it is", and is looking to build for the future.

And that's a good thing. The sooner some of you people realize that, the better.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 10:55 AM
Walker is a pro-bowl caliber player with a seriously bad knee. I don't care how good a player he is if he never plays. Walker might be a team cancer as well. Thus Colbert is an upgrade over Walker as is, not as what Walker could be.

In that case.... Glenn Martinez is an upgrade over Walker.... Until Walker's knee actually goes.... Walker is way better than Colbert wishes he could be. Sorry my friend... this is a huge down grade.

If we signed a guy like D.J. Hackett or Bryant Johnson, it would still be a down grade but at least and adiquate one.

Bronco9798
03-03-2008, 10:58 AM
His numbers the past three years combined declined (62-670-2). That is 2, count em two TD's the last three years.
Colbert is not the answer.

Hang on now, Colbert wasn't the answer in Carolina which cold be for many reasons that we don't know. We all know a new system, new surroundings, new people around him, different coaching, etc., can make a person better. The potential has always been there for Colbert. Maybe it;s just going to take a new team with a different scheme that brings out his true potential. You just don't know. I'm going to give it a chance and see what happens.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 10:59 AM
You guys are funny...

1)Did you really think we were going to find "the answer" to WR through free agency?

2)Did you really think we were going to replace Javon Walker?

The answer to the smart Denver fan on both of these is "no".

Bowlen has already stated he isn't going to let Shanahan sign any costly free agents.

And considering Shanahan's track record, and him being the cause of the current state of the team, Bowlen di the right thing.

Denver has likely already called the upcoming season "what it is", and is looking to build for the future.

And that's a good thing. The sooner some of you people realize that, the better.

So why not sign, Drew Carter over Keary Colbert? Or Devry Henderson? Both guys are super cheap to sign... actually Henderson signed for less, and both are at least threats on the field. Henderson might drop more than a few, but he sure does make it up with the big play every now and then.

We signed a slow, over-rated, bad blocking wide out. I wouldn't be surprised to see Derrick Hamilton, Glenn Martinez, or Taylor Jacobs do better than Colbert.

BigDaddyBronco
03-03-2008, 11:01 AM
In that case.... Glenn Martinez is an upgrade over Walker.... Until Walker's knee actually goes.... Walker is way better than Colbert wishes he could be. Sorry my friend... this is a huge down grade.

If we signed a guy like D.J. Hackett or Bryant Johnson, it would still be a down grade but at least and adiquate one.
I agree with the last statement, but I stand with anyone playing is an upgrade over an injury plauged, drama queen Walker. How does his high cap number, never playing, always complaining ass help the Broncos.

Hint, it doesn't that's why he was cut.

We'll see if Walker ever amounts to anything, and I'm not counting on Colbert being anything special, but at least he'll play. Maybe a better question is whether Colbert is an upgrade over Glenn Martinez because that is who he is replacing.

Scarface
03-03-2008, 11:01 AM
Walker is a pro-bowl caliber player with a seriously bad knee and bad attitude. I don't care how good a player he is if he never plays. Walker might be a team cancer as well. Thus Colbert is an upgrade over Walker as is, not as what Walker could be.

Added something...

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 11:05 AM
I agree with the last statement, but I stand with anyone playing is an upgrade over an injury plauged, drama queen Walker. How does his high cap number, never playing, always complaining ass help the Broncos.

Hint, it doesn't that's why he was cut.

We'll see if Walker ever amounts to anything, and I'm not counting on Colbert being anything special, but at least he'll play. Maybe a better question is whether Colbert is an upgrade over Glenn Martinez because that is who he is replacing.

I under stand the cut... I 100% support it... but the statement made was that Colbert is an upgrade over Walker... when truely it is not. It is a huge down grade.

silkamilkamonico
03-03-2008, 11:05 AM
So why not sign, Drew Carter over Keary Colbert? Or Devry Henderson? Both guys are super cheap to sign... actually Henderson signed for less, and both are at least threats on the field. Henderson might drop more than a few, but he sure does make it up with the big play every now and then.

Who's to say they didn't try and sign them?

We don't know who they went after, and neither does all the rumor sources.

I don't know about Carter, but Henderson signed with New Orleans. Considering he knows what he's getting there, and the oppurtunities, it would have taken a little more to get him to come to Denver.

Henderson is hardly a threat on the field. He's been a bust his entire career.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 11:10 AM
Who's to say they didn't try and sign them?

We don't know who they went after, and neither does all the rumor sources.

I don't know about Carter, but Henderson signed with New Orleans. Considering he knows what he's getting there, and the oppurtunities, it would have taken a little more to get him to come to Denver.

Henderson is hardly a threat on the field. He's been a bust his entire career.

Henderson signed for 2 million dollars. Colbert signed for 7.5 million dollars. They are both the same age.

Just look at the stats the past two seasons and you are going to tell me that Henderson isn't a threat and Colbert is????

Colbert: 37 receptions, 388 yards, 0 TD
Henderson: 52 receptions, 1154 yards, 8 TD, plus 1 rushing

Oh and Henderson has return skills, which is also a need for the Broncos.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 11:10 AM
Who's to say they didn't try and sign them?

We don't know who they went after, and neither does all the rumor sources.

I don't know about Carter, but Henderson signed with New Orleans. Considering he knows what he's getting there, and the oppurtunities, it would have taken a little more to get him to come to Denver.

Henderson is hardly a threat on the field. He's been a bust his entire career.

And............. he's been better than Colbert. What does that say.

Bronco9798
03-03-2008, 11:13 AM
Henderson signed for 2 million dollars. Colbert signed for 7.5 million dollars. They are both the same age.

Just look at the stats the past two seasons and you are going to tell me that Henderson isn't a threat and Colbert is????

Colbert: 37 receptions, 388 yards, 0 TD
Henderson: 52 receptions, 1154 yards, 8 TD, plus 1 rushing

Oh and Henderson has return skills, which is also a need for the Broncos.

I don't think you can predict a players future numbers to past numbers. Again, new system, playing around different players, different coaching, you just don't know what he will he do with us. If you look at WR's they usually blossom and play better after a few years in the league.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 11:16 AM
I don't think you can predict a players future numbers to past numbers. Again, new system, playing around different players, different coaching, you just don't know what he will he do with us. If you look at WR's they usually blossom and play better after a few years in the league.

Yeah, maybe, but I do know he is slow, has decent hands but nothing special, he doesn't break a lot of tackles, he isn't a red zone threat, he doesn't help in the return game, and he doesn't block well.

Bronco9798
03-03-2008, 11:20 AM
Yeah, maybe, but I do know he is slow, has decent hands but nothing special, he doesn't break a lot of tackles, he isn't a red zone threat, he doesn't help in the return game, and he doesn't block well.

I understand all of that. I'm a true believer that a person can change all that with new surroundings and different coaching. The staff apparently liked some things they saw on film that was that he probably coachable. You just have to give a guy a chance when he starts over. I'm all for it. I have a gut feeling that he can play a role for us. We're not goingt o ask him to get 1000 yards and make the pro bowl. Marshall is your No#1 threat. He just needs to make some catches and move the chains. People are acting like he's suppose to come in and be a super star, that's not going to happen. Just produce and make some catches when your number is called.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 11:23 AM
I understand all of that. I'm a true believer that a person can change all that with new surroundings and different coaching. The staff apparently liked some things they saw on film that was that he probably coachable. You just have to give a guy a chance when he starts over. I'm all for it. I have a guy feeling that he can play a role for us. We're not goingt o ask him to get 1000 yards and make the pro bowl. Marshall is your No#1 threat. He just needs to make some catches and move the chains. People are acting like he's suppose to come in and be a super star, that's not going to happen. Just produce and make some catches when your number is called.

I hope you are right niner. I'm all for supporting the guy because he will be a Broncos, but I must say, my expectations aren't very high right now. I hope he can adapt to catching some flame throwers, because Cutler will bring them.

Did Colbert play with Palmer at all? Or was it Leinhart? Hopefully Palmer was the guy and he was use to some hot one coming at him.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 11:26 AM
Colbert = Wal Mart shopping.

I don't think that the Panthers have a terrible coaching staff. Next thing someone is going to post is "let Rod Smith mentor him". To many people think Rod can mentor everyone.

topscribe
03-03-2008, 11:32 AM
Yeah, maybe, but I do know he is slow, has decent hands but nothing special, he doesn't break a lot of tackles, he isn't a red zone threat, he doesn't help in the return game, and he doesn't block well.


You don't know anything of the sort, Boss.


Draft Scout Snapshot:03/24/04 - Senior wide receiver KEARY COLBERT... weighed in at 6005, 201 pounds... which was six pounds lighter than at the Combine... ran between 4.45 and 4.49 in the 40... fastest clock was 4.38... 1.56/1.59 10-yard... 4.18 short shuttle...


http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/profile.php?pyid=58424


But how did the Colbert issue bleed over to this thread? :confused:

-----

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 11:39 AM
Colbert's current scouting report... not his college one... per ESPN

Colbert is athletic and has functional play speed. He gets to top speed quickly and has good play speed in his routes. He has some lateral quickness and acceleration off the line. He has above-average route savvy and the quickness at the top stems to create separation. He has some awareness to find soft spots in coverage and he works to get open on slow-developing plays. He plays bigger than his size. He has good leaping ability, ball skills and timing on his jumps downfield. He isn't a burner, but he has deceptive speed after the catch. But he plays too upright and has a choppy running style. He seems to have problems with his feet. He isn't very physical against press coverage. He isn't very fluid when separating at break points. His concentration and body control can be inconsistent on tough catches in traffic. He isn't a strong or consistent blocker. Colbert has underachieved since his rookie season. He's best suited to being a backup.

ydave77
03-03-2008, 11:49 AM
Wow, I am not going to lie. I am hurting right now. Out of every DT available, this was the one I wanted the most. Most of the others (aside form Corey Williams), were available for a good reason:
Shaun Rogers-Character/Work Ethic
Kris Jenkins-Not the player he once was/Character/Work Ethic
Marcus Stroud-Injury Hx/Drug Issues

Those guys were available for those very reasons. Their former teams wanted them off bc there talent wasnt greater than the negative baggage they brought with them. In a league where DTs are at a premium you know these issues were serious enough that their teams were willing to let them go. And I was fine with that, I'll admit Rogers peaked my interest, but its probably a good thing we didnt get him. There is no reason why he wouldnt continue to be a turd here. Truth of the matter is, that without Al, and in one yr without Lynch, we dont have many leaders on D. Champ has always been a quiet, by example, kinda guy. And I am not sure if DJ can take up the mantle that Al held. I am somewhat digressing, but felt that it was important to understand why those other DT's were not right for us.

On the other hand Dewayne is known as a model citizen, one who hasnt ever had drug or character concerns. AND he was on the trade market not because he had a lack of talent, instead because he is not built for a 3-4 Defense. He is built for a 4-3 defense and the Jets realized it didnt make sense to play someone with such a huge salary out of position. All the while he has been playing out of position, he has never complained, never brought up the obvious that his stats playing as a NT in a 3-4 would be non existent. No, he did his job. Which I am realizing is perhaps more important than I ever thought. The cohesiveness of a unit, the idea that the sum is greater than the parts, the idea that playing together when everyone is on the same page will yield results is something I would love for us to get back too.

Truth be told, I dont know if he is a top 5 DT playing the 4-3, but I do suspect he would have immediately been head and shoulders above any DT on our current roster. And considering that picking up a good DT will do more for our defense than any other single move, this really is a lost opportunity. And one with good character, who will do what needs to be done just amplifies the loss. This hurts, this really hurts.

topscribe
03-03-2008, 11:54 AM
Colbert's current scouting report... not his college one... per ESPN

Colbert is athletic and has functional play speed. He gets to top speed quickly and has good play speed in his routes. He has some lateral quickness and acceleration off the line. He has above-average route savvy and the quickness at the top stems to create separation. He has some awareness to find soft spots in coverage and he works to get open on slow-developing plays. He plays bigger than his size. He has good leaping ability, ball skills and timing on his jumps downfield. He isn't a burner, but he has deceptive speed after the catch. But he plays too upright and has a choppy running style. He seems to have problems with his feet. He isn't very physical against press coverage. He isn't very fluid when separating at break points. His concentration and body control can be inconsistent on tough catches in traffic. He isn't a strong or consistent blocker. Colbert has underachieved since his rookie season. He's best suited to being a backup.

Sounds pretty good to me. So he has decent speed (he's not slow then,
right?), can create separation, and is a good jumper. His blocking is
something that improves for everybody when the join the Broncos since
that is a priority, right? He implied in the RMN article I posted that he wants
to be a good blocker.

-----

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 12:14 PM
:focus: Robertson.




I think it more the issue that the trade was conditional on him re-doing his contract. Which in most cases sounds like long term big bucks to me.

Now It sounds like he is worth it but it also sound to me, Pat said no to a long term expensive FA..

The more the inactions I see in the bidding wars for talent, the more I see the choke collar tightening around mikey's misdeeds in the past..

Pat seems to be real serious about turning the talent pool around from BIG BUCK FA to lots of rookie contracts..

Many of you were not listening when he had his press conference.



Take the Colbert comments to his thread..

turftoad
03-03-2008, 12:18 PM
:focus: Robertson.




I think it more the issue that the trade was conditional on him re-doing his contract. Which in most cases sounds like long term big bucks to me.

Now It sounds like he is worth it but it also sound to me, Pat said no to a long term expensive FA..

The more the inactions I see in the bidding wars for talent, the more I see the choke collar tightening around mikey's misdeeds in the past..

Pat seems to be real serious about turning the talent pool around from BIG BUCK FA to lots of rookie contracts..

Many of you were not listening when he had his press conference.



Take the Colbert comments to his thread..

I'm still pissed about this.

Above average DT's do tend to make some $$. If we want a good one we'll have to pay.

topscribe
03-03-2008, 12:22 PM
I'm still pissed about this.

Above average DT's do tend to make some $$. If we want a good one we'll have to pay.

And through all this the Broncos have yet to address the DT position . . .

-----

dogfish
03-03-2008, 12:30 PM
I'm still pissed about this.

Above average DT's do tend to make some $$. If we want a good one we'll have to pay.

seriously, you get what you pay for more often than not. . . at best we're going to be relying on a talented rookie to which the position-- at a spot where they tend to take time to develop-- or, more likely, we'll once again be relying on 2nd day afterthoughts to patch up holes on the D-line. . . OR, worst of all, we'll just ignore it completely, draft a LB in the 1st round, and call it a day. . . alvin mckinley and josh mallard can get the job done, right?

dogfish
03-03-2008, 12:31 PM
And through all this the Broncos have yet to address the DT position . . .

-----

in any way, shape or form. . . . :mad:

topscribe
03-03-2008, 12:31 PM
seriously, you get what you pay for more often than not. . . at best we're going to be relying on a talented rookie to which the position-- at a spot where they tend to take time to develop-- or, more likely, we'll once again be relying on 2nd day afterthoughts to patch up holes on the D-line. . . OR, worst of all, we'll just ignore it completely, draft a LB in the 1st round, and call it a day. . . alvin mckinley and josh mallard can get the job done, right?


:faint:

-----

turftoad
03-03-2008, 12:33 PM
I would have been VERY happy to give up both 4ths or even one of them and Foxy for Robertson. He's still a good young player, restucturing his contract would have been well worth it.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 12:35 PM
seriously, you get what you pay for more often than not. . . at best we're going to be relying on a talented rookie to which the position-- at a spot where they tend to take time to develop-- or, more likely, we'll once again be relying on 2nd day afterthoughts to patch up holes on the D-line. . . OR, worst of all, we'll just ignore it completely, draft a LB in the 1st round, and call it a day. . . alvin mckinley and josh mallard can get the job done, right?

