PDA

View Full Version : No signs of progress between Broncos, Elvis Dumervil



Pages : [1] 2

broncofaninfla
06-08-2010, 09:01 AM
No signs of progress between Broncos, Elvis Dumervil (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/08/no-signs-of-progress-between-broncos-elvis-dumervil/)

Posted by Mike Florio on June 8, 2010 7:08 AM ET
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/assets_c/2010/05/NFL_dumervil2_250-thumb-250x185-11469.jpg (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/NFL_dumervil2_250.jpg)Given that the Denver Broncos reached a long-term deal recently with guard Chris Kuper (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=3966), some have wondered whether the team will soon work out a new contract with linebacker Elvis Dumervil (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=3941), the 2010 NFL sack leader.

Based on coach Josh McDaniels' comments from Monday, it doesn't sound like anything is coming soon.

"[W]e'll be in communication with [agent] Gary [Wichard] and keep working towards what we're all [striving towards]," McDaniels. "It's hard to gauge [the status]. You have conversations with him and sometimes they feel better than others, but ultimately nobody really cares until it gets done. When it gets done, it progresses really fast and everybody is content with the result and when it's not done, while you're working on it, everybody can say what they want. We're going to continue to work. We know what we want and we know what they want and we're trying to make it happen."

Dumervil has reported for offseason workouts without signing his one-year, $3.17 million tender. Next Tuesday, the team could drop the offer to 110 percent of his 2009 base salary in the amount of $540,980 (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/player/elvis-dumervil/401593).

Lonestar
06-08-2010, 09:09 AM
Let's hope Doom signs the tender would hate to see him lose 2.5 or so mil to try and prove a point.

That would be stupid of his agent in not getting that much done.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

LTC Pain
06-08-2010, 09:32 AM
Florio is reaching on this one to create a buzz. I don't get the same conclusion at all when I read McDaniel's reaction to the question. It's a pretty benign response by Coach McDaniels. A reader could just as easily think negotiations were on track. Who knows? Not Florio that's for sure.

T.K.O.
06-08-2010, 09:38 AM
Florio is reaching on this one to create a buzz. I don't get the same conclusion at all when I read McDaniel's reaction to the question. It's a pretty benign response by Coach McDaniels. A reader could just as easily think negotiations were on track. Who knows? Not Florio that's for sure.

and even moreso when listening to the presser.all he said was both sides want to get a deal done and they are working on it.
if there was a real story here it would be that the broncos said something like "were waiting for him to sign his tender" etc...
this is no news:coffee:

Elevation inc
06-08-2010, 11:15 AM
exactly sign your tender doom..broncos hold the cards here period....dont want this to drag out...get your 3.1 mil.....guarenteed you for this year and you will have a new extension worked out for the next six years......

TimTebow15MVP
06-08-2010, 11:20 AM
i guess that big greeting they gave each othedr yesterday before practice was a bad sign also

Lonestar
06-08-2010, 12:05 PM
What greeting was that?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
06-08-2010, 01:26 PM
Let's hope that front office isn't trying low ball him. It's suppose to be a two way street that's why it's called negotiations.

nevcraw
06-08-2010, 02:50 PM
Make it a clean sweep ---
Doom is just another Me 1st malcontent from 06 trying to get his... hurry up & show him the door - Ayers is ready..
















(sarcasm button - heavily depressed)

Tned-Mobile
06-08-2010, 04:01 PM
If he signs the tender, then it pretty much rules out an extension until next off season. So, the Broncos have to decide if he deserves a new contract like McDaniels said, or if they want to use their leverage to force him to play underpaid and possibly lose the chance to sign him longterm.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
06-08-2010, 06:21 PM
If he signs the tender, then it pretty much rules out an extension until next off season. So, the Broncos have to decide if he deserves a new contract like McDaniels said, or if they want to use their leverage to force him to play underpaid and possibly lose the chance to sign him longterm.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

i'm hoping they pay him, but betting they don't. . . .

jhildebrand
06-08-2010, 09:32 PM
The Broncos have always taken care of their premiere players even when some might have had some strikes against them. That is how they became one of the classiest teams in the league.

Part of Shanahan's downfall, the biggest IMHO, is his non chalant attitude when Bertrand Berry and Reggie Hayward were due. The team felt like they could be easily replaced with players and not have to take the cap hit.

Dumervil is the first player since Berry and Hayward worth a damn and the Broncos are acting as though they haven't learned their lesson!

With Marshall they could sell the "checkered" past and off season problems. However, Dumervil has been nothing but class and an asset to the organization. What is the issue with getting him paid :confused: There shouldn't be any!

I guess, for me, I walk away with the idea that: one, other FA's are paying attention including our own players; two, this is par for the course with the "NE way" look at how Wilfork was treated, Seymour, Brown, McGinest, Brady currently,etc...


i'm hoping they pay him, but betting they don't. . . .^^Says it best!

Lonestar
06-08-2010, 09:43 PM
If he signs the tender, then it pretty much rules out an extension until next off season. So, the Broncos have to decide if he deserves a new contract like McDaniels said, or if they want to use their leverage to force him to play underpaid and possibly lose the chance to sign him longterm.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Did I miss something? they would franchise him as worst case scenario.

We all know that the franchise tag is never going to be given up by the owners, and since it only affects 1 possible two players a season there will be little support from those that would never be franchised if it came down to a "breaking point" for a strike.

jhildebrand
06-08-2010, 10:03 PM
Did I miss something? they would franchise him as worst case scenario.

We all know that the franchise tag is never going to be given up by the owners, and since it only affects 1 possible two players a season there will be little support from those that would never be franchised if it came down to a "breaking point" for a strike.

The franchise and transition tags were never used as promised by owners. It will most likely be back but in a much revised format.

Besides, whats it say that the Broncos are relying on the FT? It is just poor taste. Again, it smacks of the NE way i.e. Brown, Brady, McGinest, Seymour, Wilfork, etc... It will only serve to hurt the team in the long run, IMO

Tned
06-09-2010, 07:02 AM
Did I miss something? they would franchise him as worst case scenario.

We all know that the franchise tag is never going to be given up by the owners, and since it only affects 1 possible two players a season there will be little support from those that would never be franchised if it came down to a "breaking point" for a strike.

Yea, you missed something.

I said they could use their leverage to "force" him to play with an underpaid contract, but that might cost them a chance to sign him long term. After this year, or possibly next (depending on what happens with the CBA) they would likely be able to franchise him, which again would damage their chances of signing him to a long term contract.

Tned
06-09-2010, 07:06 AM
For those that don't know about the 30% rule in the current CBA (only came into play with this uncapped year), it says that a player's salary can only increase by 30% a year when doing renegotiations or extensions.

So, if Dumervil signs his tender, then the Broncos and Doom try and don't a long term deal a month later, then it will be tied to that tender and his salary in year one of the extension can only be 30% above the tender he signed, and then each year of the extension it can go up another 30%.

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:04 AM
Yea, you missed something.

I said they could use their leverage to "force" him to play with an underpaid contract, but that might cost them a chance to sign him long term. After this year, or possibly next (depending on what happens with the CBA) they would likely be able to franchise him, which again would damage their chances of signing him to a long term contract.

Yes I saw that and understood the ramifications.

They just may not be ready to "sell the farm" in signing him him to a huge guaranteed contract.

While we can argue his value as a Pass rusher ONLY. That other teams will gladly pay for that talent.

Josh wants verstile players and will pay for them.

If it were me I'd agree to allow them to look for a trade to another team once he signs a tender offer IF he feels that he is worth more.

I'd guess that since he did not get any nibbles as a highest tendered RFA that more or less told everyone his value. That no one was willing to make the offer he wants.

As I have always said I'll pay the guy based on an incentive based contract once he has proved he can do something more than just pass rush from the down position.

Pay him the money he wants when he develops into a true OLB.

Y'all seem to forget this is a business and while he is popular in DEN no one outside of DEN cared enough to pay for him for his ONE talent.

If his agent can work a trade that is benifical to everyone great if not he needs to be content to work for a measly 3+million this year with a 30% raise there after.

If anyone thinks he is goes to lead the NFL in sacks each year then let him earn it incentive wise. Sooner or later the other OCs will take him out of the game.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:12 AM
The franchise and transition tags were never used as promised by owners. It will most likely be back but in a much revised format.

Besides, whats it say that the Broncos are relying on the FT? It is just poor taste. Again, it smacks of the NE way i.e. Brown, Brady, McGinest, Seymour, Wilfork, etc... It will only serve to hurt the team in the long run, IMO

They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
06-09-2010, 09:19 AM
Let's hope that front office isn't trying low ball him. It's suppose to be a two way street that's why it's negotiations.

Definitely.

Northman
06-09-2010, 09:23 AM
The franchise and transition tags were never used as promised by owners. It will most likely be back but in a much revised format.

Besides, whats it say that the Broncos are relying on the FT? It is just poor taste. Again, it smacks of the NE way i.e. Brown, Brady, McGinest, Seymour, Wilfork, etc... It will only serve to hurt the team in the long run, IMO

Unfortuantely, when your that arrogant in thinking your own shit dont stink than what do you expect? :lol:

honz
06-09-2010, 09:46 AM
Lots of hyperbole in this thread.

arapaho2
06-09-2010, 10:53 AM
They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums



like rookie wrs with one route in their arsenal?

as for emulating....would that be the cheating by filming other teams signals?

turftoad
06-09-2010, 11:05 AM
They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

First of all SCREW THE NE PATRIOTS... We are the DENVER BRONCOS, no one else.

Secondly, (and I've posted this before) as much as us old dogs would like to see throw back running game and defense, it's not going to happen.

The NFL has turned into a pass first, pass happy league. That said, you have to have a premier pass rusher. You have to get pressure on the QB.
Doom creates havoc and is an OC's nightmare.
Even if he is a "one trick pony" we have to keep him, have to pay him.
We don't have anyone else to put any pressure on the opposing QB.
In this pass happy NFL, you have to have a guy like that....... and, they are not easy to find. Unless..... of course...... you want to count on Ayers. :tsk:

Ravage!!!
06-09-2010, 11:54 AM
They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Yeah... like Seymour and Vrabel. Their loyalty paid off.

Just like Wilfork, who stated that he would take it as a SLAP IN THE FACE if he was given the franchise tag and not work out a long term deal. So how is that TEAM first and not wanting money? They ALLLL want money and to be paid fair-market price in comparison to their peers around the league. No matter what team you play for.

Tell me again how the NE patriots are different than anyone else :coffee:

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 12:07 PM
They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


And how the hell do you no it's not the Broncos trying low ball him.

You make a lot assumptions that you have no way back.

I don't give a damn about the New England Patriots. Their model isn't freakass perfect. If you like their model so much then pay attenton to them. Anyone that thinks it's all about the model and that players don't matter is fooling theirself.

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 12:16 PM
If he signs the tender, then it pretty much rules out an extension until next off season. So, the Broncos have to decide if he deserves a new contract like McDaniels said, or if they want to use their leverage to force him to play underpaid and possibly lose the chance to sign him longterm.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

no it doesnt thats how kuper got his he signed his tender and they worked a extension on top of it....

the 30% rule is whats killing doom in the long run....he just needs to sign his tender and they need to do a six year extension giving him a huge pay increase, thats about the only way a deal gets done before the season starts....even marshall didnt get a new deal he got a extension on the tender he signed....

doom signs the tender its his best chance at a good pay increase aint a chance he gets Ware money unless he waits out the 2010 season in which case he will have alienated his team...and coach

he deserves more money, but not ware money period!!!!! he would make 3.1 mil next year and it could raise 30% every year after that....

the broncos arent just gonna throw out a 6 year 60 million contract right now....thats bad buisness period, its why otehr teams aren't doing crazy deals like that, they are extending players on there tenders they sign....the 2011 unknowns are screwing players its life get over it.....

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 12:20 PM
NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.



Troy Brown disagrees

arapaho2
06-09-2010, 12:21 PM
Yeah... like Seymour and Vrabel. Their loyalty paid off.

Just like Wilfork, who stated that he would take it as a SLAP IN THE FACE if he was given the franchise tag and not work out a long term deal. So how is that TEAM first and not wanting money? They ALLLL want money and to be paid fair-market price in comparison to their peers around the league. No matter what team you play for.

Tell me again how the NE patriots are different than anyone else :coffee:

i think its because he says they are, rather than they actually are???

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 12:27 PM
Troy Brown disagrees

And I really don't thing Wilfork feels that the Patriots putting the franchise tag on him was them being fair. Of course we all know that Wilfork isn't one of the best nose tackles in the game. :rolleyes:

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 12:30 PM
And I really don't thing Wilfork feels that the Patriots putting the franchise tag on him was them being fair. Of course we all know that Wilfork isn't one of the best nose tackles in the game. :rolleyes:

Richard Seymour loves the Patriots. :rolleyes: He was treated fairly.

Moss is beginning to piss and moan.

Shoot, even the golden boy himself Tom Brady is taking issues with the Pats and their contract ways right now.

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 12:32 PM
I would rather the team simply point to labor uncertainty regarding Dumervil's contract than continue treating the fanbase like mushrooms.

They can't sell off the field problems, they cant sell personality problems. It is pathetic really. I don't care the guy is a "one trick" pony. Even with double teams Dumervil still put up numbers. The sad thing is with double teams and chips, people like Ayers and others couldn't get sacks-that should be the problem!

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 12:37 PM
Richard Seymour loves the Patriots. :rolleyes: He was treated fairly.

Moss is beginning to piss and moan.

Shoot, even the golden boy himself Tom Brady is taking issues with the Pats and their contract ways right now.

No way!!!! Tom Brady is taking issue with Patriots about the negotiation practices? What a pariah. What they need to do is shit can him because we all know Hall of Fame (to be) quarterbacks are a dime a dozen. :coffee:

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 12:58 PM
No way!!!! Tom Brady is taking issue with Patriots about the negotiation practices? What a pariah. What they need to do is shit can him because we all know Hall of Fame (to be) quarterbacks are a dime a dozen. :coffee:

Tom Brady is ridiculous! He needs to realize the concept of team! Forget the SB trophies that showed up as soon as he started. Run his ass out of town. Trade him to his hometown team!

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 01:01 PM
doom is a RFA period yes he deserves more money so do many other RFA's....doom would make 3.1 mil next year if he signs his tender, then we can easily do a extension on that benefitting both doom and the broncos....my hunch is dooms agent is the one in the way not denver....doom's agent knows he can get a huge payday right before FA next year...so the agent is playing hard ball not MCD, doom or the broncos FO....dooms best bet for huge money is next year, his best bet to benefit himself for this year and denver is to sign his tender and work out a extension similar to what marshall did in miami....marshall is only playing for 3.1 million this year, why cant doom.....

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 01:03 PM
Tom Brady is ridiculous! He needs to realize the concept of team! Forget the SB trophies that showed up as soon as he started. Run his ass out of town. Trade him to his hometown team!

this thread is derailing to quickly:laugh:.....lets leave the wack ass patriots out of a broncos discussion, just becasue we have a former coach and players from there doesnt mean we need to use the patriots in every topic on this forum good and bad.....

Tned
06-09-2010, 01:24 PM
no it doesnt thats how kuper got his he signed his tender and they worked a extension on top of it....

the 30% rule is whats killing doom in the long run....he just needs to sign his tender and they need to do a six year extension giving him a huge pay increase, thats about the only way a deal gets done before the season starts....even marshall didnt get a new deal he got a extension on the tender he signed....

doom signs the tender its his best chance at a good pay increase aint a chance he gets Ware money unless he waits out the 2010 season in which case he will have alienated his team...and coach

he deserves more money, but not ware money period!!!!! he would make 3.1 mil next year and it could raise 30% every year after that....

the broncos arent just gonna throw out a 6 year 60 million contract right now....thats bad buisness period, its why otehr teams aren't doing crazy deals like that, they are extending players on there tenders they sign....the 2011 unknowns are screwing players its life get over it.....

Kuper and Dumervil aren't in the same situation. Kuper is a serviceable guard that was never going to get big money. Therefore, the 30% rule wasn't a major factor. Dumervil's contract will be fore more than just 30% more than his high tender, therefore the Broncos will have to replace the value with more signing bonus money (greater risk for the Broncos) or not be able to sign him to an extension.

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 01:26 PM
Kuper and Dumervil aren't in the same situation. Kuper is a serviceable guard that was never going to get big money. Therefore, the 30% rule wasn't a major factor. Dumervil's contract will be fore more than just 30% more than his high tender, therefore the Broncos will have to replace the value with more signing bonus money (greater risk for the Broncos) or not be able to sign him to an extension.

fine i will use marshall as a example he signed his tender will make 3.1 million this year plus a guarentee bonus and then they threw money at him yearly in the form of extension, the same should be done for doom, but i bet you its his agent preventing that not the broncos...

honz
06-09-2010, 01:27 PM
You guys realize it's still early June, right? They are still working on coming to an agreement on Doom's extension. Everybody calm down.

dogfish
06-09-2010, 01:43 PM
They are saying that one man is not a TEAM.

NE has always been fair to its TEAM players.

IMO it sends the message you will be paid a fair wage for being a multi talented TEAM player.

That any player that thinks them bigger than the TEAM will be allowed to go that they will not mortgage the franchise for one trick prima donnas.

NE pays for loyality and skills but they do not overpay.

They have been a damned fine model to emulate IMO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TEAM!!

TEAM TEAM TEAM!!!

111!!!111!!!!!111!!!!!



there. . . do you feel better now?

:huh:

Tned
06-09-2010, 01:56 PM
fine i will use marshall as a example he signed his tender will make 3.1 million this year plus a guarentee bonus and then they threw money at him yearly in the form of extension, the same should be done for doom, but i bet you its his agent preventing that not the broncos...

It's possible that there is an exception to the 30% rule when a player is traded. Marshall will have a base salary of $6.5 million 2011, which is a lot more than a 30% increase from the 2010 tender offer of $2.5 million he accepted.

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 01:58 PM
just becasue we have a former coach and players from there doesnt mean we need to use the patriots in every topic on this forum good and bad.....

Well plenty continue to bring up Shanny, Cutler, and the past at every point possible but I digress.

I rarely bring up the "NE Way" yet in this instance it is absolutely appropriate to do so.

Finally, when the coach references the NE Way as often as he does, which is a lot, why shouldn't I or why should it be an issue? :confused: Its what McDaniels knows and has no problem in admitting he is duplicating that system here as he sees it.

Tned
06-09-2010, 02:01 PM
Well plenty continue to bring up Shanny, Cutler, and the past at every point possible but I digress.

I rarely bring up the "NE Way" yet in this instance it is absolutely appropriate to do so.

Finally, when the coach references the NE Way as often as he does, which is a lot, why shouldn't I or why should it be an issue? :confused: Its what McDaniels knows and has no problem in admitting he is duplicating that system here as he sees it.

Plus, most of his most ardent supporters on BF constantly refer to the success in NE as 'proof' that McDaniels must know what he's doing in Denver.

honz
06-09-2010, 02:03 PM
Plus, most of his most ardent supporters on BF constantly refer to the success in NE as 'proof' that McDaniels must know what he's doing in Denver.
I don't believe that is true. I can only think of a couple of posters that say stuff like that.

Tned
06-09-2010, 02:07 PM
I don't believe that is true. I can only think of a couple of posters that say stuff like that.

Even in this thread, one of McDaniels biggest groupies was touting the "NE way" as justification for low balling Doom. It happens quite frequently.

honz
06-09-2010, 03:07 PM
Even in this thread, one of McDaniels biggest groupies was touting the "NE way" as justification for low balling Doom. It happens quite frequently.
Yes, and that is one of the 2 or 3 posters I am talking about.

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 03:47 PM
Looks like none of us can wait for the season to get under way :lol:

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 04:06 PM
First of all SCREW THE NE PATRIOTS... We are the DENVER BRONCOS, no one else.

Secondly, (and I've posted this before) as much as us old dogs would like to see throw back running game and defense, it's not going to happen.

The NFL has turned into a pass first, pass happy league. That said, you have to have a premier pass rusher. You have to get pressure on the QB.
Doom creates havoc and is an OC's nightmare.
Even if he is a "one trick pony" we have to keep him, have to pay him.
We don't have anyone else to put any pressure on the opposing QB.
In this pass happy NFL, you have to have a guy like that....... and, they are not easy to find. Unless..... of course...... you want to count on Ayers. :tsk:


I guess we will see how much they want a one trick pony will we not.

I suspect he will be forced to sign the tender and attempts will be made to trade him off for value and that he mat receive the contract so many of you believe he deserves

That or he is trapped in the 30% rule that Tned has commented on.

There seems to be an impasse he is screwed by the system and it is not the Broncos fault like so many here believe.

I for one would not pay the guy the ware money it "seems" everyone thinks he deserves it is irresponsible, to do for a one dimensional player regardless of what is going on in the NFL.

Give the guy 30 mil guaranteed, would never happen with my check book, I'd rather have 2-4 other players that can get after the QB for 5-8 sacks a year. That my friend will create more havoc if they do not know where it is coming from.