Thanks for making me more depressed about this than I already am Dog. :tsk:

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 12:36 PM
I'm still pissed about this.

Above average DT's do tend to make some $$. If we want a good one we'll have to pay.

I agree but the hand writing is on the wall we build with talent in the draft and fill in weak spots via FA second tier talent..

dogfish
03-03-2008, 12:41 PM
Thanks for making me more depressed about this than I already am Dog. :tsk:

sorry about that. . .


i'm passing the ultimate blame on to shanahan, though!

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 12:42 PM
The agent for DT Dewayne Robertson says no trade involving his client has been completed.

"We have not agreed to a contract, not by any stretch," the agent said. The Bengals and Jets are believed to have agreed on compensation, but the deal hinges on Robertson getting an extension. It shouldn't be a major obstacle.
Source: New York Daily News

dogfish
03-03-2008, 12:44 PM
The agent for DT Dewayne Robertson says no trade involving his client has been completed.

"We have not agreed to a contract, not by any stretch," the agent said. The Bengals and Jets are believed to have agreed on compensation, but the deal hinges on Robertson getting an extension. It shouldn't be a major obstacle.
Source: New York Daily News

if that is true. . . . GET ON THE PHONE, SHANAHAN!!!

ydave77
03-03-2008, 12:48 PM
I agree, DT is a premium position, if you want to get one that doesnt have the question marks (injury hx, drug issues, past their prime, character issues) you will have to pay for him.

I understand that we have been burned before, but that was when we were gambling on players turning over a new leaf in Denver. Javon (Prima Donna in Gb, Prima Donna here), Travis Henry (Injured everywhere he has played, Injured here), Marcus Thomas (Drug Issues in college, Drug Issues here), etc.
Lets be honest, we are not New England, we dont have the leadership on this team right now to turn around the head cases.

We should be going after good citizens, and Dewayne was one that was available for a 4th/5th rounder. Good lord that is cheap. Salary wise, he will probably command some serious dollars, but DT is one of those positions that good players get paid at. So pay the man. I really dont see what our other options were. DT value @ 12 is pretty non existent. And if we draft a DT after the 1st rd, its a crapshoot (and yes I know there are anecdotal evidences of DTs being drafted late). I wonder what % of DTs drafted after the 1st round develop into quality starters, I am certain its less than half. Now even assuming we find a steal in a later round, that goes onto a quality career, what impact will he have this yr? The fact is that DT typically is a position that takes a yr or two to transition from the college to pro game.

But under the more likely case that we dont find a gem in thr rough starter DT in this draft, we will be in the EXACT same position next yr at this same time.

mopatt24
03-03-2008, 12:50 PM
They'll get it done

dogfish
03-03-2008, 12:54 PM
I agree, DT is a premium position, if you want to get one that doesnt have the question marks (injury hx, drug issues, past their prime, character issues) you will have to pay for him.

I understand that we have been burned before, but that was when we were gambling on players turning over a new leaf in Denver. Javon (Prima Donna in Gb, Prima Donna here), Travis Henry (Injured everywhere he has played, Injured here), Marcus Thomas (Drug Issues in college, Drug Issues here), etc.
Lets be honest, we are not New England, we dont have the leadership on this team right now to turn around the head cases.

We should be going after good citizens, and Dewayne was one that was available for a 4th/5th rounder. Good lord that is cheap. Salary wise, he will probably command some serious dollars, but DT is one of those positions that good players get paid at. So pay the man. I really dont see what our other options were. DT value @ 12 is pretty non existent. And if we draft a DT after the 1st rd, its a crapshoot (and yes I know there are anecdotal evidences of DTs being drafted late). I wonder what % of DTs drafted after the 1st round develop into quality starters, I am certain its less than half. Now even assuming we find a steal in a later round, that goes onto a quality career, what impact will he have this yr? The fact is that DT typically is a position that takes a yr or two to transition from the college to pro game.

But under the more likely case that we dont find a gem in thr rough starter DT in this draft, we will be in the EXACT same position next yr at this same time.


all good points. . . robertson is no superstar, but he's a durable, high-character guy with plenty of talent-- and he's just entering his prime, and probably still has some unrealized potential. . . you're not going to find a better opportunity to fill a position of dramatic need with a reliable, proven guy who can come in and hold the spot down for the next five years or more. . . why spend 2nd day picks looking for that diamond in the rough when you can get a known commodity?


good to see you posting here, dave. . . :beer:

mopatt24
03-03-2008, 01:03 PM
This don't make any since to me AT ALL!!

I understand we are "rebuilding", but even that starts with FA.

A ******* 4th and 5th for this guy and we don't even look that way, this is an outrage. I don't think I've ever been this mad at our organization before. This was a guy that could have filled one of our biggest needs on the line and young enough to be around during our "rebuilding" stage. Yet here we are signing special teamers, who the **** is Niko anyway?

We have young guys on the D-line, but there's got to be some impact experience with them, so they can develop. I don't care what anyone says, but I believe not making this move will set us back a couple of years. This trade was screaming our name and we failed to give up a friggin 4th and 5th.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 01:05 PM
This don't make any since to me AT ALL!!

I understand we are "rebuilding", but even that starts with FA.

A ******* 4th and 5th for this guy and we don't even look that way, this is an outrage. I don't think I've ever been this mad at our organization before. This was a guy that could have filled one of our biggest needs on the line and young enough to be around during our "rebuilding" stage. Yet here we are signing special teamers, who the **** is Niko anyway?

We have young guys on the D-line, but there's got to be some impact experience with them, so they can develop. I don't care what anyone says, but I believe not making this move will set us back a couple of years. This trade was screaming our name and we failed to give up a friggin 4th and 5th.


Well we would have to give something better than a 4th and 5th considering the Bengals pick ahead of us. The Bengals 4th and 5th are better picks than our 4th and 5th and we don't have a 3rd.

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 01:14 PM
Well we would have to give something better than a 4th and 5th considering the Bengals pick ahead of us. The Bengals 4th and 5th are better picks than our 4th and 5th and we don't have a 3rd.


It could have worked could have used two 4ths' but no one was answering the phone at 3am..

mopatt24
03-03-2008, 01:16 PM
Well we would have to give something better than a 4th and 5th considering the Bengals pick ahead of us. The Bengals 4th and 5th are better picks than our 4th and 5th and we don't have a 3rd.

thats when foxworth comes into play.

what gets me though is, if the Bengals are switching to the 3-4, why are they going after robertson?

this is a guy we should have traded for. Period.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 01:17 PM
thats when foxworth comes into play.

what gets me though is, if the Bengals are switching to the 3-4, why are they going after robertson?

this is a guy we should have traded for. Period.

Jets don't need a CB. I doubt they want Foxworth or consider him worth as much as other teams in need of a CB. Jets have very, very good CB's.

topscribe
03-03-2008, 01:21 PM
Jets don't need a CB. I doubt they want Foxworth or consider him worth as much as other teams in need of a CB. Jets have very, very good CB's.

Well, we must have something the Jets would have needed.

It's not like they're the Patriots.

-----

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 01:24 PM
Well, we must have something the Jets would have needed.

It's not like they're the Patriots.

-----

Yeah they wanted Shaun Rogers and needed us in the trade to land him because the Lions wanted Foxworth and draft picks.

ydave77
03-03-2008, 01:36 PM
all good points. . . robertson is no superstar, but he's a durable, high-character guy with plenty of talent-- and he's just entering his prime, and probably still has some unrealized potential. . . you're not going to find a better opportunity to fill a position of dramatic need with a reliable, proven guy who can come in and hold the spot down for the next five years or more. . . why spend 2nd day picks looking for that diamond in the rough when you can get a known commodity?


good to see you posting here, dave. . . :beer:

Thanks dogfish...I am ashamed to admit I am what I am...which is pretty much a lurker. I probably spend/waste/use? a few hours a day on this site...but dont post much. But i blame at least a min a day on you, ogling your avy.

But this situation has gotten me off my laziness enough to drop a few posts. I guess the only positive of this, is that if we continue to stay fiscally prudent, we will be able to resign our own guys whenever they do come up..Doom, Mars, Scheff. The draft 1st philosophy can definitely be a winner, but we have to continue to draft well, as we have in 05 and 06. 2007 draft pending (though not looking great at this pt). I really feel though that one good DT would do more for this team than any other addition could make. And i wish we could have gotten this done.

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 01:46 PM
Thanks dogfish...I am ashamed to admit I am what I am...which is pretty much a lurker. I probably spend/waste/use? a few hours a day on this site...but dont post much. But i blame at least a min a day on you, ogling your avy.

But this situation has gotten me off my laziness enough to drop a few posts. I guess the only positive of this, is that if we continue to stay fiscally prudent, we will be able to resign our own guys whenever they do come up..Doom, Mars, Scheff. The draft 1st philosophy can definitely be a winner, but we have to continue to draft well, as we have in 05 and 06. 2007 draft pending (though not looking great at this pt). I really feel though that one good DT would do more for this team than any other addition could make. And i wish we could have gotten this done.

Yet if we had drafted well prior to 2006 we would not be looking at having the break the bank when the 2006 and 07 rookie contracts are over.. All in one year..

BTW that CAP will go up each year so If we do not break the bank on a few big buck FA and once we get rid of all the dead cap space mikey has carried for nigh on a decade we should have plenty of money for keeping the quality rookies we seemed to have drafted the past two years.

Does anyone keep track of DEAD cap space?

ydave77
03-03-2008, 02:12 PM
Yet if we had drafted well prior to 2006 we would not be looking at having the break the bank when the 2006 and 07 rookie contracts are over.. All in one year..

BTW that CAP will go up each year so If we do not break the bank on a few big buck FA and once we get rid of all the dead cap space mikey has carried for nigh on a decade we should have plenty of money for keeping the quality rookies we seemed to have drafted the past two years.

Does anyone keep track of DEAD cap space?

Jr...its prob best to get another opinion...from someone who may knwo the cap better than I...Tned if youre listening....

But I am pretty sure that dead cap space will only stay on the books for 2 yrs max. For example by releasing player X, if we designate him a June 1 cut, then you are allowed to spread his cap hit over this yr and the following. If the player is released prior to, or not designated a June 1st cut, then his entire cap hit goes on the books for this yr. And when you release a player, the cap hit really only comes from the unpaid part of the signing bonus being accelerated.
So next yr, we should really only have dead cap money from guys like Javon, maybe gold (depending on if his SB has already been paid out). But the yr after we shoud have an empty open cap, unless we release more vets before their signing bonuses are due.

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 02:20 PM
Jr...its prob best to get another opinion...from someone who may knwo the cap better than I...Tned if youre listening....

But I am pretty sure that dead cap space will only stay on the books for 2 yrs max. For example by releasing player X, if we designate him a June 1 cut, then you are allowed to spread his cap hit over this yr and the following. If the player is released prior to, or not designated a June 1st cut, then his entire cap hit goes on the books for this yr. And when you release a player, the cap hit really only comes from the unpaid part of the signing bonus being accelerated.
So next yr, we should really only have dead cap money from guys like Javon, maybe gold (depending on if his SB has already been paid out). But the yr after we shoud have an empty open cap, unless we release more vets before their signing bonuses are due.

I understand that part of it the max we can have dead money out there is indeed two year and now with the new CBA some of that has changed also..

BUT now were are going to have 7 mil or so on the books from javon this year plus the 2.5 signing Colbert so that WR move just cost us 10 mil this year.. we have all the dead space from gold and Rod coming up this year also..

We could have up wards of 15 mil dead space 10% or more of our available funds..

Mostly from making poor decisions on signing FA's and that folks has been in the past ALL OF mikey's realm of responsibilities.

I think Pat has really whispered in his ear that their is a new sheriff (PAT) in town and he better pay attention.. Build VIA the draft is what we are gonna do..

ydave77
03-03-2008, 02:32 PM
I am finally starting to agree with the character over talent idea... I am sick of getting my hopes up with guys like Thomas, Henry, Javon who all have talent but for whatever reason cant keep their heads in the game. I also think a team plays best when everyone is on the same page. That is what is so exciting about Cut, Scheff, and Mars all working out together in Atl. I love the idea of cohesiveness and camaraderie that goes beyond the field. You play harder when everyone is playing for the team, playing for each other, not themselves. I hope Shanny is taking this to heart, and we stop taking other teams character castoffs.

As for our past draft acquisitions, we can only hope that somehow we have turned the corner. 05 was a very good draft considering we had no 1st rd pick. 06 is one of the best drafts I have ever see. 07 jury is still out on...but hopefully the trend is there, and if we can continue to improve our drafting...that will be a huge plus.

HolyDiver
03-03-2008, 02:44 PM
That is what is so exciting about Cut, Scheff, and Mars all working out together in Atl. I love the idea of cohesiveness and camaraderie that goes beyond the field.(quote ..ydave77)

This is really going to pay off this season.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 02:46 PM
That is what is so exciting about Cut, Scheff, and Mars all working out together in Atl. I love the idea of cohesiveness and camaraderie that goes beyond the field.(quote ..ydave77)

This is really going to pay off this season.

Unless the reports were true about them being at that brothel in Atlanta.

ydave77
03-03-2008, 03:15 PM
Unless the reports were true about them being at that brothel in Atlanta.

Those who play together, win together...so those who brothel together...:confused:

shank
03-03-2008, 04:10 PM
Those who play together, win together...so those who brothel together...:confused:

come together.









what?! i meant come together as brothers! in spirit!

dogfish
03-03-2008, 04:16 PM
Unless the reports were true about them being at that brothel in Atlanta.


you think they're hangin' with TD at the Gold Club?



:laugh:

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 05:47 PM
I'm not upset at all. Rod Coleman is still out there if Shanny is looking to upgrade...as are Darwin Walker and Larry Tripplett...MUCH CHEAPER OPTIONS.

Another thing to consider...Dolphins got their DTs. Jets got their DT. Bengals got their DT. Bills got their DTs. Oakland just broke the bank on their DT.

hmmm...I wonder who is gonna draft Doresy and Ellis before we get the chance...

JONtheBRONCO
03-03-2008, 06:04 PM
A deal that would've sent Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Bengals in exchange for fourth- and fifth-round picks has reportedly been called off.

It's the second deal for a big interior tackle Cincinnati has missed out on. It's believed the trade hinged on Robertson agreeing to a long-term contract with the Bengals. The Jets will likely continue to shop the 26-year-old.

Source: FOXSports.com

Requiem / The Dagda
03-03-2008, 06:09 PM
A deal that would've sent Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Bengals in exchange for fourth- and fifth-round picks has reportedly been called off.

It's the second deal for a big interior tackle Cincinnati has missed out on. It's believed the trade hinged on Robertson agreeing to a long-term contract with the Bengals. The Jets will likely continue to shop the 26-year-old.

Source: FOXSports.com

That's two Bengals deals that haven't went through now, LOL.

Thanks for the update, I was just going to post this.

Thanks again J!

dogfish
03-03-2008, 06:11 PM
A deal that would've sent Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Bengals in exchange for fourth- and fifth-round picks has reportedly been called off.

It's the second deal for a big interior tackle Cincinnati has missed out on. It's believed the trade hinged on Robertson agreeing to a long-term contract with the Bengals. The Jets will likely continue to shop the 26-year-old.

Source: FOXSports.com

best news i've heard all day!


make it happen shenanigans!

Retired_Member_001
03-03-2008, 06:27 PM
A deal that would've sent Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Bengals in exchange for fourth- and fifth-round picks has reportedly been called off.

It's the second deal for a big interior tackle Cincinnati has missed out on. It's believed the trade hinged on Robertson agreeing to a long-term contract with the Bengals. The Jets will likely continue to shop the 26-year-old.