FWIW last year
NE was ranked 23 in sacks yet #5 in scoring defense,
DEN 10 in sacks and T12 in scoring ,
NYJ T18 and #1
DAL 7 and 2
BAL T18 and 3
MIN 10 and 1
PIT 2 and T12
MIA T3 and 25
PHL T3 and 19

So while it may make some sense to some the correlation of sacks to winning games or not allowing team to score on you dose not seem to be as big as some would want you to believe.

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 04:13 PM
no it doesnt thats how kuper got his he signed his tender and they worked a extension on top of it....

the 30% rule is whats killing doom in the long run....he just needs to sign his tender and they need to do a six year extension giving him a huge pay increase, thats about the only way a deal gets done before the season starts....even marshall didnt get a new deal he got a extension on the tender he signed....

doom signs the tender its his best chance at a good pay increase aint a chance he gets Ware money unless he waits out the 2010 season in which case he will have alienated his team...and coach

he deserves more money, but not ware money period!!!!! he would make 3.1 mil next year and it could raise 30% every year after that....

the broncos arent just gonna throw out a 6 year 60 million contract right now....thats bad buisness period, its why otehr teams aren't doing crazy deals like that, they are extending players on there tenders they sign....the 2011 unknowns are screwing players its life get over it.....

It is funny when someone is logical about doing business.

It is always Pat's of Joshes fault when we do not sign a fan favorite No one is denying he needs a raise , it is the level of the raise that seems to be in contention.

To me a 6 fold raise is a hell of a raise for a pigmy OLB that can only rush the passer with his hand on the ground. He is good at it but SOONER than later the OC are going figure out a way to slow him down.

We do not or at least I don not want to put all of our eggs in ONE basket a small one at that. what happens in the second game when they cut block him and his career is over, are the spend it all on DOom fans going to then understand the logic for incentive based contracts.

dogfish
06-09-2010, 04:22 PM
We do not or at least I don not want to put all of our eggs in ONE basket a small one at that. what happens in the second game when they cut block him and his career is over, are the spend it all on DOom fans going to then understand the logic for incentive based contracts.

because it's better to not have any eggs. . .


shit. . .

without doom, we don't even have a basket, let alone anything to put in it. . .

it's great to talk about "I'd rather have 2-4 other players that can get after the QB for 5-8 sacks a year."

except. . . have you noticed? we don't even have ONE other player who can get 5-8 sacks per year, let alone FOUR. . . .

:lol::lol:


but hey, i guess it's tremendously easy to build an incredible team when you get to do it in FANTASYLAND instead of the real world. . . .

Mike
06-09-2010, 04:28 PM
Doom is the kind of player that you want to reward. He is by all reports a good locker-room presence and soft-spoken player. He has performed on the field, has stayed out of trouble off the field, and has handled his current contract situation with class and professionally. I will be disappointed with the team and lose a lot of respect for the FO if they don't pay the guy.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 04:33 PM
Looks like none of us can wait for the season to get under way :lol:

No shit. :laugh:

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 04:43 PM
To me a 6 fold raise is a hell of a raise for a pigmy OLB that can only rush the passer with his hand on the ground. He is good at it but SOONER than later the OC are going figure out a way to slow him down.

Yeah they'll figure out how to slow him down when they can figure out how to beat natural leverage. I'm sure there are hundreds of offensive tackles that stand only six feet tall. :rolleyes:

Btw did you go around calling Tom Jackson a pigmy OLB?

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 04:45 PM
Doom is the kind of player that you want to reward. He is by all reports a good locker-room presence and soft-spoken player. He has performed on the field, has stayed out of trouble off the field, and has handled his current contract situation with class and professionally. I will be disappointed with the team and lose a lot of respect for the FO if they don't pay the guy.

I bet something is going to get done it will be just before the start of camp.

Ravage!!!
06-09-2010, 04:45 PM
It is funny when someone is logical about doing business.

It is always Pat's of Joshes fault when we do not sign a fan favorite No one is denying he needs a raise , it is the level of the raise that seems to be in contention.

To me a 6 fold raise is a hell of a raise for a pigmy OLB that can only rush the passer with his hand on the ground. He is good at it but SOONER than later the OC are going figure out a way to slow him down.

We do not or at least I don not want to put all of our eggs in ONE basket a small one at that. what happens in the second game when they cut block him and his career is over, are the spend it all on DOom fans going to then understand the logic for incentive based contracts.


Players don't have "incentive based" contracts for the EXACT example you just gave. The owners would LOVE if players simply and only played for "incentive" based contracts, that way the owners NEVER have to take any risk and the players have to take it all. Then, since the NFL contracts aren't guaranteed, they can just cut the player at any time and screw the players that much more.

D1g1tal j1m
06-09-2010, 04:45 PM
He will get paid based on what the currently system allows for. We shouldn't pay him too much more than what is required, for that will set a dangerous precedent going forward with our FA's.

dogfish
06-09-2010, 04:54 PM
He will get paid based on what the currently system allows for. We shouldn't pay him too much more than what is required, for that will set a dangerous precedent going forward with our FA's.

what?

"required?"

what are you talking about?


we aren't "required" to pay him anything. . .

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 04:56 PM
Players don't have "incentive based" contracts for the EXACT example you just gave. The owners would LOVE if players simply and only played for "incentive" based contracts, that way the owners NEVER have to take any risk and the players have to take it all. Then, since the NFL contracts aren't guaranteed, they can just cut the player at any time and screw the players that much more.

Every once in awhile you get a guy whose been a great player and he'll sign an incentive based contract but that's usually a guy like Neil Smith who is in the twilight of his career and wants to win a championship so bad that they are will to take less than what fair market value is.

Dumervil is just now entering the prime of his career with one sack title under his belt. A real logical person knows that it would be a dumb ass idea to give an incentive based contract to player who is coming into his own as great pass rusher. If Denver is stupid enough to take this kind approach they will have tough time keeping talented players. You might as well rename the team the Arizona Cardinals I would also have seriously question the competence of the front office. :coffee:

Ravage!!!
06-09-2010, 05:01 PM
He will get paid based on what the currently system allows for. We shouldn't pay him too much more than what is required, for that will set a dangerous precedent going forward with our FA's.

what dangerous precedent is that? If you show you perform on the field, you get paid?

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:16 PM
because it's better to not have any eggs. . .


shit. . .

without doom, we don't even have a basket, let alone anything to put in it. . .

it's great to talk about "I'd rather have 2-4 other players that can get after the QB for 5-8 sacks a year."

except. . . have you noticed? we don't even have ONE other player who can get 5-8 sacks per year, let alone FOUR. . . .

:lol::lol:


but hey, i guess it's tremendously easy to build an incredible team when you get to do it in FANTASYLAND instead of the real world. . . .

We had two back up players have 4 or more sacks. Reid had 4 and Holliday had 5. However NO other starter had more than 3.5.

Northman
06-09-2010, 05:17 PM
Doom is the kind of player that you want to reward. He is by all reports a good locker-room presence and soft-spoken player. He has performed on the field, has stayed out of trouble off the field, and has handled his current contract situation with class and professionally. I will be disappointed with the team and lose a lot of respect for the FO if they don't pay the guy.

Best post of the thread.

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 05:18 PM
because it's better to not have any eggs. . .


shit. . .

without doom, we don't even have a basket, let alone anything to put in it. . .

it's great to talk about "I'd rather have 2-4 other players that can get after the QB for 5-8 sacks a year."

except. . . have you noticed? we don't even have ONE other player who can get 5-8 sacks per year, let alone FOUR. . . .

:lol::lol:


but hey, i guess it's tremendously easy to build an incredible team when you get to do it in FANTASYLAND instead of the real world. . . .

Look I know you do not understand what I am saying but we have a lot of talent on the team, while he got a lot of sacks he is worthless as a tit on a boar fro anthyhing else. He is tied #100 for LB as a tackler with 50 other OLB ahead of him in tackles
for Gods sake HAggan was #68 even rookie Orakapo had more tackles
Woodyard used in limited time had 44.

If Josh wants to sell the farm for him I'll deal with it.

But I think he understands that Doom is a great guy and a locker room positive but there is little if anything he can do other than sign him to an incentive laden deal, have him sign the tender and allow him to work out a mutually agreeable trade. Or hope that the CBA is done and that they can give him a better deal than the 30% increase that seems to be the max they can do IN DEN.

Northman
06-09-2010, 05:26 PM
DeMarcus Ware 45 tackles, 11 sacks, 5 FF, and 6 PD (15 games)

Orakpo had 50 tackles, 11 sacks and 1 FF (16 games)

Dumervil had 41 tackles, 17 sacks and 4 FF and 3 PD (14 games)

Haggan had 45 tackles, 1 sack, and 3 FF, and 1 PD (16 games)

Now can someone show me where the huge disparity is here with the examples that were just given for 2009? Anyone?

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:30 PM
There is no proof what so ever that Dumervil is asking for a break the bank deal.

Also I'm not broken hearted about being on someone's ignore list. Relationships are a two way street.

Northman
06-09-2010, 05:31 PM
Oh, and Doom did that playing in less games than all of them.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:39 PM
Oh, and Doom did that playing in less games than all of them.

Mario Williams was the number one overall pick in the same draft that we got Dumervil and he (Dumervil) still has more sack 39.5 to 43 even though he started less games that Williams.

jrelway
06-09-2010, 05:40 PM
This team has been searching for a pass rush specialist now for how many years? And some of you are saying not to over pay for a one trick pony? **** that, he led the league in sacks last year. He has no character issues, and hasnt run his mouth too much about his contract. Pay the mofo and let him ball.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:42 PM
This team has been searching for a pass rush specialist now for how many years? And some of you are saying not to over pay for a one trick pony? **** that, he led the league in sacks last year. He has no character issues, and hasnt run his mouth too much about his contract. Pay the mofo and let him ball.

The thing is his other stats are not dramatically less than the other top pass rushers in the freakin League and that's with only ONE year in a new system and a new position.

Northman
06-09-2010, 05:45 PM
The thing is his other stats are not dramatically less than the other top pass rushers in the freakin League and that's with only ONE year in a new system and a new position.

Thats the problem. A lot of yo-yo's on this board dont even take in consideration all the inconsistency on the defensive side of the ball and then when the guy finally gets placed in the right spot all of a sudden he's a one trick pony compared to guys who have been in the same system for years. Got to love it. :lol:

jrelway
06-09-2010, 05:48 PM
Thats the problem. A lot of yo-yo's on this board dont even take in consideration all the inconsistency on the defensive side of the ball and then when the guy finally gets placed in the right spot all of a sudden he's a one trick pony compared to guys who have been in the same system for years. Got to love it. :lol:

and hes young. its not like we're breaking the bank for any of our other players.

Tned
06-09-2010, 06:34 PM
We do not or at least I don not want to put all of our eggs in ONE basket a small one at that. what happens in the second game when they cut block him and his career is over, are the spend it all on DOom fans going to then understand the logic for incentive based contracts.

You do realize that outsde of your posts and the Madden-like fantasy football world, that no NFL team uses the type "incentive based contracts" that you constantly speak of. There is no high end player that is going to sign the kind of contracts you keep saying the Broncos should sign players to.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 06:44 PM
and hes young. its not like we're breaking the bank for any of our other players.

I just keep wondering where this idea that Dumervil wants the mega break the bank kind of contract comes from? I haven't seen anything that even alludes to what kind of money Dumervil is looking for. Have you?

Does anyone know if he's making less than Robert Ayers? I would assume he is considering he was a 4th round pick. I would even guess it's considerably less than what Ayers is getting.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 06:51 PM
Thats the problem. A lot of yo-yo's on this board dont even take in consideration all the inconsistency on the defensive side of the ball and then when the guy finally gets placed in the right spot all of a sudden he's a one trick pony compared to guys who have been in the same system for years. Got to love it. :lol:

They don't even consider that he's (I assuming he is.)making less than Robert Ayers who did exactly what for us last year as number one pick? I like Ayers and I'm hopeful he will develop into solid player for us but by no means did have big impact on the defense.

dogfish
06-09-2010, 07:38 PM
We had two back up players have 4 or more sacks. Reid had 4 and Holliday had 5. However NO other starter had more than 3.5.

and reid's hurt, and holliday plays for somebody else now. . . :fear:




DeMarcus Ware 45 tackles, 11 sacks, 5 FF, and 6 PD (15 games)

Orakpo had 50 tackles, 11 sacks and 1 FF (16 games)

Dumervil had 41 tackles, 17 sacks and 4 FF and 3 PD (14 games)


you clearly aren't bright enough to understand that those extra three or four tackles make all the difference. . . .

dogfish
06-09-2010, 07:39 PM
Look I know you do not understand what I am saying

no, i understand exactly what you're saying-- just because i think you're dead wrong doesn't mean i don't get it. . . .

;)

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 08:43 PM
You do realize that outsde of your posts and the Madden-like fantasy football world, that no NFL team uses the type "incentive based contracts" that you constantly speak of. There is no high end player that is going to sign the kind of contracts you keep saying the Broncos should sign players to.

So what do you suggest.

The options as I see them are.
He signs a tneder gets paid 3 mil and change.

He does not sign the tender and gets 500K and is still bronco property until the franchise tag goes away.

He signs the tender and redoes the contract with 30% escalators
Each year and incebtives that do not counts against BASE salary.

Or

He signs the tender they offer him a chance to make a trade that is good for both sides so he can. Redo his contract.

So what is it?

Waiting to hear how Y'all get him out of rock and hard place that the CBA put him in.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
06-09-2010, 08:47 PM
So what do you suggest.

The options as I see them are.
He signs a tneder gets paid 3 mil and change.

He does not sign the tender and gets 500K and is still bronco property until the franchise tag goes away.

He signs the tender and redoes the contract with 30% escalators
Each year and incebtives that do not counts against BASE salary.

Or

He signs the tender they offer him a chance to make a trade that is good for both sides so he can. Redo his contract.

So what is it?

Waiting to hear how Y'all get him out of rock and hard place that the CBA put him in.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

You left out the option of redoing his contract before he signs the tender, when there are no restrictions in terms of the contract.

dogfish
06-09-2010, 08:58 PM
You left out the option of redoing his contract before he signs the tender, when there are no restrictions in terms of the contract.

which is and always has been the correct answer. . . .


OR, he plays under the RFA tender this year and gets paid somewhere else next year if we won't do it. . .

Tned
06-09-2010, 09:00 PM
which is and always has been the correct answer. . . .


OR, he plays under the RFA tender this year and gets paid somewhere else next year if we won't do it. . .

Ya, pretty simple logic.

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:05 PM
no, i understand exactly what you're saying-- just because i think you're dead wrong doesn't mean i don't get it. . . .

;)

Then you really don't get it. :laugh:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:13 PM
You left out the option of redoing his contract before he signs the tender, when there are no restrictions in terms of the contract.

Not sure that is an option still think the 30% rules are in play.

The max he could make IIRC would then be 130% of. 5ook that is his max this year as a RFA.

The whole reason that cause was put in. To keep teams from doing that.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:16 PM
which is and always has been the correct answer. . . .


OR, he plays under the RFA tender this year and gets paid somewhere else next year if we won't do it. . .

Or he plays for 3 mil this year and is a FTag guy next year. At 8+ mil. NO guaranteed money.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
06-09-2010, 09:21 PM
Not sure that is an option still think the 30% rules are in play.

The max he could make IIRC would then be 130% of. 5ook that is his max this year as a RFA.

The whole reason that cause was put in. To keep teams from doing that.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

No, the 30% rule wouldn't apply. Free agents (including RFA's) can be signed to any contract, any amount. The 30% rule only applies to players under contract and limits extensions or renegotiations of existing contracts.

So, before signing the tender, there are no restrictions on his contract. After signing it, then there are major restrictions.

That's why, contrary to the bashing you and some others are doing of Doom, he and the Broncos are clearly working in good faith to get a contract done. Doom hasn't signed his tender, because it isn't about being selfish, it actually makes it MUCH easier for the Broncos to sign him long term.

The fact he signed a waiver and attended mini-camps shows that not signing the tender isn't a 'hold out' at this point, but instead is giving the Broncos more room to sign him to a long term deal.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 09:32 PM
and reid's hurt, and holliday plays for somebody else now. . . :fear:





you clearly aren't bright enough to understand that those extra three or four tackles make all the difference. . . .

It's like I was saying about the Ayers pick from last year he didn't come in and just tear the NFL a new one with his play. I'm hopeful that he will develop into a dependable sack specialist but that remains to be seen.

Dumervil has done everything asked of him. He deserves not to be dicked around by management (not that they are).

Lonestar
06-09-2010, 09:56 PM
No, the 30% rule wouldn't apply. Free agents (including RFA's) can be signed to any contract, any amount. The 30% rule only applies to players under contract and limits extensions or renegotiations of existing contracts.

So, before signing the tender, there are no restrictions on his contract. After signing it, then there are major restrictions.

That's why, contrary to the bashing you and some others are doing of Doom, he and the Broncos are clearly working in good faith to get a contract done. Doom hasn't signed his tender, because it isn't about being selfish, it actually makes it MUCH easier for the Broncos to sign him long term.

The fact he signed a waiver and attended mini-camps shows that not signing the tender isn't a 'hold out' at this point, but instead is giving the Broncos more room to sign him to a long term deal.


While I can't dispute this with any reliable source, I still think your wrong on the 30% rule.

I guess we will see on the 15th how this goes down.

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 11:21 PM
He will get paid based on what the currently system allows for. We shouldn't pay him too much more than what is required, for that will set a dangerous precedent going forward with our FA's.

That isn't a dangerous precedent! :lol: This team became the class of the league taking care of its own and paying its players.

The dangerous precedent is being set by not taking care of players. Players are payattention to these kinds of things. Do you think it goes unnoticed that a guy who is top 5 in sacks the last three seasons isn't getting paid? :confused: The Bengals still haven't shed the "cheap" label.

Finally, many reporters and others associated with the league insisted that Cutler and Marshall are gone for no other reason than the team didn't want to pony up. Thats hard to argue when they have had all this time to work a deal for Dumervil, especially now those guys are gone, and they are here at the deadline with no deal! Dumervil has been nothing but class the Broncos should try the same!

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 11:55 PM
That isn't a dangerous precedent! :lol: This team became the class of the league taking care of its own and paying its players.

The dangerous precedent is being set by not taking care of players. Players are payattention to these kinds of things. Do you think it goes unnoticed that a guy who is top 5 in sacks the last three seasons isn't getting paid? :confused: The Bengals still haven't shed the "cheap" label.

Finally, many reporters and others associated with the league insisted that Cutler and Marshall are gone for no other reason than the team didn't want to pony up. Thats hard to argue when they have had all this time to work a deal for Dumervil, especially now those guys are gone, and they are here at the deadline with no deal! Dumervil has been nothing but class the Broncos should try the same!

The Cardinals have had a long standing reputation of drafting good players and then letting them go because they didn't pony up.

jhildebrand
06-10-2010, 12:52 AM
The Cardinals have had a long standing reputation of drafting good players and then letting them go because they didn't pony up.

Exactly! Once a team earns that label, it can be hard to shed. I mentioned the Bengals but the Cardinals are another perfect example. You don't think that had an effect with Karlos Dansby? Of course it did. Sure they let Bolding go. I get that. He was paid and then wanted more.

But even the Cardinals paid Larry Fitzgerald. He is a class guy on and off the field like Dumervil. So what's the Broncos excuse? :confused:

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 01:03 AM
That isn't a dangerous precedent! :lol: This team became the class of the league taking care of its own and paying its players.

The dangerous precedent is being set by not taking care of players. Players are payattention to these kinds of things. Do you think it goes unnoticed that a guy who is top 5 in sacks the last three seasons isn't getting paid? :confused: The Bengals still haven't shed the "cheap" label.

Finally, many reporters and others associated with the league insisted that Cutler and Marshall are gone for no other reason than the team didn't want to pony up. Thats hard to argue when they have had all this time to work a deal for Dumervil, especially now those guys are gone, and they are here at the deadline with no deal! Dumervil has been nothing but class the Broncos should try the same!

Let's see if I have this correct.

Because nikey overpaid for nost of his FAs most of which were less than impressive.

Totoally over paid a lot of our own players like MA and TP. Yet allowed a few sack masters to leave.

We should step and overpay a sack ONLY OLB.

Give me a ******* break.

It is a business not a social club.

Your love affair with this guy is clouding the logical mind.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 07:20 AM
Exactly! Once a team earns that label, it can be hard to shed. I mentioned the Bengals but the Cardinals are another perfect example. You don't think that had an effect with Karlos Dansby? Of course it did. Sure they let Bolding go. I get that. He was paid and then wanted more.

But even the Cardinals paid Larry Fitzgerald. He is a class guy on and off the field like Dumervil. So what's the Broncos excuse? :confused:

Absolutely it has an effect. You not only lose top players that you've drafted and invested a lot of time in but then free agents get from other teams get wind of it and they start staying away.