Source: FOXSports.com

Come on for gods sake Shanny, trade for him.

ydave77
03-03-2008, 06:27 PM
we know what it will take...lets make it happen...:welcome:

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 06:33 PM
we know what it will take...lets make it happen...:welcome:

yeah we do...us agreeing to give Robertson a LOT of money.

turftoad
03-03-2008, 06:35 PM
Despite numerous indications that a deal would go down, the Cincinnati Bengals once again have failed to trade for a new defensive tackle.

FOXSports.com has learned that Dewayne Robertson of the New York Jets, who met with Bengals officials at team headquarters on Monday, will not be traded to Cincinnati.

Robertson has two years remaining on the rookie deal he signed as the No. 4 pick of the 2003 draft. He is set to earn $1.5 million in base salary this season.

Robertson, who spoke Sunday night to Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, has been a poor fit in the 3-4 defensive scheme New York installed when Eric Mangini became head coach in 2006. Robertson, 26, would likely be better suited to play in a 4-3 system as a penetrating-style defensive tackle.

The Bengals thought they had an agreement Friday with Detroit to acquire defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. But a contractual issue nullified the deal, leading to the Lions instead agreeing to send Rogers to Cleveland for a third-round draft pick and cornerback Leigh Bodden.

Robertson became expendable in New York when the Jets acquired defensive tackle Kris Jenkins in a Friday trade with Carolina. A source said the new Jets contract Jenkins signed includes $9.5 million in guaranteed money and a $4.5 million roster bonus due in March. The total value of the five-year contract is $30.25 million with $18 million coming in the first three seasons, the source said.

Media reports have stated Jenkins was set to earn $20 million in guaranteed money from the Jets.

JONtheBRONCO
03-03-2008, 06:37 PM
How pissed are Bengals fans?

turftoad
03-03-2008, 06:39 PM
1.5 mill is his base this year. Cheap for a good DT. I think the kicker is what he may want to restructure. I'm sure he's not going to be cheap. Most good DT aren't. I don't think he'll command top dollars either.
We need him.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 06:40 PM
Reports said his cap number is 12mil

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 06:43 PM
PFT rumormill: Robertson deal falls through
For the second time since Friday, a deal that the Bengals thought they'd make to upgrade a subpar defense has fallen apart.

Alex Marvez of FOXSports.com reports that the trade between the Jets and the Bengals for New York defensive tackle Dewayne Robertson is off.

The sticking point was Cincy's insistence that Robertson re-do a contract that is set to pay him $9.8 million in 2008. Unless and until the Jets find a team for whom Robertson is willing to take a haircut, the likelihood is that Robertson eventually will be cut before a $3 million roster bonus comes due in June.
Reply With Quote

ikillz0mbies
03-03-2008, 07:10 PM
Am I the only one who thought that Al Davis was running the Bengals front office?

turftoad
03-03-2008, 07:11 PM
PFT rumormill: Robertson deal falls through
For the second time since Friday, a deal that the Bengals thought they'd make to upgrade a subpar defense has fallen apart.

Alex Marvez of FOXSports.com reports that the trade between the Jets and the Bengals for New York defensive tackle Dewayne Robertson is off.

The sticking point was Cincy's insistence that Robertson re-do a contract that is set to pay him $9.8 million in 2008. Unless and until the Jets find a team for whom Robertson is willing to take a haircut, the likelihood is that Robertson eventually will be cut before a $3 million roster bonus comes due in June.
Reply With Quote

oooooh............. yep, he'd have to restructure.

MHCBill
03-03-2008, 07:17 PM
I'll be upset if we don't nab him.

We brought in the likes of Sam Adams and Josh Mallard's of the world, but we won't bring in a very solid NFL DT that is 26 and is a good character guy?

Oh yea, a position of need also.

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 07:24 PM
oooooh............. yep, he'd have to restructure.


Right now this is what he was paid..

2007 Jets $ 4,975,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 1,025,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 7,391,369
2006 Jets $ 4,669,994 $ 0 $ 1,948,661 $ 6,618,655 $ 9,417,760 DT
2005 Jets $ 952,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 952,000 $ 3,751,105 DT
2004 Jets $ 516,250 $ 10,000,000 $ 0 $ 10,516,250 $ 3,315,355 DT
2003 Jets $ 0 $ 4,746,428 $ 0 $ 4,746,428 $ 2,174,999 DT
Robertson, Dewayne
View Stats at Players Inc Site
Player Info
Draft Info

DT (#)
Year: 2003

New York Jets
Round: 1

Memphis, TN
Position: 4

Salary History

2003 1746428.00
2004 516250.00
2005 952000.00
2006 4669994.00
2007 4975000.00
2008 6,800,000.00
2009 4,500,000.00



This would call for a major restructure IMO..

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 07:59 PM
Anyone have Scout.com insider access? I just saw the following...

Here is big reason D-Rob deal is off
By Dan Leberfeld
Date: Mar 3, 2008

A major reason the trade of defensive tackle Dewayne Robertson to Cincinnati is off might have nothing to do with money.

http://www.scout.com/a.z?s=143&p=2&c=734204&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.scout.com%2fa.z%3fs% 3d143%26p%3d2%26c%3d734204

shank
03-03-2008, 08:05 PM
Anyone have Scout.com insider access? I just saw the following...

Here is big reason D-Rob deal is off
By Dan Leberfeld
Date: Mar 3, 2008

A major reason the trade of defensive tackle Dewayne Robertson to Cincinnati is off might have nothing to do with money.

http://www.scout.com/a.z?s=143&p=2&c=734204&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.scout.com%2fa.z%3fs% 3d143%26p%3d2%26c%3d734204

oh, come one! someone has to have scout.com insider!

(this must be how girls feel when the latest britny spears gossip comes out)

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 09:13 PM
A deal that would've sent Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Bengals in exchange for fourth- and fifth-round picks has reportedly been called off.

It's the second deal for an interior tackle Cincinnati has missed out on. The trade hinged on Robertson signing a long-term deal with the Bengals, but he balked at reducing his remaining salaries ($6.8 million in 2008 and $4.5 million in '09). The Jets will likely continue to shop the 26-year-old.
Source: FOXSports.com

hamrob
03-03-2008, 09:38 PM
This isn't just about money...the truth is...if Ellis or Dorsey fall to us...we will draft them and pay them as much if not more than we would pay to rework Robertson's deal.

It's not very logical to me. I'd gladly give them a 4 and 5 for Robertson...considering we have two of each and this guy is a petential probowl player in a 4-3.

BOSSHOGG30
03-03-2008, 09:41 PM
$6.8 million in 2008 and $4.5 million in '09, I don't think that is too bad considering how bad our need is for a good DT.

Sad thing is, Denver blew away that much with the Walker contract. We could of signed him easy if it wasn't for that.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-03-2008, 09:43 PM
Hence the careful planning in 2008. Nobody wants a repeat of JWalk.

shank
03-03-2008, 11:21 PM
Hence the careful planning in 2008. Nobody wants a repeat of JWalk.

this can be used as a "reason" but the situations are very different. walker was a malcontent coming off of a major injury and we gave up a 2nd for him.

robertson is a hard worker, has high character, has no injury history, and is available for a 4th and 5th (maybe a 4th and foxy, or even less at this point...)

the situations are so different that i will never in a million years think that we are not VERY stupid for passing up robertson. even if we get something done now, it's a stroke of luck that he didn't go to cincy.

Lonestar
03-03-2008, 11:38 PM
This isn't just about money...the truth is...if Ellis or Dorsey fall to us...we will draft them and pay them as much if not more than we would pay to rework Robertson's deal.

It's not very logical to me. I'd gladly give them a 4 and 5 for Robertson...considering we have two of each and this guy is a petential probowl player in a 4-3.


We are not going to spend $11+ milion in salaries for the next two years, for a #12

We gave Jay

2006 275,000.00
2007 360,000.00
2008 647,500.00
2009 1,035,000.00
2010 1,422,500.00
2011 1,810,000.00

Cutler, Jay

Year Team Base Salary Sign Bonus Other Bonus Total Salary Cap Value
2007 Broncos $ 360,000 $ 0 $ 5,755,520 $ 8,253,020 $ 1,943,020
2006 Broncos $ 275,000 $ 0 $ 1,275,000 $ 1,550,000 $ 1,550,000

Y'all need to get real with the dollars.. They do not grow on trees..

granted he is not a DT but the two most coveted positions in Football are DT and QB then probably CB.

ydave77
03-04-2008, 12:04 AM
We have no way of knowing what Cincy offered. But Robertson would have to realize he will be cut if he doesnt get traded. He knows there is 0% chance of him getting the 10 mill he is on the books for this yr. So if he is offered a deal on the level of what corey williams, or kris jenkins got, i would think he might consider taking it. That being said, we dont know what Cincy offered him...maybe they low balled him. Or maybe they gave him a reasonable offer, and he just didnt want to play for the Bengals. 6yrs 38 mill 16 mill guaranteed to corey williams. 5yrs 35 mill, 20 mill guaranteed to Jenkins.

I am hoping we get in this thing, and offer a contract on par with what the other DT's got. I think it is reasonable for a position that is weak not just on our team, but is scarce around the league. You have to pay for someone that can play.

These are things I dont understand about the FO, we sign Dre Bly to a 5 yr, 33 mill contract when it wasnt our highest priority (Foxy, Paymah). We go out and spend 5yr,30 mill on Dan Graham, when a co-starting TE was certainly not one of our greatest needs (Scheff). But we have a huge hole at DT. By huge I mean gigantic hole at DT, but we wont pony up the cash and a 4th/5th to get him? Someone please explain this to me...

SoCoPoCo
03-04-2008, 01:13 AM
Taking two scenarios: 1- we offer him the $$ he's looking for (the 4th and 5th are hopefully not deal breakers from Den's standpoint, IMO) and lock him up for an extended period that will make him want to come here; 2 - we wait it out because the Jets will ultimately have to cut him rather than paying him the $$ he's due. Problem with this is we end up in a bidding war with everyone else and we are apparently done writing big checks.
I would love to have him here, I really hope we can get this done.

WARHORSE
03-04-2008, 01:42 AM
The real issue, like Rogers, may not be the money, but the team. It can simply be a matter of Robertson not wanting to go to the soap opera thats called the Bungles. Rogers wouldnt redo his deal for the Bungles, he did redo it for the Browns.

Im hoping that he likes the Broncos. :coffee:

BOSSHOGG30
03-04-2008, 11:30 AM
The Bengals reportedly may have backed out of their proposed trade for Jets DT Dewayne Robertson due to a bone-on-bone condition in his knee.

The Bengals may have balked at giving him a long-term deal because of the knee. Robertson recently also had hand surgery, but that was a non-issue.
Source: New York Daily News

ydave77
03-04-2008, 05:04 PM
Ok well that takes out some of the sting if we dont land him. I still think a 4th/5th is well worth the risk, but if he does have any serious health issues I would not be interested in paying him huge cap dollars.

fcspikeit
03-04-2008, 06:02 PM
this can be used as a "reason" but the situations are very different. walker was a malcontent coming off of a major injury and we gave up a 2nd for him.

robertson is a hard worker, has high character, has no injury history, and is available for a 4th and 5th (maybe a 4th and foxy, or even less at this point...)

the situations are so different that i will never in a million years think that we are not VERY stupid for passing up robertson. even if we get something done now, it's a stroke of luck that he didn't go to cincy.

We are asking for a 3rd for Foxxy,, If they only want a 4 and 5 we could give them a 5 and Foxxy making Foxxy worth a 4th but I would not give them a 4th and Foxxy. That would mean we only got a 5th out of Foxworth.

IMO if they wanted Foxworth and a 4th, it would be better to just give them the 4th and 5th picks and keep Foxworth.

Lonestar
03-04-2008, 07:04 PM
The Bengals reportedly may have backed out of their proposed trade for Jets DT Dewayne Robertson due to a bone-on-bone condition in his knee.

The Bengals may have balked at giving him a long-term deal because of the knee. Robertson recently also had hand surgery, but that was a non-issue.
Source: New York Daily News


Huge red flag to me..

shank
03-04-2008, 07:27 PM
ok, there's a reason the bengals don't want him... without knee troubles, he still went for far too cheap imo though. either word of this will drive his trade value and asking price down, or he will just be cut and available in FA.

knee concerns and all, he's getting cheaper every day. i still think we should bring him in with how bad our DTs are, this just made the move cheaper.

although with shanny's past failures, i'm sure any sign of any injury means that we will avoid him like the plague. which most likely means he'll go cheap and play well for another team (today's a pessimist day... ya know, just like all the others).

Lonestar
03-04-2008, 07:36 PM
ok, there's a reason the bengals don't want him... without knee troubles, he still went for far too cheap imo though. either word of this will drive his trade value and asking price down, or he will just be cut and available in FA.

knee concerns and all, he's getting cheaper every day. i still think we should bring him in with how bad our DTs are, this just made the move cheaper.

although with shanny's past failures, i'm sure any sign of any injury means that we will avoid him like the plague. which most likely means he'll go cheap and play well for another team (today's a pessimist day... ya know, just like all the others).

vet minimum with lots of incentives NO problem. He can make 4-5 mil a year if he makes all of them it is ok with me..

shank
03-04-2008, 07:41 PM
vet minimum with lots of incentives NO problem. He can make 4-5 mil a year if he makes all of them it is ok with me..

that would be amazing. i'd love an almost exclusively incentive based contract where he gets payed like a pro bowler if he plays like one, and gets payed like a scrub if he plays like one.

i'm sure we'd have to go above vet min to out bid another team, but there's no reason some incentives couldn't protect us if he's cut.

not getting my hopes up for anything at this point though.

Lonestar
03-04-2008, 07:46 PM
that would be amazing. I'd love an almost exclusively incentive based contract where he gets payed like a pro bowler if he plays like one, and gets payed like a scrub if he plays like one.

I'm sure we'd have to go above vet min to out bid another team, but there's no reason some incentives couldn't protect us if he's cut.

not getting my hopes up for anything at this point though.

Do not hold your breath if he does come it justifies mikey not doing a Day one quality DT..

shank
03-04-2008, 07:55 PM
Do not hold your breath if he does come it justifies mikey not doing a Day one quality DT..

true. but in my mind there are only 2 quality DT available in this draft, and both are out of our reach. guys who can become stars. the rest look like solid starters or less at this point (imo) which isn't bad, but if the knee doesn't hinder robertson, i think he could potentially play at a pro-bowl level when he's finally in a scheme that has him playing to his size and talents.

i just don't see value in taking a DT at 12 or at 42 right now unless someone falls or we trade back in either round, so i'd like to see us take at least one other shot somewhere to help solidify the position. i think a guy like rubin on day 2 would be a good pick too, as i think he could develop into a solid starter and can be taken much later than a guy like laws, who i also only see as a solid starter in the nfl, and not a star... again, just how i'm looking at it.

DenBronx
03-04-2008, 08:41 PM
yeah we do...us agreeing to give Robertson a LOT of money.

it's not your money and your not the one spending it, so why are you worried about it? if teams want players they tweak and get around the cap if they want. the redskins have been doing it for years. besides we need a run stuffer and ellis is out of reach come draft day. the draft is thin for dt's and the majority of good free agent's are gone. so spending a little would be ok for a stud dt. im ok with us signing a bloke for a 2nd or 3rd tier wr but not ok with overlooking our biggest area of need the past few years....this $#!& must stop.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-04-2008, 09:15 PM
...and how good are the Redskins? How much of our salary is dead money? Please try again when you actually have a vaild point.

dogfish
03-04-2008, 09:25 PM
Do not hold your breath if he does come it justifies mikey not doing a Day one quality DT..

stop kidding yourself JR, you know better-- he's probably not drafting a 1st day DT anyways. . .

DenBronx
03-04-2008, 09:31 PM
...and how good are the Redskins? How much of our salary is dead money? Please try again when you actually have a vaild point.

i guess were just peachy at dt. :rolleyes:

without fixing this we will suck just as bad next year. we play lj and lt twice a year...we were one of the worst teams in the nfl at stopping the run last year. so....would you rather us just sprinkle money around for sucky wr's?

SmilinAssasSin27
03-04-2008, 09:35 PM
i guess were just peachy at dt. :rolleyes:

without fixing this we will suck just as bad next year. we play lj and lt twice a year...we were one of the worst teams in the nfl at stopping the run last year. so....would you rather us just sprinkle money around for sucky wr's?

there is a difference between going after an area of need and haphazardly tossing double digit millions at it. Fiscal irresponsibility is what has gotten the team into the mess it is in. Look at Boss's thread about the cap numbers. How much money is going to waste this year for that exact reason? Robertson is playing under a HUGE contract and doesn't have to renegotiate if he doesn't want to. Players like Tripplett and Coleman are obtainable at far more reasonable rates and would allow us to do more with our money. At this point, Robertson has hardly looked even as good as Coleman. Why pay him double what Coleman would gather?

Lonestar
03-05-2008, 01:38 AM
stop kidding yourself JR, you know better-- he's probably not drafting a 1st day DT anyways. . .

I've never had that illusion for a minute. mikey does not have the common sense to do the right thing. Not on his own at least his proclivities are to reach for some clown in the first that we could have had in the second or later rounds..

His record speaks for itself..

shank
03-05-2008, 01:48 AM
I've never had that illusion for a minute. mikey does not have the common sense to do the right thing. Not on his own at least his proclivities are to reach for some clown in the first that we could have had in the second or later rounds..

His record speaks for itself..

lol, i remember when we all found out we would be picking 12, many peoplel (including me) exclaimed happily that there's no way we can screw up this draft...


the closer it gets, the more i think shanny will do his best to do just that. mcfadden will probably drop and despite offers for us to trade down, we will probably take kenny phillips at 12 cause mike, "felt comfortable with it." then we'll take a 2nd round WR bust (as per the standard), and late round scrubs who will never contribute apart from their maintenance of our special teams ineptitude. :mad:

SmilinAssasSin27
03-05-2008, 09:00 AM
lol, i remember when we all found out we would be picking 12, many peoplel (including me) exclaimed happily that there's no way we can screw up this draft...


the closer it gets, the more i think shanny will do his best to do just that. mcfadden will probably drop and despite offers for us to trade down, we will probably take kenny phillips at 12 cause mike, "felt comfortable with it." then we'll take a 2nd round WR bust (as per the standard), and late round scrubs who will never contribute apart from their maintenance of our special teams ineptitude. :mad:

I still think it's an impossibility...unless he goes QB or TE. THAT is how many needs we have. And here is why (no particular order):

RB-Not a huge NEED, but c'mon after the dust settles on this board if we go RB, ya know you ALL would be drooling at the thought of Mendenhall or Stewart in our offense.

WR-We NEED a #2, no matter how some of you downplay it. I don't want it at #12, but can we really be THAT mad if we draft Malcolm Kelly or Limas Sweed? An argument can even be made for DeSean Jackson as a returnman as our STs have been awful.

OG-Not a position of need today, but we have 2 aging vets, 1 of which still has a headache. That Albert kid from Virginia would look REAL good if we kept him in Orange and Blue.

OT-No justification needed...and there are PLENTY of options.

DT-No justification needed. Even if we trade Foxxy and a future #3 or #4 to Bmore to get to the 8 spot (ahead of Cincy and NO), noone will be too upset when we land Dorsey or Ellis. BUT if it's not one of those 2, 12 is the wrong spot to reach at the others.

S-2 gaping holes and Kenny Phillips is uber-talented.

LB-Although I think the value is in round 2, I wouldn't be at all upset if Rivers or Connor were donning Denver unis next year.

DE-Moss's health is a question and Elvis is a 1 trick pony...although it's a damn nice trick. Crowder is soild vs the run, but our other options are old/hurt. A bigger DE like Merling or Harvey who could play DE on running downs and switch to DT on passing downs could be valuable to us given our deficiencies at DT.

CB-Yes...even CB. Bly is owed a LOT of money in 2009 (I think 7.7mil) and is not even close to worth all that. He may be gone. Foxxy is trade bait now and Paymah is a FA next year too. As strong as CB appears to be now, the story may change completetly in 2009.

I think it's gonna be really hard for Shanny to screw this up. I mean, he could always end up egtting someone who busts, but that risk lies in everyone.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 09:09 AM
Talks about a potential trade of Jets DT Dewayne Robertson to the Broncos have reportedly been "resurrected."

Newsday suggests that the talks involve Broncos restricted free agent DB Domonique Foxworth, who the Jets could start at cornerback or free safety. Denver will have to examine Robertson's knee carefully before pulling the trigger, however. It's widely believed he has a bone-on-bone condition.
Source: Newsday

WARHORSE
03-13-2008, 09:23 AM
Maybe the bone on bone condition is not in his knee, but in his head?


Lets hope the Broncos can get it done at a minimum of cost. If its Foxworth for Robertson, Id pull that trigger if the knee is ok.

Drill-N-Fill
03-13-2008, 09:25 AM
An argument can even be made for DeSean Jackson as a returnman as our STs have been awful.



If Shanny drafts DeSean Jackson, I will consider him the biggest fool. DeSean is a 1 trick pony that runs below average routes. He can't get away from the press b/c of his body frame. And he will disappear just like Lelie in the red zone b/c your no longer scared of his blazing speed.

Watchthemiddle
03-13-2008, 09:40 AM
If Shanny drafts DeSean Jackson, I will consider him the biggest fool. DeSean is a 1 trick pony that runs below average routes. He can't get away from the press b/c of his body frame. And he will disappear just like Lelie in the red zone b/c your no longer scared of his blazing speed.

I agree. To me, drafting him at #12 is a waste. A return man is the least of our worries. THe DEFENSE has to stop someone first on DEFENSE in order to make the other team punt to your return man.

Watchthemiddle
03-13-2008, 09:41 AM
Sam Adams anyone? :laugh:

.

DIdn't Big Money get cut by the Raiders? Maybe we can bring him back too.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 09:46 AM
You have to be concerned with Robertson's knee. Why would the Jets bring in Kris Jenkins over Robertson? Something sounds funky. Hopefully he won't cost us a lot if we do trade for him.

ydave77
03-13-2008, 10:11 AM
If Shanny drafts DeSean Jackson, I will consider him the biggest fool. DeSean is a 1 trick pony that runs below average routes. He can't get away from the press b/c of his body frame. And he will disappear just like Lelie in the red zone b/c your no longer scared of his blazing speed.

Yh honestly...the Devin Hester effect makes no sense. He is a special talent. There isnt another Devin Hester out there right now. The only was for Jackson to be worth it @12, is if he really is Devin Hester, and there's only one of those. Taking a risk and hoping he turns into a special force like Devin in the 3rd or 4th rd is one thing, but @#12 overall makes no sense.

As for him being a receiver...I agree with what you said. The only great short wr I know is steve smith. And I have no idea how he does it, he actually is a force in the red zone, which belies his height. But again I'd rather not roll the dice that Desean Jackson manages to emulate stevie smith.

MHCBill
03-13-2008, 10:12 AM
I don't know about the knee, but if games played and production mean anything it keeps me very interested.

claymore
03-13-2008, 10:44 AM
Meanwhile, talks between the Jets and Broncos on a trade that could send Dewayne c to Denver have been resurrected, according to another source (though it's unclear whether yesterday's announcement that Broncos general manager Ted Sundquist is no longer with the team will temper or accelerate the conversations). The Jets are trying to deal Robertson not only because he never truly fit in their 3-4 defensive scheme but also because he is due a $3-million roster bonus on June 1 and, under his current contract, would count more than $11 million against the salary cap in 2008.

Terms of any potential deal were not known, but they could involve cornerback Domonique Foxworth. With visits from Law and Strickland, the Jets clearly are interested in bolstering that position. The Jets had a tentative trade in place with the Bengals this month that would have given them a fourth- and a fifth-round pick in exchange for the defensive tackle, but that deal fell through.
At the price stated above, I would almost want a 5th from the Jets in addition to Robertson.

shank
03-13-2008, 10:48 AM
You have to be concerned with Robertson's knee. Why would the Jets bring in Kris Jenkins over Robertson? Something sounds funky. Hopefully he won't cost us a lot if we do trade for him.

because the jets run a 3-4 and robertson's size and skills are best suited to be a 4-3 tackle, not a prototypical NT. the jets were ranked 29th against the run last year, and part of that has to be attributed to having the anchor of your 3-4 not suited to play that part...

robertson is also due a huge amount of money, which had to leave the jets to believe he wouldn't be with the team in 08, meaning they had to make other plans at NT. if they have to replace him, they might as well find someone who is better suited to play in that scheme.

lex
03-13-2008, 10:53 AM
The article said nothing about him restructuring his deal. How is this any different than signing a FA for 11 million? Cincinnati already made a deal for him and werent able to get him to budge on his salary. Is Denver hoping our band of merrymen in the locker room will change his mind?

shank
03-13-2008, 10:57 AM
The article said nothing about him restructuring his deal. How is this any different than signing a FA for 11 million? Cincinnati already made a deal for him and werent able to get him to budge on his salary. Is Denver hoping our band of merrymen in the locker room will change his mind?

a player almost never gets a choice of where they get traded to, and robertson had the privelage of having a hand in "choosing" by not choosing cincy. i believe he refused to restructure as a way of not having to play for the bengals. i'm not saying he would rather be here, but wouldn't you?

plus, if he thinks he's going to be playing anywhere in the nfl without restructuring, he's kidding himself. he has to know this, and THAT's why i think he just played the only hand he had in his trade destination.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 11:06 AM
Talks between the Jets and Broncos on a trade that could send Dewayne Robertson to Denver have been resurrected, according to another source (though it's unclear whether yesterday's announcement that Broncos general manager Ted Sundquist is no longer with the team will temper or accelerate the conversations). The Jets are trying to deal Robertson not only because he never truly fit in their 3-4 defensive scheme but also because he is due a $3-million roster bonus on June 1 and, under his current contract, would count more than $11 million against the salary cap in 2008.
Terms of any potential deal were not known, but they could involve cornerback Domonique Foxworth. With visits from Law and Strickland, the Jets clearly are interested in bolstering that position. The Jets had a tentative trade in place with the Bengals this month that would have given them a fourth- and a fifth-round pick in exchange for the defensive tackle, but that deal fell through
------------------

Make it happen JimmyJeffJoe
A 4th and 5th from Cincy = 121 which is at the bottom of the 3rd round. Foxy for DRob and a restructure may be a fine risk.
At this point I think NYJ should send us a 6th to make it happen. The guy is done in NYC.

lex
03-13-2008, 11:06 AM
a player almost never gets a choice of where they get traded to, and robertson had the privelage of having a hand in "choosing" by not choosing cincy. i believe he refused to restructure as a way of not having to play for the bengals. i'm not saying he would rather be here, but wouldn't you?

plus, if he thinks he's going to be playing anywhere in the nfl without restructuring, he's kidding himself. he has to know this, and THAT's why i think he just played the only hand he had in his trade destination.

I hope youre right and I also hope thats why talks are continuing. What would be even better is if we give up a 4th and a 5th AND he comes down on his price...basically the Cincy deal. I wonder if it will cost us more if NYJ gets him to come down on his deal before he is traded. I wonder if part of this has sort of been ironed out ahead of time. The fact that theyre talking is hope for optimisim but Im also really hoping that we're not absorbing that contract as it is now.

shank
03-13-2008, 11:13 AM
I hope youre right and I also hope thats why talks are continuing. What would be even better is if we give up a 4th and a 5th AND he comes down on his price...basically the Cincy deal. I wonder if it will cost us more if NYJ gets him to come down on his deal before he is traded. I wonder if part of this has sort of been ironed out ahead of time. The fact that theyre talking is hope for optimisim but Im also really hoping that we're not absorbing that contract as it is now.

there's no way we take on an 11 million dollar contract at a position where we've never payed anyone real money ever. 'big money' made a lot less than that and he was a broncos anomaly...

at this point i'm campaigning for foxy-robertson straight up. with foxy's 3rd round tender, along with his actual play experience, versatility, and the jets search for another corner, he's worth more than a 4th and 5th.

turftoad
03-13-2008, 11:14 AM
I hope youre right and I also hope thats why talks are continuing. What would be even better is if we give up a 4th and a 5th AND he comes down on his price...basically the Cincy deal. I wonder if it will cost us more if NYJ gets him to come down on his deal before he is traded. I wonder if part of this has sort of been ironed out ahead of time. The fact that theyre talking is hope for optimisim but Im also really hoping that we're not absorbing that contract as it is now.

There can be no way Robertson plays under his current contract. Either he gets traded and restructures or he's cut. When he's cut his contract is a non issue. Then he signs with a team on a new deal.
I hope we can make a trade happen for him rather than getting into a bidding war once he becomes a FA.

lex
03-13-2008, 11:24 AM
There can be no way Robertson plays under his current contract. Either he gets traded and restructures or he's cut. When he's cut his contract is a non issue. Then he signs with a team on a new deal.
I hope we can make a trade happen for him rather than getting into a bidding war once he becomes a FA.


Yeah, but if he gets cut the bidding process begins, which yield a more sensible salary than the 11 he is due but he still may be obscenely expensive in those circumstances. Just look at what the Raiders paid their mediocre DT. But if youre Robertson, that scenario may actually make sense. He has more earning potential and flexibility if he forces NYJ to cut him.

DenBronx
03-13-2008, 12:43 PM
there's no way we take on an 11 million dollar contract at a position where we've never payed anyone real money ever. 'big money' made a lot less than that and he was a broncos anomaly...

at this point i'm campaigning for foxy-robertson straight up. with foxy's 3rd round tender, along with his actual play experience, versatility, and the jets search for another corner, he's worth more than a 4th and 5th.

foxy for robertson straight up makes the most sense. foxy is easily a starter for the jets.

dogfish
03-13-2008, 12:48 PM
git 'er dooooone!

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 12:53 PM
foxy for robertson straight up makes the most sense. foxy is easily a starter for the jets.

I think the Jets will sign Ty Law though.... Rumor has it that the Patriots want Ty Law too, so you know the rivalry they have there... Jets will try to keep Law away from the Pats.

I'm kindof shocked that the Jets are looking for a cornerback. I think they have two young and promising guys already.

Astrass
03-13-2008, 12:53 PM
Yeah, but if he gets cut the bidding process begins, which yield a more sensible salary than the 11 he is due but he still may be obscenely expensive in those circumstances. Just look at what the Raiders paid their mediocre DT. But if youre Robertson, that scenario may actually make sense. He has more earning potential and flexibility if he forces NYJ to cut him.

I hope he gets cut and goes to a team who picks before us in the draft....then we have a better chance at Ellis :)

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 01:36 PM
Sources tell Newsday's Tom Rock that Domonique Foxworth would not be involved in a trade for Dewayne Robertson.

The source tells Rock the Broncos are close to signing Foxworth to the long-term deal he's been looking for this offseason. Rock was told the trade could involve another Broncos player, although it's not clear who.
Source: Newsday

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/football/jets/blog/2008/03/denver_talks_continue.html

Requiem / The Dagda
03-13-2008, 01:38 PM
Sources tell Newsday's Tom Rock that Domonique Foxworth would not be involved in a trade for Dewayne Robertson.