The other things it's some people here that have mentioned mega deals. I haven't seen one word in print from Dumervil that he's looking to be paid like DeMarcus Ware.

claymore
06-10-2010, 07:34 AM
Let's see if I have this correct.

Because nikey overpaid for nost of his FAs most of which were less than impressive.

Totoally over paid a lot of our own players like MA and TP. Yet allowed a few sack masters to leave.

We should step and overpay a sack ONLY OLB.

Give me a ******* break.

It is a business not a social club.

Your love affair with this guy is clouding the logical mind.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
I think the common consensus is that your logic is clouded with McD lust/Shanny hate. So... Here is another post saying you have no room to talk. :lol:

Tned
06-10-2010, 08:06 AM
While I can't dispute this with any reliable source, I still think your wrong on the 30% rule.

I guess we will see on the 15th how this goes down.

What part do you think I am wrong on?


That the 30% rule exists at all?
That the 30% rule only applies to renegotiation/extensions?
That Dumvervil's contract doesn't fall under the 30% rule limitations until AFTER he signs he tender offer?


If you let me know where you think I am "wrong" (as it relates to this thread of course), I can spend a couple minutes on this cool new invention I recently found, "Google", and get you all the reliably sourced information you need.

Tned
06-10-2010, 08:09 AM
Let's see if I have this correct.

Because nikey overpaid for nost of his FAs most of which were less than impressive.

Totoally over paid a lot of our own players like MA and TP. Yet allowed a few sack masters to leave.

We should step and overpay a sack ONLY OLB.

Give me a ******* break.

It is a business not a social club.

Your love affair with this guy is clouding the logical mind.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

What does Nike have to do with the Broncos and their contracts? :confused:

LTC Pain
06-10-2010, 09:04 AM
Doom is excellent in one of three areas an OLB needs to be strong in. Pass rush, stopping the run and pass coverage. Doom is obviously top five in pass rushing. No argument there. But he is not in the top 20 OLBs in the other two areas. Everyone is screaming for Doom to get a payday because he can get to the QB. What about equal consideration in the other two areas where he is weak and still under development? Logically, I think all three areas should be equally considered when coming to terms on a new contract. Doom deserves a raise over his current contract but he is not a top five OLB in the NFL and shouldn't be paid like one.

tomjonesrocks
06-10-2010, 09:28 AM
Wow, the team is now threatening to cut Dumervil's pay...hadn't heard this.
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_15264797?source=rss&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

"According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season."

That should destroy the relationship between he and the team effectively...:tsk:

broncofaninfla
06-10-2010, 09:35 AM
I'm beginning to think Doom is the next Bronco that will be traded.

tomjonesrocks
06-10-2010, 09:45 AM
I'm beginning to think Doom is the next Bronco that will be traded.

Might as well trade Clady too. He's going to need max money someday...

red98
06-10-2010, 09:57 AM
What part do you think I am wrong on?


That the 30% rule exists at all?
That the 30% rule only applies to renegotiation/extensions?
That Dumvervil's contract doesn't fall under the 30% rule limitations until AFTER he signs he tender offer?


If you let me know where you think I am "wrong" (as it relates to this thread of course), I can spend a couple minutes on this cool new invention I recently found, "Google", and get you all the reliably sourced information you need.

I don't know about JR but you are correct, mostly.

The 30% rule does not apply to Doom as he is not under contract. Contracts signed in an uncapped year are also not subject to the 30% rule, so at no point in 2010 will Doom be affected by the 30% rule.

The 30% rule:

"No NFL Player Contract entered into in a Capped Year and extending into the Final League Year or beyond may provide for an annual increase in Salary, excluding any amount attributable to a signing bonus ... of more than 30% of the Salary provided for in the Final Capped Year, per year, either in the Final League Year or in any subsequent League Year covered by the Player Contract."

Doom is looking to be one of the top 5 highest paid LBs according to the Denver Post article that Florio cribbed from, for those who were wondering.

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 10:14 AM
What does Nike have to do with the Broncos and their contracts? :confused:

I noticed that mikey (n being next to the M on a very small keyboard) was miss spelled after I posted.
In the mobile mode I was unable to edit it as on this blackberry I am unable to see anything more that the first line in edit mode.

I think everyone knows mikey is a name I use all the time, including yourself.

But good try.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
06-10-2010, 10:24 AM
Wow, the team is now threatening to cut Dumervil's pay...hadn't heard this.
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_15264797?source=rss&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

"According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season."

That should destroy the relationship between he and the team effectively...:tsk:


:lol:

Wow, so if you are a team player and one of the best players on the team you dont get a new contract. If you arent a team player, cause problems in the lockerroom you dont get a new contract. Way to go McD! This coach is a ******* joke.

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 10:32 AM
I don't know about JR but you are correct, mostly.

The 30% rule does not apply to Doom as he is not under contract. Contracts signed in an uncapped year are also not subject to the 30% rule, so at no point in 2010 will Doom be affected by the 30% rule.

The 30% rule:

"No NFL Player Contract entered into in a Capped Year and extending into the Final League Year or beyond may provide for an annual increase in Salary, excluding any amount attributable to a signing bonus ... of more than 30% of the Salary provided for in the Final Capped Year, per year, either in the Final League Year or in any subsequent League Year covered by the Player Contract."

Doom is looking to be one of the top 5 highest paid LBs according to the Denver Post article that Florio cribbed from, for those who were wondering.

Thanks for the info. Especially the last part by the report of florio. Stating the OBVIOUS that he is looking for top 5 money.

That said I think you ar misintrepting how the rule reads. "
"No NFL Player Contract entered into in a Capped Year and extending into the Final League Year or beyond" the key to that is extending into the final year or beyond.

While I'm not a lawyer that means to me that while the CBA is in place and that is till next March, he can't get more than a 30% increase.

I guess perhaps Lawdog needs to give us an actual reading on this.

Anyway IF he is indeed asking for top 5 money. I just do not think he has proved that OTHER than being a classy guy(that becomes debatable if he wants top 5) and can sack the passerabout once a game. All the while failing miserably as an OLB other duties playing the rush and being able to cover behind the LOS.

Maybe it is just me but I want more than a hand in the dirt OLB if I'm going pay a gazillion bucks.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

red98
06-10-2010, 10:54 AM
That said I think you ar misintrepting how the rule reads. "
"No NFL Player Contract entered into in a Capped Year and extending into the Final League Year or beyond" the key to that is extending into the final year or beyond.

Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

The key part is "... entered into in a Capped Year"

2010 is an un-capped year.

Anyway there are ways to circumvent the rule by using guaranteed money like the 49rs did.

I think Doom deserves a big contract. Maybe his starting point is top 5 money and he'd take somewhat less.

We'll see.

Northman
06-10-2010, 11:00 AM
Doom is excellent in one of three areas an OLB needs to be strong in. Pass rush, stopping the run and pass coverage. Doom is obviously top five in pass rushing. No argument there. But he is not in the top 20 OLBs in the other two areas. Everyone is screaming for Doom to get a payday because he can get to the QB. What about equal consideration in the other two areas where he is weak and still under development? Logically, I think all three areas should be equally considered when coming to terms on a new contract. Doom deserves a raise over his current contract but he is not a top five OLB in the NFL and shouldn't be paid like one.

These stats prove otherwise.

DeMarcus Ware 45 tackles, 11 sacks, 5 FF, and 6 PD (15 games)

Orakpo had 50 tackles, 11 sacks and 1 FF (16 games)

Dumervil had 41 tackles, 17 sacks and 4 FF and 3 PD (14 games)

Haggan had 45 tackles, 1 sack, and 3 FF, and 1 PD (16 games)

Elevation inc
06-10-2010, 11:03 AM
It's possible that there is an exception to the 30% rule when a player is traded. Marshall will have a base salary of $6.5 million 2011, which is a lot more than a 30% increase from the 2010 tender offer of $2.5 million he accepted.

i thought it was 3.1 he signed???? and a trade shouldnt have any bearing its still a RFA signing a extension??? should it?..not sure on that..gonna have do more looking...i will post more later in this thread when i find out

Elevation inc
06-10-2010, 11:05 AM
Wow, the team is now threatening to cut Dumervil's pay...hadn't heard this.
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_15264797?source=rss&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

"According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season."

That should destroy the relationship between he and the team effectively...:tsk:


well i gonna wait and see but this would certainly be a viable reason to be pissed at the broncos FO.....

Tned
06-10-2010, 11:46 AM
I noticed that mikey (n being next to the M on a very small keyboard) was miss spelled after I posted.
In the mobile mode I was unable to edit it as on this blackberry I am unable to see anything more that the first line in edit mode.

I think everyone knows mikey is a name I use all the time, including yourself.

But good try.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ooops, sorry. It's hard to keep up with who your latest whipping boys are. I thought maybe you were pissed at them for paying Tiger too much money or something.

Ok, back to the overrated Doom...

Tned
06-10-2010, 11:55 AM
i thought it was 3.1 he signed???? and a trade shouldnt have any bearing its still a RFA signing a extension??? should it?..not sure on that..gonna have do more looking...i will post more later in this thread when i find out

It's whatever the first round tender was. I can't remember, and it wasn't worth looking up (as Marshall isn't a Bronco anymore). I agree that a trade shouldn't have any bearing on the rule, but I'm just not sure.

A prime example of the 30% rule is Chris Johnson in Tennessee. By all accounts, Tenn is open to renegotiating, but since last years salary was around $500k and he has two years remaining (at a similar salary), the Titans are in a real tough spot. About the only options they have are to give him a HUGE signing bonus, or possibly give him a big injury payout clause (which helps him with the "one injury can ruin my career issue", but not with compensation if he stays healthy).

T.K.O.
06-10-2010, 11:56 AM
it is very possible that the team is required to notify doom of the rules regarding rfa contracts and tenders.
i doubt they did this to piss him off when they have been in negotiations.
i would bet it's a legal issue that they inform him what happens when a tender goes unsigned.
and i doubt it means they would not gladly give him at least the 3.? mil if they can't work out a deal by the 15th.
just more press drama if you ask me !:salute:

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 11:58 AM
Doom is excellent in one of three areas an OLB needs to be strong in. Pass rush, stopping the run and pass coverage. Doom is obviously top five in pass rushing. No argument there. But he is not in the top 20 OLBs in the other two areas. Everyone is screaming for Doom to get a payday because he can get to the QB. What about equal consideration in the other two areas where he is weak and still under development? Logically, I think all three areas should be equally considered when coming to terms on a new contract. Doom deserves a raise over his current contract but he is not a top five OLB in the NFL and shouldn't be paid like one.