The source tells Rock the Broncos are close to signing Foxworth to the long-term deal he's been looking for this offseason. Rock was told the trade could involve another Broncos player, although it's not clear who.
Source: Newsday

Thanks for the news, Foxworth long-term, interesting.

lex
03-13-2008, 01:45 PM
Sources tell Newsday's Tom Rock that Domonique Foxworth would not be involved in a trade for Dewayne Robertson.

The source tells Rock the Broncos are close to signing Foxworth to the long-term deal he's been looking for this offseason. Rock was told the trade could involve another Broncos player, although it's not clear who.
Source: Newsday

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/football/jets/blog/2008/03/denver_talks_continue.html

Wow, who knew we had that many bargaining Chips. I wonder if its Bly or a DE...or better yet, Travis Henry?

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 01:46 PM
Wow, who knew we had that many bargaining Chips. I wonder if its Bly or a DE...or better yet, Travis Henry?

We still have Paymah, Bly, Abdullah, and Bell.

lex
03-13-2008, 01:52 PM
We still have Paymah, Bly, Abdullah, and Bell.

If they want Abdullah or Bell, wow...just, wow. Id rather give them Nenry.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 02:39 PM
Foxworth could be signing a long term deal with NYJ before the trade is completed.... you never know. Heck, both parties may have a trade agreement, but both have to work on contract details. Denver will need Robertson to lower his cap # and Jets are probably exploring Foxworths asking price.

claymore
03-13-2008, 02:51 PM
Sources tell Newsday's Tom Rock that Domonique Foxworth would not be involved in a trade for Dewayne Robertson.

The source tells Rock the Broncos are close to signing Foxworth to the long-term deal he's been looking for this offseason. Rock was told the trade could involve another Broncos player, although it's not clear who.
Source: Newsday

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/football/jets/blog/2008/03/denver_talks_continue.html

Whoever it is could be our path to the draft. If it is Henry, by golly were getting Stewart.

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 03:06 PM
I agree. To me, drafting him at #12 is a waste. A return man is the least of our worries. THe DEFENSE has to stop someone first on DEFENSE in order to make the other team punt to your return man.
.
.I agree 100% remember we had hixon last year who turned out pretty good on a NYG squad.

Oh I remember it was TED the cut him..

So it is Teds fault ST are so bad.. Now that he is gone all is well in Dove valley..

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 03:16 PM
Personally I'd rather someone else underneath us that is looking a DT bites the bullet on him.. Leaving Dorsey or Ellis to us..

The knee thing really bothers me.. Or is it just another lie planted like mikey did with walker?

I'd rather build with a less expensive rookie that has less miles on them..

lex
03-13-2008, 03:19 PM
Personally I'd rather someone else underneath us that is looking a DT bites the bullet on him.. Leaving Dorsey or Ellis to us..

The knee thing really bothers me.. Or is it just another lie planted like mikey did with walker?

I'd rather build with a less expensive rookie that has less miles on them..

...or perhaps one that has les miles on them.

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 03:21 PM
...or perhaps one that has less miles on them.

one what? another DT I just do not see any FA out there worth any money..

lex
03-13-2008, 03:23 PM
one what? another DT I just do not see any FA out there worth any money..

You added an 'S' that was left out intentionally. I was talking about Dorsey and how Les Miles coached him. I know what you were trying to say. Had to cash in on the play on words.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 03:26 PM
Who else could the Jets be interested in?

D.J. Williams? Only backer we have that is big enough for their 3-4.

Foxworth, Bly? They are looking for a CB

Travis Henry? I highly doubt it. They already have Thomas Jones.

Paymah or Abdullah? Doubt it... if they wanted either guy it would only cost them a 6th rounder.

lex
03-13-2008, 03:31 PM
Who else could the Jets be interested in?

D.J. Williams? Only backer we have that is big enough for their 3-4.

Foxworth, Bly? They are looking for a CB

Travis Henry? I highly doubt it. They already have Thomas Jones.

Paymah or Abdullah? Doubt it... if they wanted either guy it would only cost them a 6th rounder.

Youre insinuating Bly or Williams. I really doubt its Williams. I think youre on the money with Bly too assuming its true that Foxworth is staying. In the interest of fair disclosure though, it could be wishful thinkin on my part as Ive never really liked having Bly on the Broncos.

shank
03-13-2008, 03:39 PM
if we are locking up foxworth, i would agree with boss, that it could all be in preperation for the trade, or it could mean bly or paymah are out...

i still like bly/bailey together because it allows us to bragg about having the best CB duo in the league, but if getting rid of bly gets us a solid DT, then i think i can live with it...

i'd really rather not trade paymah, i really like the kid and think he can be a very good corner, and has the size to play safety if the cards ever fall that way. i think out of bly, foxy, and paymah, i'd most prefer to retain karl, i just like his physical play over bly and foxys, but they are all great players...

i would guess it means we are trying to deal bly or foxy... foxy wouldn't sign the extension here if they are both staying, he's made it clear that he wants to start. either that or the extension is part of a trade agreement, but that contradicts the news that he's not part of the trade...

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 03:51 PM
if we are locking up foxworth, i would agree with boss, that it could all be in preperation for the trade, or it could mean bly or paymah are out...

i still like bly/bailey together because it allows us to bragg about having the best CB duo in the league, but if getting rid of bly gets us a solid DT, then i think i can live with it...

i'd really rather not trade paymah, i really like the kid and think he can be a very good corner, and has the size to play safety if the cards ever fall that way. i think out of bly, foxy, and paymah, i'd most prefer to retain karl, i just like his physical play over bly and foxys, but they are all great players...

i would guess it means we are trying to deal bly or foxy... foxy wouldn't sign the extension here if they are both staying, he's made it clear that he wants to start. either that or the extension is part of a trade agreement, but that contradicts the news that he's not part of the trade...

having the best Cb means squat unless you can put pressure on the QB. See last years SUPERBOWL for that lesson in defensive coaching. something mikey has never subscribed to.. his passion has always been on fast LB regardless if they could tackle lately or not..

shank
03-13-2008, 03:54 PM
having the best Cb means squat unless you can put pressure on the QB. See last years SUPERBOWL for that lesson in defensive coaching. something mikey has never subscribed to.. his passion has always been on fast LB regardless if they could tackle lately or not..

very true, and that's why i'd be willing to part with bly if it meant getting a better d-line. it'd be nice to rid ourselves of his big contract and get foxy back into the rhythm of only playing CB. all this S play is just hampering his development (*cough*dj williams *cough*). i'd be happy with bailey-foxy-paymah as long as our line can get enough pressure that foxy doesn't just get exposed... bly did damned good this year considering how bad our dline was...

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 03:59 PM
very true, and that's why i'd be willing to part with bly if it meant getting a better d-line. it'd be nice to rid ourselves of his big contract and get foxy back into the rhythm of only playing CB. all this S play is just hampering his development (*cough*dj williams *cough*). i'd be happy with bailey-foxy-paymah as long as our line can get enough pressure that foxy doesn't just get exposed... bly did damned good this year considering how bad our dline was...

I'd rather dump foxworth I do not see the great play everyone else seems to see. we can cut Bly next year if Paymah comes around like mikey seems to think he will..If not we re-do his contract..

Right now no one is gonna take his contract on as is.. Bly simply is not that good. He is a gambler and IF we had a decent FS roaming center field I'd feel better about him..

Dump foxworthless and get something great in return..

shank
03-13-2008, 04:05 PM
I'd rather dump foxworth I do not see the great play everyone else seems to see. we can cut Bly next year if Paymah comes around like mikey seems to think he will..If not we re-do his contract..

Right now no one is gonna take his contract on as is.. Bly simply is not that good. He is a gambler and IF we had a decent FS roaming center field I'd feel better about him..

Dump foxworthless and get something great in return..

foxworth looked very good at corner in his first year. since then we've been moving him around so much and playing him at safety, i think he just can't get in a groove, same as dj when we won't stop moving him. how can a guy excell when he's playing a different role from week to week?

i also think bly is still very good. he didn't gamble this year, the big plays he gave up were either great offensive plays, or he bit on play action because our front 7 played so bad. champ did the same things, and it's unfair even to compare bly to champ.

i really like paymah and want to keep him around, but if we lock up foxworth, they'll probably let paymah walk next year.

in a perfect world we could keep them all, but we know bly/foxy can't really co-exist, so i'd like one of them to net us a good DT or a pick that can be used on one, and for us to lock up paymah for the long haul as our nickle or more if he developes into a star (which i think he can).

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 04:19 PM
foxworth looked very good at corner in his first year. since then we've been moving him around so much and playing him at safety, i think he just can't get in a groove, same as dj when we won't stop moving him. how can a guy excell when he's playing a different role from week to week?

i also think bly is still very good. he didn't gamble this year, the big plays he gave up were either great offensive plays, or he bit on play action because our front 7 played so bad. champ did the same things, and it's unfair even to compare bly to champ.

i really like paymah and want to keep him around, but if we lock up foxworth, they'll probably let paymah walk next year.

in a perfect world we could keep them all, but we know bly/foxy can't really co-exist, so i'd like one of them to net us a good DT or a pick that can be used on one, and for us to lock up paymah for the long haul as our nickle or more if he developes into a star (which i think he can).


Fox is a nice guy and a pillar of the community but he got toasted every time they played him at nickle by good WR they would underneath him because he does not have the recovery speed and could/can not play bump and run so they buried him by throw underneath his coverage..

they played him at Safety because IMO he is never gonna be a starter at CB.. a good Jack of all trades master of none.. If they can get a ham sandwich for him let him go..

topscribe
03-13-2008, 04:29 PM
Take off the Orange tinted glasses Coach. If you really think Colbert is a good #2, you are truely viewing this with you oranged tinted glasses on. As for the Marcus Thomas debate... sure if funny how a 1st round talent slides down the draft boards like he did just because of a simple pot issue in college.

I did not take Coach's comment as saying Colbert is a "good #2." I see that
nowhere in his post at all. I believe he was saying that Colbert ought at least
to get a chance to prove or disprove himself as a Denver Bronco.

I get tired of someone talking about orange sunglasses when a poster tries to
bring up something positive about the club or a player.

-----

dogfish
03-13-2008, 04:49 PM
Who else could the Jets be interested in?

D.J. Williams? Only backer we have that is big enough for their 3-4.

Foxworth, Bly? They are looking for a CB

Travis Henry? I highly doubt it. They already have Thomas Jones.

Paymah or Abdullah? Doubt it... if they wanted either guy it would only cost them a 6th rounder.


they might be interested in moss as an edge rusher, but i certainly hope we wouldn't give up on him before at least giving him a chance to see what he can do after what we paid for him. . . IMO the most likely scenario is that a contract is being worked out between fox and the jets, and the report wasn't entirely accurate-- IF anything is even happening on this front. . . .


we'll see. . .

Rogue
03-13-2008, 04:51 PM
Broncos angle for Jets' tackle Robertson
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 03/13/2008 02:09:08 PM MDT

Knowing their reconstructed defense has unfinished work at tackle, the Broncos are exploring a trade with the New York Jets for Dewayne Robertson, two NFL sources confirmed today.

In terms of need and fit, the Jets and Broncos would be an ideal match. Robertson is 317 pounds but extremely quick, a combination that made him the No. 4 pick in the 2003 draft.

However, he is best suited for the 4-3 scheme the Broncos use. The Jets switched two years ago to a 3-4. Robertson became expendable after the Jets recently acquired Kris Jenkins.

The Broncos badly need a defensive tackle of Robertson's ilk and they have extra draft picks in the fourth and fifth rounds they can deal in exchange for him.

There are two potential hang-ups, however. Naturally, money is the big issue. Robertson was the NFL's highest-paid defensive tackle last season and he's currently second after Oakland gave a new deal to Tommie Kelly.

Robertson is due a $3 million bonus on June 1, then a $9.5 million salary in 2008, so the Broncos would need to restructure his deal with agent Hadley Engelhard, who also represents Denver running back Travis Henry.

There also is concern about Robertson's right knee. A deal with the Cincinnati Bengals was nixed because Robertson didn't pass a physical.

TXBRONC
03-13-2008, 06:50 PM
DIdn't Big Money get cut by the Raiders? Maybe we can bring him back too.

Big Money played better than the guys Bates brought in.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 06:50 PM
sounds like we will give them one of our 4ths and one of our 5ths.

MHCBill
03-13-2008, 06:58 PM
See sig below Dove Valley...

Screw Ted... I want the job!

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 07:26 PM
See sig below Dove Valley...

Screw Ted... I want the job!

can you handle mikey big gulp drink..

DenBronx
03-13-2008, 07:30 PM
Big Money played better than the guys Bates brought in.

much better!

even myers was better than adams and that isnt saying much. :laugh:

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 09:18 PM
If it's not Foxxy...it has to be Bly. DJ COULD be an option, but I kinda doubt it. If Foxxy is getting signed long term, Bly becomes expendable. I don't like him anyways. He takes way too many chances and bites way too much to be in Denver...basically cuz we have a feeble pass rush.

I would hope we get Foxxy AND Paymah done and we're set at CB for the next few years.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 09:37 PM
In a response to a PM...Foxxy may not be as talented as Bly, but he's very solid. He will cost WAY less and he is younger. I would hate to move him along and watch him excel elsewhere. He's not the playmaker Bly is, but he also isn't in nearly as many highlights chasing WRs into the endzone.

Lonestar
03-13-2008, 09:42 PM
In a response to a PM...Foxxy may not be as talented as Bly, but he's very solid. He will cost WAY less and he is younger. I would hate to move him along and watch him excel elsewhere. He's not the playmaker Bly is, but he also isn't in nearly as many highlights chasing WRs into the endzone.

I disagree I saw him when playing nickle get owned by crossing and underneath routes.. They may not have scored but he was not close enough to his man to prevent the first downs being made.

I'm not a fan of Bly at all but I'd rather see foxy elsewhere than starting in Den that would IMO be a HUGE mistake..

I hope I never get the chance to say I told you so..

Requiem / The Dagda
03-13-2008, 09:44 PM
Rumors saying Foxworth was looking for a long-term deal with Denver have been pulled off the table from the source that originally stated so. Thought so.

BOSSHOGG30
03-13-2008, 09:44 PM
I like Foxworth. He may not be as good in coverage, but I think is far more complete as a tackler. Bly gives effort, but he is a horrible tackler. I would have to say that Bly is the better overall player, but Foxworth still has plenty of potential, he is young, cheaper, and he really isn't that far behind Bly as far as talent. I will give Foxworth the benefit of the doubt because he has been moved around a lot. I think if he was put into the #2 CB role that he would have a learning year but after that he would be above average.

The most important thing, regardless of who is our cornerback, is that we get pressure on the opposing QB plus do a lot better versus the run. This will help our secondary look a lot better.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 10:01 PM
I disagree I saw him when playing nickle get owned by crossing and underneath routes.. They may not have scored but he was not close enough to his man to prevent the first downs being made.

I'm not a fan of Bly at all but I'd rather see foxy elsewhere than starting in Den that would IMO be a HUGE mistake..

I hope I never get the chance to say I told you so..

My comments have more to do w/ the fact that I HATE Bly, but I do think Foxxy isn't given enough credit. Foxxy is a solid CB...and has experience at Safety. He does tackle well, like Boss said and again...cheaper and younger. Denver didn't have shutdown CBs when they won 2 SBs...I think the $$ could be spent elsewhere.

turftoad
03-13-2008, 10:11 PM
My comments have more to do w/ the fact that I HATE Bly, but I do think Foxxy isn't given enough credit. Foxxy is a solid CB...and has experience at Safety. He does tackle well, like Boss said and again...cheaper and younger. Denver didn't have shutdown CBs when they won 2 SBs...I think the $$ could be spent elsewhere.

Foxworth is not all that. Average at best. I wouldn't want him as a starter. Nickle is fine.
Maybe we didn't have a shutdown CB during our superbowl years but we did have a pass rush. Meaning the CB's didn't have to cover as long.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 10:13 PM
Foxworth is not all that. Average at best. I wouldn't want him as a starter. Nickle is fine.
Maybe we didn't have a shutdown CB during our superbowl years but we did have a pass rush. Meaning the CB's didn't have to cover as long.

...which supports my statement that the $$ should be spent elsewhere.

Superchop 7
03-13-2008, 10:18 PM
If they play man coverage, Paymah is the guy you want in there. He has made Bly expendable. He is just as good and a far better tackler.

Foxy is solid and versatile, but he isn't the "man" corner Paymah has become.

turftoad
03-13-2008, 10:18 PM
...which supports my statement that the $$ should be spent elsewhere.

I'm not a huge Bly fan myself, however he is better than Foxworth.

I agree with your statement.

Simple Jaded
03-13-2008, 10:19 PM
I must be watching a different Foxworth, cause I see a Foxworth that appears to be scared shitless of tackling (And of giving up the big play at CB, for that matter).

I don't care if he's brought back, he's a good player and a better person, but I cringe at the thought of Foxworth starting for the Denver Broncos......

turftoad
03-13-2008, 10:26 PM
I must be watching a different Foxworth, cause I see a Foxworth that appears to be scared shitless of tackling (And of giving up the big play at CB, for that matter).

I don't care if he's brought back, he's a good player and a better person, but I cringe at the thought of Foxworth starting for the Denver Broncos......

Right on. When at CB he plays so far off that anyone can get a first down on him underneath. When at saftey, he is not physical at all. Looks like he's scared to him anyone.
He's a stop gap player.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 10:28 PM
I'd rather have a CB who is a bit more cautious than one who is known and subsequently abused for biting on the WRs first move.

turftoad
03-13-2008, 10:31 PM
I'd rather have a CB who is a bit more cautious than one who is known and subsequently abused for biting on the WRs first move.

You gotta point. Maybe we do draft CB this year. Both Foxworth and Bly are due new contracts next year.
Wouldn't hurt my feeling.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-13-2008, 10:32 PM
You gotta point. Maybe we do draft CB this year. Both Foxworth and Bly are due new contracts next year.
Wouldn't hurt my feeling.

I'd like 2008 to be the year Paymah gets his legit shot.

Superchop 7
03-13-2008, 10:33 PM
.
.I agree 100% remember we had hixon last year who turned out pretty good on a NYG squad.

Oh I remember it was TED the cut him..

So it is Teds fault ST are so bad.. Now that he is gone all is well in Dove valley..

__________________________________________________ ________________________________

I absolutely blame Ted for not signing Ayanbedejo.

How stupid could he get ?

Pro Bowl special teamer for cheap, had he actually looked into it he would have known that Ayanbedejo was suing a supplement manufacturer and had a "legit" case. (The product was pulled off the market)

turftoad
03-13-2008, 10:36 PM
Trade Foxy this year. Draft a CB. Dump Bly before he wants big bucks and let the draft pick and Paymah battle for the starting spot next year.
sounds good to me.
i really don't see Bly in orange and blue next year.

Requiem / The Dagda
03-13-2008, 10:37 PM
You gotta point. Maybe we do draft CB this year. Both Foxworth and Bly are due new contracts next year.
Wouldn't hurt my feeling.

Do you mean Paymah and Foxworth, we have Bly until 2011.

TXBRONC
03-13-2008, 10:38 PM
I must be watching a different Foxworth, cause I see a Foxworth that appears to be scared shitless of tackling (And of giving up the big play at CB, for that matter).

I don't care if he's brought back, he's a good player and a better person, but I cringe at the thought of Foxworth starting for the Denver Broncos......


That's not what I see. I see a corner back that plays a bit more cautiously than he need to but one that is scared to death.

dogfish
03-13-2008, 10:41 PM
Trade Foxy this year. Draft a CB. Dump Bly before he wants big bucks and let the draft pick and Paymah battle for the starting spot next year.
sounds good to me.
i really don't see Bly in orange and blue next year.

man, i hate the thought of having to invest more picks at CB already. . . with what w've poured into the position over the past 4-5 years we should be DONE with it for a while, even after the D-will tragedy. . . we've got about 15 different holes that need more urgent attention-- call it 12 if guys like moss and niko pan out this year. . . neither bly, paymah or foxworth is an elite player, but they're perfectly serviceable-- guys that you can win with if the run D improves. . . support them with an actual pass rush-- maybe even a safety who has the range and athleticism to help over the top-- and we've got a damn good group of corners. . . right now it's about the only spot on the team that actually has legitimate depth, it's the last place we need to be worrying about. . . .

Superchop 7
03-13-2008, 10:44 PM
Keeping the cap in mind, the deal would make sense with a Bly-Robertson trade.....it would be a great trade for both clubs.

dogfish
03-13-2008, 10:47 PM
Keeping the cap in mind, the deal would make sense with a Bly-Robertson trade.....it would be a great trade for both clubs.

that's a solid point, although i personally think we'd be getting the better of the deal as robertson has only the one big year left. . . it's also worth pointing out that the jets have been on a spending spree bringing in as many vets as possible-- mangini and tannenbaum clearly think their necks are on the line if they don't win this year. . .

Superchop 7
03-14-2008, 03:03 AM
that's a solid point, although i personally think we'd be getting the better of the deal as robertson has only the one big year left. . . it's also worth pointing out that the jets have been on a spending spree bringing in as many vets as possible-- mangini and tannenbaum clearly think their necks are on the line if they don't win this year. . .

__________________________________________________ _________________________________________________

As bad as the Jets need a corner (and don't need Robertson) they would be doing great for themselves.

The question is; Do we want three technique tackles or run stuffers ? (I pray to God it's three)

dogfish
03-14-2008, 04:22 AM
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________________

As bad as the Jets need a corner (and don't need Robertson) they would be doing great for themselves.

The question is; Do we want three technique tackles or run stuffers ? (I pray to God it's three)

ideally i'd like another one of BOTH, but we already have a pair of three-techniques with thomas and mckinley-- i think we'd benefit most from a true one-technique who can hold the point against double teams, but i suppose it depends on what scheme you want to run up front. . . robertson is better suited to the three-technique, but either way he at least has a little more size than mckinley, and is just an all-around greater talent. . . no question in my mind he'd be an upgrade. . . .

dogfish
03-14-2008, 08:45 AM
ROBERTSON’S KNEES CAUSE CONCERN


As the New York Jets continue to try to unload defensive tackle Dewayne Robertson, word is getting around that one of the big concerns with Robertson is the condition of his knees.

Adam Schefter of NFL Network reports that two teams think that Robertson would be undraftable in 2008 due to his knees. So who, then, would give up a draft pick or two for him?

There’s also a concern that Robertson might have only one year left, due to his knee problems.

Still, Schefter points out that Robertson has started every game for the past two years, and has played in every game in four of his five seasons in the league.

Thus, the Jets will continue to try to shop him. But a deal needs to be done fairly soon. On June 3, Robertson is due to receive a $3 million roster bonus. So if the Jets can’t trade him, they’ll most likely cut him.

The Denver Broncos remain in the hunt for Robertson. Given the team’s screwy moves regarding defensive linemen over the years, it really isn’t a surprise.

___________________________________


WTH? this is getting weird. . . . i find it strange that the guy has never shown any health problems, and all of a sudden they're speculating that his knees are so bad that they might end his career? and no one has even mentioned what is exactly WRONG with them. . .

at this point, who knows WTF is going on. . . . :noidea:

BOSSHOGG30
03-14-2008, 08:46 AM
just draft a guy would you... forget the overpriced DT with the knee injury.

jrelway
03-14-2008, 10:55 AM
have we not learned our lesson by signing guys with bum knees. bone on bone doesnt sound to good to me.

HolyDiver
03-14-2008, 10:58 AM
I would be much happier with Trevor Laws than I would Robertson anyway.

fcspikeit
03-14-2008, 11:53 AM
I would be much happier with Trevor Laws than I would Robertson anyway.

If we knew by not getting Robertson, we would definitely draft Laws, This conversation would be over for me...

If we knew we would get Laws, The trade up for Ellis thread would be a done deal too :D

I don't see him on the board when we pick at 42.. IMO, for this to be a successful draft we need to come away with either Dorsey, Ellis or Laws.

mclark
03-14-2008, 12:01 PM
Do you guys like Trevor Laws over Dre Moore or Pat Sims? He's quite a bit smaller. Or are you assuming Sims and Moore will be gone?

I think we're still conscious of being too small in the trenches.


1.
Glenn Dorsey LSU 6-2 299 5.05
2.
Sedrick Ellis USC 6-1 295 4.90
3.
Kentwan Balmer North Carolina 6-5 282 5.05
4
Pat Sims Auburn 6-4 312 5.00
5.
Dre Moore Maryland 6-4 311 4.90

6. Trevor Laws Notre Dame 6-1 295 5.00
7.
Ahtyba Rubin Iowa St. 6-3 330 5.15

8. Red Bryant
Texas A&M
6-5
324
5.15
9. DeMario Pressley NC State 6-3 295 5.00
10. Marcus Harrison Arkansas 6-3 310 5.00
11.
Carlton Powell Virginia Tech 6-2 300 5.15
12
Frank Okam Texas 6-5 320 5.10
13. Andre Fluellen
Florida St.
6-4
285
5.00
14. Kendall Langford
Hampton
6-6
294
5.00
15. Keilen Dykes
West Virginia
6-5
295
5.00
16.
Jason Shirley
Fresno St.
6-5
330
5.10
17.
Nick Hayden
Wisconsin
6-5
301
5.15
18.
James McClinton
Kansas
6-1
290
5.20
19.
Chris Norwell
Illinois
6-6
300
5.05
20.
Frank Morton
Tulane
6-2
330
5.35

lex
03-14-2008, 12:37 PM
I think Laws had the best senior bowl, most productive season this past season (averaged almost 10 tackles per game as a DT, which is rare), and put in the most preparation for the combine. Its a combination of things that makes people feel more solid about Laws. The guy has an awesom motor and is a hard worker off the field, or so it would seem. Sims and Moore are also solid pickups but Laws stands out.


Do you guys like Trevor Laws over Dre Moore or Pat Sims? He's quite a bit smaller. Or are you assuming Sims and Moore will be gone?

I think we're still conscious of being too small in the trenches.


1.
Glenn Dorsey LSU 6-2 299 5.05
2.
Sedrick Ellis USC 6-1 295 4.90
3.
Kentwan Balmer North Carolina 6-5 282 5.05
4
Pat Sims Auburn 6-4 312 5.00
5.
Dre Moore Maryland 6-4 311 4.90

6. Trevor Laws Notre Dame 6-1 295 5.00
7.
Ahtyba Rubin Iowa St. 6-3 330 5.15

8. Red Bryant
Texas A&M
6-5
324
5.15
9. DeMario Pressley NC State 6-3 295 5.00
10. Marcus Harrison Arkansas 6-3 310 5.00
11.
Carlton Powell Virginia Tech 6-2 300 5.15
12
Frank Okam Texas 6-5 320 5.10
13. Andre Fluellen
Florida St.
6-4
285
5.00
14. Kendall Langford
Hampton
6-6
294
5.00
15. Keilen Dykes
West Virginia
6-5
295
5.00
16.
Jason Shirley
Fresno St.
6-5
330
5.10
17.
Nick Hayden
Wisconsin
6-5
301
5.15
18.
James McClinton
Kansas
6-1
290
5.20
19.
Chris Norwell
Illinois
6-6
300
5.05
20.
Frank Morton
Tulane
6-2
330
5.35

lex
03-14-2008, 12:39 PM
If we knew by not getting Robertson, we would definitely draft Laws, This conversation would be over for me...

If we knew we would get Laws, The trade up for Ellis thread would be a done deal too :D

I don't see him on the board when we pick at 42.. IMO, for this to be a successful draft we need to come away with either Dorsey, Ellis or Laws.

I could live with Sims or Moore but would rather have Laws. Moore hasnt been playing football very long but is a good athlete and very strong...definitely some upside there.

mclark
03-14-2008, 12:46 PM
I could live with Sims or Moore but would rather have Laws. Moore hasnt been playing football very long but is a good athlete and very strong...definitely some upside there.

Laws 110 tackles are more than Sims and Morre combined. Almost twice as many as Sedrick Ellis. Dorsey had 69.

I'm impressed. Also, I see his weight now is 304, so he's growing.

BOSSHOGG30
03-14-2008, 12:49 PM
He is another Dumervil... has the production to be cosidered an elite prospect, but due to his size teams don't put him in that category.

Requiem / The Dagda
03-14-2008, 12:59 PM
He is another Dumervil... has the production to be cosidered an elite prospect, but due to his size teams don't put him in that category.

Yep, blue-collar lunch-pail type guy who has a non-stop motor that never quits.

Denver needs more Dumervil's and Crowders (guys like Laws) instead of guys like Moss and Thomas.

You'll be interested in an article coming out for Broncos Talk that I did about Laws; I'll send it to you when it's published.

Lonestar
03-14-2008, 01:00 PM
He is another Dumervil... has the production to be cosidered an elite prospect, but due to his size teams don't put him in that category.


But at 6'1" and 295 he is more like a NT short and squat.. He may not knock many passes down, but seems to be the kind of guy I could like stuffing upteh middle.. If he is stuffing the oline back into the Qb who cares. Could probably put a few more pounds on also..

Requiem / The Dagda
03-14-2008, 01:01 PM
Laws put on a lot of weight already, played around 285-290 as a DE for the Irish this year; and is at 305 right now; he's done a good job.

lex
03-14-2008, 01:10 PM
Laws 110 tackles are more than Sims and Morre combined. Almost twice as many as Sedrick Ellis. Dorsey had 69.

I'm impressed. Also, I see his weight now is 304, so he's growing.

I agree that Laws' tackles # is very impressive, but its also worth pointing out that Notre Dames offense was so woeful, that you can easily see its a little inflated due to NDs defense being on the field more. Its still very impressive though.

One thing though to say about Sims is that when Auburn played Florida and Arkansas, Sims was probably the biggest reason for Auburn winning those games.

lex
03-14-2008, 01:13 PM
Yep, blue-collar lunch-pail type guy who has a non-stop motor that never quits.

Denver needs more Dumervil's and Crowders (guys like Laws) instead of guys like Moss and Thomas.

You'll be interested in an article coming out for Broncos Talk that I did about Laws; I'll send it to you when it's published.

Theres nothing wrong with drafting guys like Moss and Thomas but they need to have Crowders and Dumervils in the mix as well.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-14-2008, 01:15 PM
One thing though to say about Sims is that when Auburn played Florida and Arkansas, Sims was probably the biggest reason for Auburn winning those games.

...that and the fcat that both of em were barely above average in 2007.

lex
03-14-2008, 01:17 PM
...that and the fcat that both of em were barely above average in 2007.


Actually, go look at how well Dorsey did against those same teams.

And actually, Floridas problem was replacing 9 players on defense with freshmen. Their problem was definitely not their offense.

mclark
03-14-2008, 01:20 PM
He is another Dumervil... has the production to be cosidered an elite prospect, but due to his size teams don't put him in that category.

Laws? If he's at 304, he weighs more than Dorsey, Ellis and Balmer. Just 6'1" -- so, like Doomer, he's short.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-14-2008, 01:26 PM
Actually, go look at how well Dorsey did against those same teams.