Dumervil's stats are not out of line with the stats of other elite pass rushers in the League. His stats are similar to Peppers, Suggs, Allen, and Ware. Besides that he's been playing the position for all of one year. Also how do we know his tackles wont go if our defensive line is as improved as we think it is?

No disrespect intended but how is fair to criticize his pass coverage skills when he not being asked to play in coverage? Ware's name gets mentioned a lot but do you know how many passed defended he had in '08 when he led the League in sacks with 20? All of 2 just like Dumervil. I'm not saying this would you but some people will point to the fact that he had more tackles. But again he has a better talent surrounding him. Going back to '08 for just a minute. Do you know how many other players had more than five sacks in '08 when Ware was tearing it up? Three. Do you know how many other players on our defense had more than five sacks? None. We had one with five and one with four and those reserve players. No other starter had more than 3.5 sacks. What does that tell us about how important Dumervil is to our pass rush?

Again this isn't meant to hammer you LTC. I just thinks important for us to keep in things in perspective Dumervil's stats verse what he's being asked to do.

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 12:05 PM
:lol:

Wow, so if you are a team player and one of the best players on the team you dont get a new contract. If you arent a team player, cause problems in the lockerroom you dont get a new contract. Way to go McD! This coach is a ******* joke.

It makes me a little uneasy but in it's entirety it sounds like Dumervil is still trying to deal with team in good faith.


http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_15264797

Broncos playing hardball with Dumervil
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Posted: 06/10/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

In their latest round of contract negotiations, the Broncos threw a cut block at NFL sack king Elvis Dumervil.

According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season.

Dumervil made roughly $573,000 last season, which would put his 2010 salary at about $630,000 if he doesn't sign his tender. Would the Broncos really play hardball with their Pro Bowl linebacker by paying him a relative pittance?

The union source said New England's Logan Mankins and San Diego's Vincent Jackson along with Marcus McNeill were among unsigned restricted free agents who received similar letters. Although such letters are not uncommon, and Dumervil had intended to sign his tender this weekend, the Broncos declined to make the goodwill, negotiating gesture of not reducing his salary if he opted not to sign.

After leading the NFL with 17 sacks last season, and recording 43 sacks through his four seasons, Dumervil, 26, wants to be among the league's five highest-paid pass rushers. The Chicago Bears recently gave a $42 million guaranteed contract to Julius Peppers, who is 30 and coming off a 10 1/2-sack season. Last summer, Baltimore signed Terrell Suggs, who was coming off an eight-sack season, to a $38.1 million guarantee.

The next contract deadline involving Dumervil and the Broncos is July 29, when veterans report for training camp. While other restricted free agents have threatened to hold out from training camp if they don't get a new deal, Dumervil has said he hopes to never reach that decision.

He will attend the Broncos' mandatory minicamp Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 12:11 PM
it is very possible that the team is required to notify doom of the rules regarding rfa contracts and tenders.
i doubt they did this to piss him off when they have been in negotiations.
i would bet it's a legal issue that they inform him what happens when a tender goes unsigned.
and i doubt it means they would not gladly give him at least the 3.? mil if they can't work out a deal by the 15th.
just more press drama if you ask me !:salute:

You fogot to mention message board hysteria. From the firejosh.com groupies. Or the bring mikey back fandom.

I also suspect it was a legal necessity mandated by the CBA/NFL.

But then some would not have anything to whine about.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
06-10-2010, 12:46 PM
Wow, the team is now threatening to cut Dumervil's pay...hadn't heard this.
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_15264797?source=rss&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

"According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season."

That should destroy the relationship between he and the team effectively...:tsk:

very poor decision. . . it doesn't send a good message in our locker room, and quite frankly it looks like one of a few steps leading to doom not being here beyond this year. . .

i like josh, but damn he doesn't make it easy, at all. . . . :tsk:

LTC Pain
06-10-2010, 12:50 PM
Dumervil's stats are not out of line with the stats of other elite pass rushers in the League. His stats are similar to Peppers, Suggs, Allen, and Ware. Besides that he's been playing the position for all of one year. Also how do we know his tackles wont go if our defensive line is as improved as we think it is?

No disrespect intended but how is fair to criticize his pass coverage skills when he not being asked to play in coverage? Ware's name gets mentioned a lot but do you know how many passed defended he had in '08 when he led the League in sacks with 20? All of 2 just like Dumervil. I'm not saying this would you but some people will point to the fact that he had more tackles. But again he has a better talent surrounding him. Going back to '08 for just a minute. Do you know how many other players had more than five sacks in '08 when Ware was tearing it up? Three. Do you know how many other players on our defense had more than five sacks? None. We had one with five and one with four and those reserve players. No other starter had more than 3.5 sacks. What does that tell us about how important Dumervil is to our pass rush?

Again this isn't meant to hammer you LTC. I just thinks important for us to keep in things in perspective Dumervil's stats verse what he's being asked to do.

Perspective is exactly what I'm getting at TXBRONC. As has been pointed out by others, Doom has only played OLB one year. We haven't yet seen Doom fully developed as an OLB. If Doom turns out average against the run and in pass coverage then he shouldn't get paid as much as an OLB who does these well and can rush the passer. Sort of a "total OLB" perspective. Hey, I'm not against Doom one little bit. I hope he gets a raise and long term contract with the Broncos. All I'm saying is giving Doom top money now is not warranted until he shows that he's a top OLB against the run and in pass coverage.

claymore
06-10-2010, 12:51 PM
very poor decision. . . it doesn't send a good message in our locker room, and quite frankly it looks like one of a few steps leading to doom not being here beyond this year. . .

i like josh, but damn he doesn't make it easy, at all. . . . :tsk:

At least he is consistent. :D

Northman
06-10-2010, 01:30 PM
Perspective is exactly what I'm getting at TXBRONC. As has been pointed out by others, Doom has only played OLB one year. We haven't yet seen Doom fully developed as an OLB. If Doom turns out average against the run and in pass coverage then he shouldn't get paid as much as an OLB who does these well and can rush the passer. Sort of a "total OLB" perspective. Hey, I'm not against Doom one little bit. I hope he gets a raise and long term contract with the Broncos. All I'm saying is giving Doom top money now is not warranted until he shows that he's a top OLB against the run and in pass coverage.

But he basically has and thats what your missing. In his first year at the position he is already on par with a guy like Ware who is in what? His 3rd or 4th year at his respective position? I already showed the numbers from 09' with Doom missing 2 games and he STILL was in the same area as Ware. Then, you have to take in account of the surrounding talent, chemistry, and scheme in place that Ware has had the luxury of being in longer. When the guy comes out of the box playing on par with a guy who is supposedly the best after 3 years tells me we have our guy and he should be paid accordingly. Now, with the addition of Williams who is probably the best DL we have had in a while Doom should only get that much better. Your basing your theories on inconsistent schemes, coaching changes, and position changes when you should be concentrating on 09' where he finally was placed where he should be.

Tned
06-10-2010, 02:54 PM
You fogot to mention message board hysteria. From the firejosh.com groupies. Or the bring mikey back fandom.

I also suspect it was a legal necessity mandated by the CBA/NFL.

But then some would not have anything to whine about.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Firejosh.com seems to be a bad link. Must have been another mobile post typo. You've peaked my interest, can you post a working URL?

Tned
06-10-2010, 03:03 PM
But he basically has and thats what your missing. In his first year at the position he is already on par with a guy like Ware who is in what? His 3rd or 4th year at his respective position? I already showed the numbers from 09' with Doom missing 2 games and he STILL was in the same area as Ware. Then, you have to take in account of the surrounding talent, chemistry, and scheme in place that Ware has had the luxury of being in longer. When the guy comes out of the box playing on par with a guy who is supposedly the best after 3 years tells me we have our guy and he should be paid accordingly. Now, with the addition of Williams who is probably the best DL we have had in a while Doom should only get that much better. Your basing your theories on inconsistent schemes, coaching changes, and position changes when you should be concentrating on 09' where he finally was placed where he should be.

I'm amazed how quickly people are to completely trash our most talented players, because they think they are greedy, whiners, friends of Mike, or whatever. It's like some fans forget how long we've looked for 100 reception receivers, 10+ sack rushers, etc. When you have a talented player, even if he's one dimensional (which is actually up for debate), you keep that player. You do what it takes to keep the player.

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 03:07 PM
Perspective is exactly what I'm getting at TXBRONC. As has been pointed out by others, Doom has only played OLB one year. We haven't yet seen Doom fully developed as an OLB. If Doom turns out average against the run and in pass coverage then he shouldn't get paid as much as an OLB who does these well and can rush the passer. Sort of a "total OLB" perspective. Hey, I'm not against Doom one little bit. I hope he gets a raise and long term contract with the Broncos. All I'm saying is giving Doom top money now is not warranted until he shows that he's a top OLB against the run and in pass coverage.

But I also said that in his first year he already put numbers that are in line with what other premiere pass rushers in the League and he did that while being in position he had never played before.

I don't get this "total OLB" perspective. Is that suppose to mean that Dumervil has to put double 12 to 15 sacks, double digit passes defended, and 80 plus tackles? That not going to happen even if we had DeMarcus Ware. Again how is Dumervil suppose play better pass coverage if he not being asked to be in coverage. I also said that put better defensive line up front then I pretty confident his tackles will go up. The pass coverage issue is red herring imho because no one can rush the passer and play in coverage at the same time.

We'll have to disagree with what's warranted. When I look out and see guys like Suggs, Allen, and Peppers, getting big contracts not because they get a lot tackles but because they get sacks then I have to disagree with you on what's warranted.

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 03:09 PM
But he basically has and thats what your missing. In his first year at the position he is already on par with a guy like Ware who is in what? His 3rd or 4th year at his respective position? I already showed the numbers from 09' with Doom missing 2 games and he STILL was in the same area as Ware. Then, you have to take in account of the surrounding talent, chemistry, and scheme in place that Ware has had the luxury of being in longer. When the guy comes out of the box playing on par with a guy who is supposedly the best after 3 years tells me we have our guy and he should be paid accordingly. Now, with the addition of Williams who is probably the best DL we have had in a while Doom should only get that much better. Your basing your theories on inconsistent schemes, coaching changes, and position changes when you should be concentrating on 09' where he finally was placed where he should be.

Spot on. :beer:

T.K.O.
06-10-2010, 03:10 PM
http://www.firejoshmcdanielsnow.com
Firejosh.com seems to be a bad link. Must have been another mobile post typo. You've peaked my interest, can you post a working URL?

Northman
06-10-2010, 03:41 PM
I'm amazed how quickly people are to completely trash our most talented players, because they think they are greedy, whiners, friends of Mike, or whatever. It's like some fans forget how long we've looked for 100 reception receivers, 10+ sack rushers, etc. When you have a talented player, even if he's one dimensional (which is actually up for debate), you keep that player. You do what it takes to keep the player.

Especially when you have no one to replace that play.

Northman
06-10-2010, 03:43 PM
http://www.firejoshmcdanielsnow.com

This must be in response to Jr's http://fireshanahan.com/ site. :lol:

D1g1tal j1m
06-10-2010, 04:15 PM
Wow, the team is now threatening to cut Dumervil's pay...hadn't heard this.
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_15264797?source=rss&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

"According to an NFL Players Associations source, the Broncos recently sent a letter to Dumervil stating that if he didn't sign his restricted free-agent tender of $3.168 million by Monday, the team on Tuesday would exercise its right to reduce his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made the previous season."

That should destroy the relationship between he and the team effectively...:tsk:

The memo they sent is common practice by NFL teams to remind their RFA to sign their tenders or risk losing money for the following year. Doom will sign his tender for $3.1 million and this will be a moot point.
Example: http://www.pewterreport.com/articles/view/7081?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pewterreportcom+%28PewterRepo rt.com%29
TB sent a similar memo to their RFA tackle to sign his tender or risk getting paid less based on his contract from last year.

D1g1tal j1m
06-10-2010, 04:28 PM
Note that it states that Denver would "exercise it's rights" which just goes to show that they are not doing anything out of the ordinary but going about their NFL guidelines. If Doom doesn't sign the tender then they would only be on the hook for a 10% increase in his pay from last year (it's not their fault that he was only on a 4th round salary).

Northman
06-10-2010, 04:39 PM
Note that it states that Denver would "exercise it's rights" which just goes to show that they are not doing anything out of the ordinary but going about their NFL guidelines. If Doom doesn't sign the tender then they would only be on the hook for a 10% increase in his pay from last year (it's not their fault that he was only on a 4th round salary).

He's outplayed that salary.

SoCalImport
06-10-2010, 04:56 PM
He's outplayed that salary.

Nobody would say otherwise.
I'd hope that the head office would be willing to pay Dumer a Suggs like contract. He's worth it to this team.

Northman
06-10-2010, 04:59 PM
Nobody would say otherwise.
I'd hope that the head office would be willing to pay Dumer a Suggs like contract. He's worth it to this team.

Actually, there have been plenty to say otherwise which is why im stating that. In this case you and i agree that he should be paid.

Sparky The Sun Devil
06-10-2010, 05:00 PM
i want elvis back, but he isnt worth dware money and he isnt as good harrison because hes a run liabilty

Northman
06-10-2010, 05:07 PM
i want elvis back, but he isnt worth dware money and he isnt as good harrison because hes a run liabilty

Not according to this:

DeMarcus Ware 45 tackles, 11 sacks, 5 FF, and 6 PD (15 games)

Dumervil had 41 tackles, 17 sacks and 4 FF and 3 PD (14 games)

D1g1tal j1m
06-10-2010, 05:26 PM
I agree the Broncos should sign him, but with the uncertainty with the laps in the CBA I wouldn't want the Broncos to tie themselves up with a contract that will hurt them in the long run. He has outplayed his contract, unfortunately for him he became a FA at the wrong time. He understands this and he understands that the Broncos have the leverage this time around.

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 05:33 PM
This must be in response to Jr's http://fireshanahan.com/ site. :lol:


Not mine but would like to get the ad revenue from it.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Sparky The Sun Devil
06-10-2010, 05:37 PM
Not according to this:

DeMarcus Ware 45 tackles, 11 sacks, 5 FF, and 6 PD (15 games)

Dumervil had 41 tackles, 17 sacks and 4 FF and 3 PD (14 games)

i wasnt comparing dware to doom for their play, jus their contract amounts. ware gets like 14mill a year or somethin...ware had serious injuries though he was coming off of. the season before last he had 20 sacks and 84 tackles....we could jus as easily pay doom and say a big drop in his production too

u have a very creepy avat pic

Northman
06-10-2010, 05:52 PM
i wasnt comparing dware to doom for their play, jus their contract amounts. ware gets like 14mill a year or somethin...ware had serious injuries though he was coming off of. the season before last he had 20 sacks and 84 tackles....we could jus as easily pay doom and say a big drop in his production too





Yea, but that was Doom's first year in the right position. And thats without the kind of help that Dware gets in Dallas so i would say that Doom would improve more than regress.

Sparky The Sun Devil
06-10-2010, 05:55 PM
Yea, but that was Doom's first year in the right position. And thats without the kind of help that Dware gets in Dallas so i would say that Doom would improve more than regress.

hopefully.

why are people freaking out over denver sending him a letter saying his salary will be reduced from 3.2 million to 600k??? thats what the nfl rule is, if he doesnt sign the tender

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 05:57 PM
i wasnt comparing dware to doom for their play, jus their contract amounts. ware gets like 14mill a year or somethin...ware had serious injuries though he was coming off of. the season before last he had 20 sacks and 84 tackles....we could jus as easily pay doom and say a big drop in his production too

u have a very creepy avat pic when Doom is a consistent overall player great pay the guy

Give me two of the three things he is supposed to be doing, pass rush, running defense or drop bcd into coverage. then we can talk till then well

BTW here are the real stats on the who that North seems to like just to show last years numbers


Season Team Tackles Interceptions Fumbles
2009 Dallas Cowboys G GS Comb Total Ast Sck SFTY PDef Int Yds Avg Lng TDs FF
2009 Dallas Cowboys 16 15 57 45 12 11.0 -- 6 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 5
2008 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 84 69 15 20.0 -- 2 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 6
2007 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 84 60 24 14.0 -- 4 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 4
2006 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 71 57 14 11.5 0 5 1 41 41.0 41T 1 5
2005 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 58 47 11 8.0 -- 1 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 3
TOTALDallas Cowboys 354 278 76 64.5 0 18 1 41 -- 41 1 23



Season Team Tackles Interceptions Fumbles
2009 Denver Broncos G GS Comb Total Ast Sck SFTY PDef Int Yds Avg Lng TDs FF
2009 Denver Broncos 16 14 49 42 7 17.0 -- 3 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 4
2008 Denver Broncos 16 15 24 17 7 5.0 -- 0 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 1
2007 Denver Broncos 16 16 39 34 5 12.5 -- 4 1 27 27.0 27 0 4
2006 Denver Broncos 13 0 17 14 3 8.5 -- 1 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 1
TOTAL Denver Broncos 129 107 22 43.0 0 8 1 27 -- 27 0 10




HUGE difference HUGE

Good try .

Northman
06-10-2010, 06:02 PM
hopefully.

why are people freaking out over denver sending him a letter saying his salary will be reduced from 3.2 million to 600k??? thats what the nfl rule is, if he doesnt sign the tender

Its not about the rule itself, only that Denver hasnt signed him longterm.

Northman
06-10-2010, 06:04 PM
when Doom is a consistent overall player great pay the guy

Give me two of the three things he is supposed to be doing, pass rush, running defense or drop bcd into coverage. then we can talk till then well

BTW here are the real stats on the who that North seems to like just to show last years numbers


Season Team Tackles Interceptions Fumbles
2009 Dallas Cowboys G GS Comb Total Ast Sck SFTY PDef Int Yds Avg Lng TDs FF
2009 Dallas Cowboys 16 15 57 45 12 11.0 -- 6 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 5
2008 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 84 69 15 20.0 -- 2 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 6
2007 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 84 60 24 14.0 -- 4 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 4
2006 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 71 57 14 11.5 0 5 1 41 41.0 41T 1 5
2005 Dallas Cowboys 16 16 58 47 11 8.0 -- 1 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 3
TOTALDallas Cowboys 354 278 76 64.5 0 18 1 41 -- 41 1 23



Season Team Tackles Interceptions Fumbles
2009 Denver Broncos G GS Comb Total Ast Sck SFTY PDef Int Yds Avg Lng TDs FF
2009 Denver Broncos 16 14 49 42 7 17.0 -- 3 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 4
2008 Denver Broncos 16 15 24 17 7 5.0 -- 0 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 1
2007 Denver Broncos 16 16 39 34 5 12.5 -- 4 1 27 27.0 27 0 4
2006 Denver Broncos 13 0 17 14 3 8.5 -- 1 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 1
TOTAL Denver Broncos 129 107 22 43.0 0 8 1 27 -- 27 0 10

HUGE difference HUGE

Good try .


The only numbers that are relevant are from 09' hence why i used them. Dware has never had to carry a defense by himself. Dware has never had to play out of position. Dware has not had to face 3-4 different DC's or schemes. When you cant separate those facts from the arguement like you should than you have already lost the arguement at hand.

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 06:21 PM
The only numbers that are relevant are from 09' hence why i used them. Dware has never had to carry a defense by himself. Dware has never had to play out of position. Dware has not had to face 3-4 different DC's or schemes. When you cant separate those facts from the arguement like you should than you have already lost the arguement at hand.


while you are correct about Doom playing a different position last year.

I think your stretching the truth about him carrying the defense by himself.

SOme of his sacks I remember seeing ayers bearing down from the other side, in a couple he actually hit him first but did not wrap up and allowed Doom to finish him off.

Look you want him regardless of the cost I say we can do without him at that cost use that money in getting a guy next year OR better yet let him play for PAY in those other areas run defense and drop back coverage.

It may be moot anyway as I still believe that there are restrictions in giving him Ware money, due to him being a RFA.

Guess I will have to agree to disagree with all the doom for ware money folks.

Tned
06-10-2010, 06:33 PM
Especially when you have no one to replace that play.

How many years have we been searching for someone that can sack the QB????

Northman
06-10-2010, 06:35 PM
How many years have we been searching for someone that can sack the QB????

Like forever. :lol:

Tned
06-10-2010, 06:45 PM
Like forever. :lol:

Ah hell, let's just trade him for a couple 4th round picks, then we can use the money we would have spent on him to get 4 guys that can get 6-8 sacks a piece.

Remind me again, how many times in the last decade have we have 3+ players who got 6+ sacks?

God, I love when we act like this is Madden football and we can just modify players stats. Let's see, we'll just go into the player attributes configurator and raise McBeans power, speed and pass rush ratngs to 95 and turn him into a sack monster, and only pay him $750,000.

Geez, I'm not sure why I didn't think of this sooner. While we're at it, we can turn Gaffney into a 100 reception reciever.... :disgust:

LTC Pain
06-10-2010, 07:27 PM
while you are correct about Doom playing a different position last year.