And actually, Floridas problem was replacing 9 players on defense with freshmen. Their problem was definitely not their offense.

Show me tangible evidence that Sims did better. Seriously. I wanna see game tape. I dont' wanna see one guy had 6 tackles while the other only had 4. Show me that Sims was constantly double teamed and still dominated the LOS. Show me how he played injured...like a frickin man. Show me why he's a top 10 prospect.

And I also wouldn't give Sims all of the credit for his teams winning. He's a DT...1 DT. He's good, but I hardly think he won games all by his lonesome.

fcspikeit
03-14-2008, 01:50 PM
I agree that Laws' tackles # is very impressive, but its also worth pointing out that Notre Dames offense was so woeful, that you can easily see its a little inflated due to NDs defense being on the field more. Its still very impressive though.

One thing though to say about Sims is that when Auburn played Florida and Arkansas, Sims was probably the biggest reason for Auburn winning those games.

Who else from ND D-line is expected to even be drafted? My point is that he was by far the best player on that defense. In fact, ND didn't have as good a defense as LSU or USC. Laws was the only player the offense had to game plan for and he still put up better #'s then Dorsey or Ellis..

I haven't heard one single negitive comment about his effort on the field, I haven't heard anything about off field issues or injury questions. Whats not to like?

Beings he is now over 300 he has shown he can put on the weight and it didn't affect his performance at the combine... If we could get this guy in the second it would be a steal!

lex
03-14-2008, 01:52 PM
Show me tangible evidence that Sims did better. Seriously. I wanna see game tape. I dont' wanna see one guy had 6 tackles while the other only had 4. Show me that Sims was constantly double teamed and still dominated the LOS. Show me how he played injured...like a frickin man. Show me why he's a top 10 prospect.

And I also wouldn't give Sims all of the credit for his teams winning. He's a DT...1 DT. He's good, but I hardly think he won games all by his lonesome.

You need to pay closer attention to what is actually being said. In those games, it began with Sims for Auburn. In those games the back 7 also did a solid job of keeping plays in front of them and tackling...but again, the Schwerpunkt was the interior line play and Sims dominated...more than Dorsey. Not saying Sims is better than Dorsey. Those were isolated games, Dorsey had injuries and teams were more likely to scheme around Dorsey. But even still, Sims was more effective in games against the same teams.

lex
03-14-2008, 01:54 PM
Who else from ND D-line is expected to even be drafted? My point is that he was by far the best player on that defense. In fact, ND didn't have as good a defense as LSU or USC. Laws was the only player the offense had to game plan for and he still put up better #'s then Dorsey or Ellis..

I haven't heard one single negitive comment about his effort on the field, I haven't heard anything about off field issues or injury questions. Whats not to like?

Beings he is now over 300 he has shown he can put on the weight and it didn't affect his performance at the combine... If we could get this guy in the second it would be a steal!

I dont see what youre arguing about. Ive already said I like Laws the most.

BOSSHOGG30
03-14-2008, 01:55 PM
Who else from ND D-line is expected to even be drafted? My point is that he was by far the best player on that defense. In fact, ND didn't have as good a defense as LSU or USC. Laws was the only player the offense had to game plan for and he still put up better #'s then Dorsey or Ellis..

I haven't heard one single negitive comment about his effort on the field, I haven't heard anything about off field issues or injury questions. Whats not to like?

Beings he is now over 300 he has shown he can put on the weight and it didn't affect his performance at the combine... If we could get this guy in the second it would be a steal!


Laws is a stud... you can't ask for more from a player... he gives his all on every play and gets the job done. He may not be a dominate player, but he would do well next to Thomas.

fcspikeit
03-14-2008, 02:24 PM
Do you guys like Trevor Laws over Dre Moore or Pat Sims? He's quite a bit smaller. Or are you assuming Sims and Moore will be gone?

I think we're still conscious of being too small in the trenches.


1.
Glenn Dorsey LSU 6-2 299 5.05
2.
Sedrick Ellis USC 6-1 295 4.90
3.
Kentwan Balmer North Carolina 6-5 282 5.05
4
Pat Sims Auburn 6-4 312 5.00
5.
Dre Moore Maryland 6-4 311 4.90

6. Trevor Laws Notre Dame 6-1 295 5.00
7.
Ahtyba Rubin Iowa St. 6-3 330 5.15

8. Red Bryant
Texas A&M
6-5
324
5.15
9. DeMario Pressley NC State 6-3 295 5.00
10. Marcus Harrison Arkansas 6-3 310 5.00
11.
Carlton Powell Virginia Tech 6-2 300 5.15
12
Frank Okam Texas 6-5 320 5.10
13. Andre Fluellen
Florida St.
6-4
285
5.00
14. Kendall Langford
Hampton
6-6
294
5.00
15. Keilen Dykes
West Virginia
6-5
295
5.00
16.
Jason Shirley
Fresno St.
6-5
330
5.10
17.
Nick Hayden
Wisconsin
6-5
301
5.15
18.
James McClinton
Kansas
6-1
290
5.20
19.
Chris Norwell
Illinois
6-6
300
5.05
20.
Frank Morton
Tulane
6-2
330
5.35

Player__________Weight_Height_40_Bench_V Jump_

Glenn Dorsey_____297___6'1"

Sedrick Ellis______309___6"0"__5.24_34

Trevor Laws_____304___6'0"___5.08_35____30.5

Kentwan Balmer__308___6'4"___5.28_33

Pat Sims________310___6'2"___5.06_20_____27

Dre Moore_______305___6'4"___4.88_31_____28

As you said, He is heaver then Dorsey, and only 1 inch shorter, a 30+ vertical is really good for a guy his size. I don't see him having a problem batting balls down. He also Benched more and ran a faster 40 then Ellis..

Does anyone know what the arm length of Dorsey, Ellis and Laws is?

FFLiveWire (http://fflivewire.com/players/PlayersCombine.asp?OrderBy=+ORDER+BY+LastNAme%2C+F irstName%2C+PosNameShort%2C+Team&PlayerName=&pTeamID=99999999&PosNum=8&GO=GO%21)

BOSSHOGG30
03-14-2008, 02:31 PM
Dre Moore is a beast! I still can't believe he ran a 4.88 at 6'4 300 lbs.

fcspikeit
03-14-2008, 02:34 PM
I dont see what youre arguing about. Ive already said I like Laws the most.

lex, I ain't arguing with you.. I never said you didn't like Laws the best? :confused:

I was just commenting on what you said,

"its also worth pointing out that Notre Dames offense was so woeful, that you can easily see its a little inflated due to NDs defense being on the field more"

I just wanted to point out that the other side to that is, the defense was so woeful Laws got all the attention (Double teams) and still was able to put up the #'s he did.. IMO, if ND wasn't such a laughing stock last year Laws would be regarded a lot higher then he is.

fcspikeit
03-14-2008, 02:37 PM
Dre Moore is a beast! I still can't believe he ran a 4.88 at 6'4 300 lbs.

He had a good/great combine all around... It's to bad FFliveWire don't but up the 10 time because that is clearly more important in regards to DT's..

You wouldn't happen to have a link to somewhere that list that would you?

Simple Jaded
03-14-2008, 06:09 PM
If the Broncos draft Laws they better not take the team to SixFlags, him and Dumervil will be the only two not big enough to ride the cool rides......

Nature Boy
03-16-2008, 01:15 PM
Broncos continue pursuit of Robertson
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 03/15/2008 09:40:14 PM MDT

Even after their point man in the proposed trade for Dewayne Robertson was dismissed, the Broncos remain interested in acquiring the defensive tackle.

Broncos' general manager Ted Sundquist had been working with the New York Jets on the proposed deal until he was fired Wednesday by executive vice president Mike Shanahan. The team's interest in Robertson, however, remains.

The Broncos have been working with agent Hadley Engelhard on reconstructing Robertson's enormous contract and with the Jets on draft-pick compensation. The teams have discussed swapping midround draft picks in 2008 along with the Jets receiving a conditional draft pick for 2009.

WARHORSE
03-16-2008, 01:26 PM
Do you guys like Trevor Laws over Dre Moore or Pat Sims? He's quite a bit smaller. Or are you assuming Sims and Moore will be gone?

I think we're still conscious of being too small in the trenches.


1.
Glenn Dorsey LSU 6-2 299 5.05
2.
Sedrick Ellis USC 6-1 295 4.90
3.
Kentwan Balmer North Carolina 6-5 282 5.05
4
Pat Sims Auburn 6-4 312 5.00
5.
Dre Moore Maryland 6-4 311 4.90

6. Trevor Laws Notre Dame 6-1 295 5.00
7.
Ahtyba Rubin Iowa St. 6-3 330 5.15

8. Red Bryant
Texas A&M
6-5
324
5.15
9. DeMario Pressley NC State 6-3 295 5.00
10. Marcus Harrison Arkansas 6-3 310 5.00
11.
Carlton Powell Virginia Tech 6-2 300 5.15
12
Frank Okam Texas 6-5 320 5.10
13. Andre Fluellen
Florida St.
6-4
285
5.00
14. Kendall Langford
Hampton
6-6
294
5.00
15. Keilen Dykes
West Virginia
6-5
295
5.00
16.
Jason Shirley
Fresno St.
6-5
330
5.10
17.
Nick Hayden
Wisconsin
6-5
301
5.15
18.
James McClinton
Kansas
6-1
290
5.20
19.
Chris Norwell
Illinois
6-6
300
5.05
20.
Frank Morton
Tulane
6-2
330
5.35

Laws had 112 tackles from the DT position............oh, and uh......led the team in tackles.

From DT??

Thats called production, and when you turn on the tape, Laws is in high gear until the whistle blows.

That being said, theres a case to be built for each of those tackles. They all have the potential to be special.

Requiem / The Dagda
03-16-2008, 01:54 PM
No, Laws did not have 112 tackles from the defensive tackle position. He played defensive end this year as the Fighting Irish made their change to a 3-4. So yeah, "turning on the tape" probably should have shown most people that, and by "tape" I mean TiVo'd games.

Simple Jaded
03-16-2008, 02:21 PM
Does the NFL even make football pants for little people?

Maybe Laws should have followed Samardzija into baseball, he'd make a hell of a SHORT stop......

Requiem / The Dagda
03-16-2008, 02:22 PM
Does the NFL even make football pants for little people?

What's with the whole "little" comment on Laws?

Simple Jaded
03-16-2008, 02:26 PM
What's with the whole "little" comment on Laws?

I don't like Laws, so I pick on his lack of size......

Requiem / The Dagda
03-16-2008, 02:27 PM
I don't like Laws, so I pick on his lack of size......

You might as well not like Ellis either considering he's shorter, and only a few more pounds more.

topscribe
03-16-2008, 02:30 PM
I don't like Laws, so I pick on his lack of size......

Lack of height might be a better comment. Someone who is six feet tall and
weighs 300 pounds has to be built like a bear . . . matter of fact, that might
be a good nickname for him. You have seen what Dumervil can do when he
gets under the opponent's pads. Can you imagine 300 lbs. under the
opponent's pads?

I'm not so sure I would mind seeing that on a Broncos' LOS.

-----

Simple Jaded
03-16-2008, 02:36 PM
You might as well not like Ellis either considering he's shorter, and only a few more pounds more.


I don't like Ellis, Dream, these just aren't my kind of players.

I think the Broncos rely too much on quickness and speed, when a team like the Chargers/Ravens punches them in the mouth, they crumble.

It really is that simple for me, I'm sick of how tiny and weak the Broncos like their players.

This not to say this is a rule for Denver, and it's mostly on the offensive line that bothers me, but I don't want to see Denver get too small on the DL either......

Simple Jaded
03-16-2008, 02:41 PM
Lack of height might be a better comment. Someone who is six feet tall and
weighs 300 pounds has to be built like a bear . . . matter of fact, that might
be a good nickname for him. You have seen what Dumervil can do when he
gets under the opponent's pads. Can you imagine 300 lbs. under the
opponent's pads?

I'm not so sure I would mind seeing that on a Broncos' LOS.

-----


This is what worries me, Top, the Denver Broncos getting carried away thinking that because Dumervil can survive, that size does not matter. Or even worse, thinking short/small is the way to go.

Dumervil is the exception, a freak, not the rule.

Dumervil will be a starter next year, I hate the idea of another runt starting next to him......

claymore
03-16-2008, 02:47 PM
Lack of height might be a better comment. Someone who is six feet tall and
weighs 300 pounds has to be built like a bear . . . matter of fact, that might
be a good nickname for him. You have seen what Dumervil can do when he
gets under the opponent's pads. Can you imagine 300 lbs. under the
opponent's pads?

I'm not so sure I would mind seeing that on a Broncos' LOS.

-----I also saw the most flagrant holding ever against Elvis all season long. Im wondering if the refs, just dont know how to handle it or what. LT's cant stop him unless they hold him.

Simple Jaded
03-16-2008, 02:56 PM
I also saw the most flagrant holding ever against Elvis all season long. Im wondering if the refs, just dont know how to handle it or what. LT's cant stop him unless they hold him.


There is even MORE Illegal Hands to the Face penalties not called......

fcspikeit
03-16-2008, 03:11 PM
I don't like Ellis, Dream, these just aren't my kind of players.

I think the Broncos rely too much on quickness and speed, when a team like the Chargers/Ravens punches them in the mouth, they crumble.

It really is that simple for me, I'm sick of how tiny and weak the Broncos like their players.

This not to say this is a rule for Denver, and it's mostly on the offensive line that bothers me, but I don't want to see Denver get too small on the DL either......

He showed he was stronger then the DT's who are bigger then him..

I believe he benched more then any other DT at the combine. There is no way a guy who can bench 225, 35 times should ever be called weak!

At the senior bowl it didn't mater who was in front of him.. He drove them back to the QB every time.. Sure this might by a weak Interior class but that don't explain why he made all other DT's except Ellis, look weak compared to him...

It really is a bit ridiculas, 10 years ago he would not be considered small.. Hell, he weighs over 300 pounds.. He doesn't take plays off as most every other DT coming out does. Who wouldn't want a guy who works his tail off ever play and showed he was ever bit as good as anyone coming out of the draft.. Does 2 or 3 inches really mean that much? He makes up for that and more with his vertical..

Lonestar
03-16-2008, 03:21 PM
This is what worries me, Top, the Denver Broncos getting carried away thinking that because Dumervil can survive, that size does not matter. Or even worse, thinking short/small is the way to go.

Dumervil is the exception, a freak, not the rule.

Dumervil will be a starter next year, I hate the idea of another runt starting next to him......

IMO one can hardly call 6' 305 a runt.. I'd rather have him that someone 6'3' 315 that extra 10 pounds distributed over an additional 3 inches does not mean much..

IN most cases with the exception of knocking down passes shorter is better in the middle of the dline..... In Dumervil's case the kid plays like he is 6'6" because of his wing spread his arms are abnormally long..

I did not like him as a choice at all, thinking he'd get buried by good NFL OT's, but his quickness and moves negate most of them..

If we could find a 335 type at DT some where that has Laws motor by all means . But the bigger they are the nore gut they have and playing 50% of your games at mile hi is not exactly a wise choice..

Italianmobstr7
03-16-2008, 05:31 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_8582413

Even after their point man in the proposed trade for Dewayne Robertson was dismissed, the Broncos remain interested in acquiring the defensive tackle.

Broncos' general manager Ted Sundquist had been working with the New York Jets on the proposed deal until he was fired Wednesday by executive vice president Mike Shanahan. The team's interest in Robertson, however, remains.

The Broncos have been working with agent Hadley Engelhard on reconstructing Robertson's enormous contract and with the Jets on draft-pick compensation. The teams have discussed swapping midround draft picks in 2008 along with the Jets receiving a conditional draft pick for 2009.

Italianmobstr7
03-16-2008, 05:32 PM
I would love to get Robertson in here with a restructured contract, and without having to give up Paymah or Foxworth. This would be a great move for Denver.

SmilinAssasSin27
03-16-2008, 05:58 PM
I get yer point Link, but yer way off abour Laws. I know ya don't like him, but if he tips at 305-310 at his height, he's not gonna get pushed around. Low man wins. If we was 6'5" at his weight, he'd get stood up by every decent OG or C...or FB. He may not be 350, but those guys often are overweight, out of shape and are injury prone due to the stress on their joints.

mclark
03-16-2008, 06:14 PM
Laws had more sacks that Kentwan Balmer and twice as many tackles as Balmer. They weigh about the same. Balmer has 3" on him.

Laws' productiveness is simply amazing.

Dorsey had 69 tackles this year. Ellis had 58. Laws had 112.

I know Notre Dame's defense was on the field much more than LSU's or USC's; but this productiveness is eye-popping.

Laws is a leader. Look at all the intangibles. Look how all his numbers improved year-to-year.

Trevor Laws
Height: 6-03/4 | Weight: 304 | 40-Time: 5.06

Official Bio

Strengths:
Has a non-stop motor...Great strength...Technically sound and really understands leverage...Is real quick and a decent athlete...Outstanding tackler...Can penetrate and make plays in the backfield..Versatile and has played multiple positions in two different schemes...Has a ton of experience against top competition...Really smart and a hard worker...Active hands...Productive...Had a great senior year...A leader.

Weaknesses:
Doesn't have the height that you look for...Can be too aggressive at times...Is not overly stout at the point of attack..Has a limited pass rush repertoire and basically relies on hustle...Not very powerful...Bit of a 'tweener...Doesn't have much upside.

Notes:
Finished 49-0 as a state champion super-heavyweight wrestler as a junior...Was ranked as the #1 high school wrestler in the nation...Gatorade Player of the Year in Minnesota..Played defensive tackle for the first 3 years of his college career and moved outside to end as a senior when the Irish transitioned to a 3-4...Notched an amazing 112 tackles as a senior, which matched the total of his three previous years combined...Could project to either tackle or end at the next level depending on the scheme...Doesn't have all the physical tools you look for but his intangibles are top-rate...The type who will never be a star and projects as more of a backup in the NFL but could play in the league for a long time and coaches will adore him.
Career Statistics
Year GP TKL TFL SACK
2003 DNP - - -
2004 12 17 2.0 1.0
2005 12 33 3.0 1.5
2006 13 62 9.5 3.5
2007 12 112 8.0 4.0
Totals 49 224 22.5 10.0

Requiem / The Dagda
03-16-2008, 06:19 PM
For whatever reason; people care more about triangular numbers than they do about how these guys actually played. Everybody knows that our run defense struggled last year; and it's quite obvious that Laws would help in that department. I'll take football players over workout freaks eight days out of the week, and that's what Laws is. A football player. Also have to like defensive tackles with wrestling backgrounds. It just something that helps.

In a lot of instances; the size of players is overrated and intangibles are underestimated. Qualities such as leadership, determination and drive and work ethic are just as important. Laws has gained 10-15 pounds since the season stopped. He realized it was a concern, but you know what - he did something about it.

Also keep in mind that Laws was played DE primarily this year in the 3-4 the Irish ran. His stats are a little inflated due to aforementioned condition; but he's a quality prospect.

TXBRONC
03-16-2008, 06:24 PM
IMO one can hardly call 6' 305 a runt.. I'd rather have him that someone 6'3' 315 that extra 10 pounds distributed over an additional 3 inches does not mean much..

IN most cases with the exception of knocking down passes shorter is better in the middle of the dline..... In Dumervil's case the kid plays like he is 6'6" because of his wing spread his arms are abnormally long..

I did not like him as a choice at all, thinking he'd get buried by good NFL OT's, but his quickness and moves negate most of them..

If we could find a 335 type at DT some where that has Laws motor by all means . But the bigger they are the nore gut they have and playing 50% of your games at mile hi is not exactly a wise choice..

I think what makes him effective is his natural leverage advantage.

mopatt24
03-16-2008, 06:56 PM
Laws had more sacks that Kentwan Balmer and twice as many tackles as Balmer. They weigh about the same. Balmer has 3" on him.

Laws' productiveness is simply amazing.

Dorsey had 69 tackles this year. Ellis had 58. Laws had 112.

I know Notre Dame's defense was on the field much more than LSU's or USC's; but this productiveness is eye-popping.

Laws is a leader. Look at all the intangibles. Look how all his numbers improved year-to-year.

Trevor Laws
Height: 6-03/4 | Weight: 304 | 40-Time: 5.06

Official Bio

Strengths:
Has a non-stop motor...Great strength...Technically sound and really understands leverage...Is real quick and a decent athlete...Outstanding tackler...Can penetrate and make plays in the backfield..Versatile and has played multiple positions in two different schemes...Has a ton of experience against top competition...Really smart and a hard worker...Active hands...Productive...Had a great senior year...A leader.

Weaknesses:
Doesn't have the height that you look for...Can be too aggressive at times...Is not overly stout at the point of attack..Has a limited pass rush repertoire and basically relies on hustle...Not very powerful...Bit of a 'tweener...Doesn't have much upside.

Notes:
Finished 49-0 as a state champion super-heavyweight wrestler as a junior...Was ranked as the #1 high school wrestler in the nation...Gatorade Player of the Year in Minnesota..Played defensive tackle for the first 3 years of his college career and moved outside to end as a senior when the Irish transitioned to a 3-4...Notched an amazing 112 tackles as a senior, which matched the total of his three previous years combined...Could project to either tackle or end at the next level depending on the scheme...Doesn't have all the physical tools you look for but his intangibles are top-rate...The type who will never be a star and projects as more of a backup in the NFL but could play in the league for a long time and coaches will adore him.
Career Statistics
Year GP TKL TFL SACK
2003 DNP - - -
2004 12 17 2.0 1.0
2005 12 33 3.0 1.5
2006 13 62 9.5 3.5
2007 12 112 8.0 4.0
Totals 49 224 22.5 10.0



Two things really standout to me about Laws "Has a non-stop motor...Great strength"

That alone will get you places in the NFL. You combine a DT like that with the type of DE's we have, then your looking at a pretty promising pass rush.

We make a move for Robertson and draft Laws in the 2nd, to go with a young Thomas, then IMO we've filled our need at DT

fcspikeit
03-16-2008, 07:45 PM
Laws had more sacks that Kentwan Balmer and twice as many tackles as Balmer. They weigh about the same. Balmer has 3" on him.

Laws' productiveness is simply amazing.

Dorsey had 69 tackles this year. Ellis had 58. Laws had 112.

I know Notre Dame's defense was on the field much more than LSU's or USC's; but this productiveness is eye-popping.

Laws is a leader. Look at all the intangibles. Look how all his numbers improved year-to-year.

Trevor Laws
Height: 6-03/4 | Weight: 304 | 40-Time: 5.06

Official Bio

Strengths:
Has a non-stop motor...Great strength...Technically sound and really understands leverage...Is real quick and a decent athlete...Outstanding tackler...Can penetrate and make plays in the backfield..Versatile and has played multiple positions in two different schemes...Has a ton of experience against top competition...Really smart and a hard worker...Active hands...Productive...Had a great senior year...A leader.

Weaknesses:
Doesn't have the height that you look for...Can be too aggressive at times...Is not overly stout at the point of attack..Has a limited pass rush repertoire and basically relies on hustle...Not very powerful...Bit of a 'tweener...Doesn't have much upside.

Notes:
Finished 49-0 as a state champion super-heavyweight wrestler as a junior...Was ranked as the #1 high school wrestler in the nation...Gatorade Player of the Year in Minnesota..Played defensive tackle for the first 3 years of his college career and moved outside to end as a senior when the Irish transitioned to a 3-4...Notched an amazing 112 tackles as a senior, which matched the total of his three previous years combined...Could project to either tackle or end at the next level depending on the scheme...Doesn't have all the physical tools you look for but his intangibles are top-rate...The type who will never be a star and projects as more of a backup in the NFL but could play in the league for a long time and coaches will adore him.
Career Statistics
Year GP TKL TFL SACK
2003 DNP - - -
2004 12 17 2.0 1.0
2005 12 33 3.0 1.5
2006 13 62 9.5 3.5
2007 12 112 8.0 4.0
Totals 49 224 22.5 10.0


I like him more all the time.. IMO wrestlers make great linemen. they have outstanding balance and they know a thing or 2 about leverage.. The fact he was a great wrestler tells me he is exceptional at both..

Another thing is how much discipline it takes to be a wrestler, They have to be constantly watching their weight.. it also shows he must be a great athlete to be able to dominate at both sports.

TXBRONC
03-16-2008, 07:54 PM
I like him more all the time.. IMO wrestlers make great linemen. they have outstanding balance and they know a thing or 2 about leverage.. The fact he was a great wrestler tells me he is exceptional at both..

Another thing is how much discipline it takes to be a wrestler, They have to be constantly watching their weight.. it also shows he must be a great athlete to be able to dominate at both sports.

He sounds like a great prospect.

WARHORSE
03-17-2008, 12:55 AM
Is it not about production? Laws may not have a ceiling of upside as high as some of the others, but productive is what you want your players to be, and thats one thing he already knows about.

Simple Jaded
03-17-2008, 01:18 AM
Laws had more sacks that Kentwan Balmer and twice as many tackles as Balmer. They weigh about the same. Balmer has 3" on him.

Laws' productiveness is simply amazing.

Dorsey had 69 tackles this year. Ellis had 58. Laws had 112.

I know Notre Dame's defense was on the field much more than LSU's or USC's; but this productiveness is eye-popping.

Laws is a leader. Look at all the intangibles. Look how all his numbers improved year-to-year.

Trevor Laws
Height: 6-03/4 | Weight: 304 | 40-Time: 5.06

Official Bio

Strengths:
Has a non-stop motor...Great strength...Technically sound and really understands leverage...Is real quick and a decent athlete...Outstanding tackler...Can penetrate and make plays in the backfield..Versatile and has played multiple positions in two different schemes...Has a ton of experience against top competition...Really smart and a hard worker...Active hands...Productive...Had a great senior year...A leader.

Weaknesses:
Doesn't have the height that you look for...Can be too aggressive at times...Is not overly stout at the point of attack..Has a limited pass rush repertoire and basically relies on hustle...Not very powerful...Bit of a 'tweener...Doesn't have much upside.

Notes:
Finished 49-0 as a state champion super-heavyweight wrestler as a junior...Was ranked as the #1 high school wrestler in the nation...Gatorade Player of the Year in Minnesota..Played defensive tackle for the first 3 years of his college career and moved outside to end as a senior when the Irish transitioned to a 3-4...Notched an amazing 112 tackles as a senior, which matched the total of his three previous years combined...Could project to either tackle or end at the next level depending on the scheme...Doesn't have all the physical tools you look for but his intangibles are top-rate...The type who will never be a star and projects as more of a backup in the NFL but could play in the league for a long time and coaches will adore him.
Career Statistics
Year GP TKL TFL SACK
2003 DNP - - -
2004 12 17 2.0 1.0
2005 12 33 3.0 1.5
2006 13 62 9.5 3.5
2007 12 112 8.0 4.0
Totals 49 224 22.5 10.0

Seems like, while I'm getting too caught up in Triangle numbers, other people are seeing only what they want to see.

This report contradicts itself, it actually supports both of our views......and judging from this scouting report, it sounds like Laws would make a hell of a back up, not a starter......

Simple Jaded
03-17-2008, 01:30 AM
College production means next to nothing, I'm not taking a player in the 2nd round based solely off what he did in college, he's drafted by what he can do on the pro level.

From the things I've been reading, it doesn't sound like his production will translate into the pro's......hustle alone won't be enough. So, much like Elvis Dumervil, he'll have to prove it on the pro level first.

It may not please his fans, but that's the way it goes. If you draft Laws higher than the 4th round, you're over-drafting him, imo......

WARHORSE
03-17-2008, 01:37 AM
Getting back to Robertson, I still would love to get him for a fourth or fifth, or both, and then give him an incentive laden deal with protection in the contract for specific injury concerning his knees.

To get him, then maybe trade down in the first, and pick up an OT, a RB and a LB or another DL through the first three picks would be tremendous. A safety can be had later, not to mention LB.

As far as LBers go though, I want someone who brings the wood, period.
Not saying a dumb guy who hurls his body at everything with abandon, but Im saying I dont want the 'SURE TACKLING' guy, without him having the ability to bring the house down. The LBers and safeties rule the defense with vigor, enthusiasm, and pump, most of it coming from huge hits.

I'll pass on Connors and Rivers, I think right now Im for Lofton or Moses later rather than Connors or Rivers sooner.

fcspikeit
03-17-2008, 01:43 AM
Seems like, while I'm getting too caught up in Triangle numbers, other people are seeing only what they want to see.

This report contradicts itself, it actually supports both of our views......

I agree and thought the same thing... But please, if you can find a prospect who don't come with as many con's I'm more then interested in him...

Some times I wonder if the guys that do these scouting reports don't just randomly choose from a list of comments. You always hear about "upside" most the time all that means is that the player has a "chance" to be good..

If anyone could get it right every time, they would be a rich man. It seems we always take chances on guys who for what ever reason Shanahan believes has the chance to be good and a real value at the pick position.. IMO it's getting a little old. How about we just pick someone who is a football player? A hard worker who has proven they have good work ethic. Someone who will never be labeled a quitter.

How many guys came on strong at the end of the year because they where trying to improve their draft stock? All that says is that they have the chance to be really dominate if they choose to be. That's BS! Do we want a guy who needs extra motivation to work hard? Shouldn't the difference between winning and losing be enough?

If you look at the draft wish list in my sig, They are all guys who I believe are hard workers. They may not be the best at their position, they may not have the most "upside" But they all have proven to be hard workers. I truly don't believe they can bust.. I believe they will do what ever is asked of them to help their team win the game. Even if its just playing special teams. I don't want anymore me players! The whole is truly better then the sum..

We Broncos fans have learned that no 1 player can be good enough to win the game by themselves, I want players that understand this..

turftoad
03-17-2008, 11:32 AM
College production means next to nothing, I'm not taking a player in the 2nd round based solely off what he did in college, he's drafted by what he can do on the pro level.
From the things I've been reading, it doesn't sound like his production will translate into the pro's......hustle alone won't be enough. So, much like Elvis Dumervil, he'll have to prove it on the pro level first.
It may not please his fans, but that's the way it goes. If you draft Laws higher than the 4th round, you're over-drafting him, imo......

Drafted by what he can do at the pro level?? No one know how any of these guys will do at the pro level.They haven't played a snap yet.

All the guys being drafted have to prove themselves.

4th round ? All the experts have him going in the second. He may slide, I doubt it.

None of these guys have done a thing yet. They ALL have to prove themselves. The draft is a crap shoot.

turftoad
03-17-2008, 12:05 PM
Broncos | Team still interested in Robertson
Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:26:11 -0700

Updating a previous report, Tom Rock, of Newsday, reports the Denver Broncos remain interested in acquiring New York Jets DT Dewayne Robertson despite his knee issues, according to a source. Apparently the two teams have been working on a deal that would send Robertson and a 2008 fourth-round draft choice to the Broncos, while the Jets would receive a 2008 fourth-round draft choice and a conditional draft choice that would likely be linked to playing time and performance.