I think your stretching the truth about him carrying the defense by himself.

SOme of his sacks I remember seeing ayers bearing down from the other side, in a couple he actually hit him first but did not wrap up and allowed Doom to finish him off.

Look you want him regardless of the cost I say we can do without him at that cost use that money in getting a guy next year OR better yet let him play for PAY in those other areas run defense and drop back coverage.

It may be moot anyway as I still believe that there are restrictions in giving him Ware money, due to him being a RFA.

Guess I will have to agree to disagree with all the doom for ware money folks.

This I agree with.

nevcraw
06-10-2010, 07:31 PM
while you are correct about Doom playing a different position last year.

I think your stretching the truth about him carrying the defense by himself.

SOme of his sacks I remember seeing ayers bearing down from the other side, in a couple he actually hit him first but did not wrap up and allowed Doom to finish him off.

Look you want him regardless of the cost I say we can do without him at that cost use that money in getting a guy next year OR better yet let him play for PAY in those other areas run defense and drop back coverage.

It may be moot anyway as I still believe that there are restrictions in giving him Ware money, due to him being a RFA.

Guess I will have to agree to disagree with all the doom for ware money folks.

Not sure what the right coin is for Doom but it should be signifcant and it better be soon. The FO needs to send the message to the other players if you are a team first guy and play well we will take care of you.. If the team drags this out, and doom looks in anyway disrespected - the guys will not play very hard for that type of treatment..
So poo poo his accomplishments all you want but it goes beyond 17 sacks and switching postions and right into the heart of the locker room..

Gimpygod
06-10-2010, 08:43 PM
Yes I saw that and understood the ramifications.

They just may not be ready to "sell the farm" in signing him him to a huge guaranteed contract.

While we can argue his value as a Pass rusher ONLY. That other teams will gladly pay for that talent.

Josh wants verstile players and will pay for them.

If it were me I'd agree to allow them to look for a trade to another team once he signs a tender offer IF he feels that he is worth more.

I'd guess that since he did not get any nibbles as a highest tendered RFA that more or less told everyone his value. That no one was willing to make the offer he wants.

As I have always said I'll pay the guy based on an incentive based contract once he has proved he can do something more than just pass rush from the down position.

Pay him the money he wants when he develops into a true OLB.

Y'all seem to forget this is a business and while he is popular in DEN no one outside of DEN cared enough to pay for him for his ONE talent.

If his agent can work a trade that is benifical to everyone great if not he needs to be content to work for a measly 3+million this year with a 30% raise there after.

If anyone thinks he is goes to lead the NFL in sacks each year then let him earn it incentive wise. Sooner or later the other OCs will take him out of the game.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

really? we dont need guys like doom either? According to you there is no I in team... or any players for that matter!

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 09:46 PM
Ah hell, let's just trade him for a couple 4th round picks, then we can use the money we would have spent on him to get 4 guys that can get 6-8 sacks a piece.

Remind me again, how many times in the last decade have we have 3+ players who got 6+ sacks?

God, I love when we act like this is Madden football and we can just modify players stats. Let's see, we'll just go into the player attributes configurator and raise McBeans power, speed and pass rush ratngs to 95 and turn him into a sack monster, and only pay him $750,000.

Geez, I'm not sure why I didn't think of this sooner. While we're at it, we can turn Gaffney into a 100 reception reciever.... :disgust:

You know if Dumervil is a "real" team player and not locker room cancer he should beg the team for an incentive based contract. We all know that with an incentive based contract everybody wins.

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 10:39 PM
really? we dont need guys like doom either? According to you there is no I in team... or any players for that matter!

There is room for all players that want to play under an incentive based contract. :beer:

jhildebrand
06-10-2010, 11:34 PM
How many years have we been searching for someone that can sack the QB????

I mentioned it before! It goes all the way back to two fellas name Reggie Hayward and Bertrand Berry.

The team was confident they could forgo those guys and make up the difference in the draft and FA, not to mention save a ton of cap space.

We all know how that worked out. You would think Mr. Bowlen was paying attention.

Bosco
06-11-2010, 04:04 AM
why are people freaking out over denver sending him a letter saying his salary will be reduced from 3.2 million to 600k??? thats what the nfl rule is, if he doesnt sign the tender

Because A) people love drama and B) it gives the haters another reason to cry about Josh and "The Patriot Way".

They just can't accept that Dumervil is going to require a top 5 salary during one of the most uncertain times in league history so everyone, players included, are looking to cover their asses.

Barring a complete breakdown, Dumervil will be here for the foreseeable future. Josh McDaniels is not going to let an elite, professional player like Dumervil get away.

Tned
06-11-2010, 06:40 AM
Because A) people love drama and B) it gives the haters another reason to cry about Josh and "The Patriot Way".

They just can't accept that Dumervil is going to require a top 5 salary during one of the most uncertain times in league history so everyone, players included, are looking to cover their asses.

Barring a complete breakdown, Dumervil will be here for the foreseeable future. Josh McDaniels is not going to let an elite, professional player like Dumervil get away.

You do realize that MOST of the conversation in this thread is simply people responding to the McDaniels' groupies who keep saying that Dumervil is a one dimensional scrub who doesn't deserve anything more than a journeyman's contract? You did actually read the thread? Right?

I know it is en vogue to play the "McDaniels hater card" anytime someone has a different opinion, but that doesn't make it close to accurate.

Dirk
06-11-2010, 07:09 AM
I am of the ones that feel D-ville is not worth Ware money. However, I think he should get a huge bump in salary and lock him up long term.

Elevation inc
06-11-2010, 09:48 AM
from what i gather most of the worthwhile RFA's that are still unsigned got similar letters, dooms intended t osign his tender this weekend so i belive this is all moot he will play at 3.1 million which is a sizeable raise, and then hopefully we can give him the 4-6 year deal he deserves long term.....i think this will be a non isssue, and doesnt need to be blown up any more....

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 09:52 AM
Easy to call names such as Josh groupies and sad that some do.

But the facts are while doom is great at doing ONE part of his job descrpition he SO far is lacking in the otjer TWO parts of what makes the OLB a OLB.

Therefore until he developes at least some sembalance of those skills, he is not IMO deserving of top 5 money.

Yet some feel he is just because ONE year he lead the league in sacks he will every year produce, the same numbers.

I believe that while he has lots of sacks in his short career the OC will take him out once they figure him out. Afterall his numbers dipped after a stellar year only to rise again last year moving to OLB. Which means THEY nuetralized him after one good year. And very well may again after seeing him at OLB hand on the ground.

Add to that the wear and tear being a smallish guy in a BIG guys league is going to dimish his speed sooner rather than later.

I was not been a DOOM groupie when he was drafted. Was pleansantly surprised with his production in his second year but not surprised he all but disapeared in his third year having his sacks IIRC more than cut in half from 12 to 5.

While he got a new lease on life moving to OLB from part time DE that does not mean they (OC) will not take him out from here on.

So the question is do you pay top 5 money to him for JUST one year numbers because while he was good last year there is NO evidence that he will not taken out if the game again.

It is easy to spend someone elses money and I'm guesing one of the reasons mikey was let go. Pat had to be pissed at all of the FA blunders and overpaying of Price and MA. While allowing heyward. And others get away when they could have had them cheap before they had a contract year.

None of us are going to solve the issue and time will tell if I'm wrong in my thinking.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

elsid13
06-11-2010, 09:58 AM
One of the things I miss about Shanahan was that he took care of the guys that performed the summer before their rookie deal ran out. Less drama that way.

Ravage!!!
06-11-2010, 10:17 AM
He's a premium pass rusher. Considering the NFL is a passing league, there is a reason that premium pass rushers come at a high price. Because they are extremely needed. Ask KC if they feel that trading away their premium pass rusher was a good idea, after looking back at all the talent they keep drafting to try and replace him?

I'm on the fence with Doom. But I know we need that kind of talent on the team. I know its silly to think that NOW the OCs will "take him out of the game" when they knew he was coming last season. Thats why we need some talent on the other side so that not everything is focused on Doom.. thats the whole point.

Its stupid to think that we are simply going to get an entire DL and LB corp that is going to get 6-8 sacks apiece. Not going to happen. We aren't going to get 4-5 guys that get over 6 sacks, no matter how much money you save. This is why premium sackers get big bucks and why they can be "one dimensional" and still get big money.

I just feel that we can't continue to remove the best talent on this team, time and time and time again.

Northman
06-11-2010, 10:20 AM
Problem is, Doom really isnt one dimensional. His numbers for 09' are right up there with Ware. If Doom stays in the same system that benefits him like Ware does he will only get that much better. Add in the great character and team player that the Josh nuthuggers always crow about and that is enough reason to pay the guy top dollar.

Ravage!!!
06-11-2010, 10:22 AM
Problem is, Doom really isnt one dimensional. His numbers for 09' are right up there with Ware. If Doom stays in the same system that benefits him like Ware does he will only get that much better. Add in the great character and team player that the Josh nuthuggers always crow about and that is enough reason to pay the guy top dollar.

So far, he's been nothing but a TEAM (notice its all capitalized) player, by every sense of the word.

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 10:32 AM
Will he maintain the same level of play is the question.

Will he get better in those areas he lacks in. That is my contention. He was not able to beat. Dwares number in which he played IIRC injured for much of the season. For one years numbers but when you look at there numbers over their careers they are not in the same ballpark.

YES DAL has a betterr supporting group but DOOM is also not Dware and never will be.

As for nut hugging I'd rather support the guy than be a nay sayer about everything he does.

YOU know I have always called a spade a spade and IF after a reasonable time Josh does not produce I will be gald to jump off the bandwagon. I gave mikey longer than I should have and pride myself for being one of the first to understand he was not the guy he was afterall his SB talent retired. Just an good OC and a really lousy GM.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 10:37 AM
Problem is, Doom really isnt one dimensional. His numbers for 09' are right up there with Ware. If Doom stays in the same system that benefits him like Ware does he will only get that much better. Add in the great character and team player that the Josh nuthuggers always crow about and that is enough reason to pay the guy top dollar.

Don't forget there several others that he was right in line with as well. Allen, Peppers, Suggs, Mario Williams, and Freeney all come to mind.

jhildebrand
06-11-2010, 10:58 AM
Will he maintain the same level of play is the question.



Nobody knows, JRWIZ. Whether he maintains his play is up to the team as much as it is up to Dumervil. However, that is a risk the team has to take. The players, like Dumervil, take a big risk playing on their rookie contracts. Both sides have risks at some point! He has played it out and been nothing but class. Why can't the Broncos reciprocate that class? After all, they continue to tell us they will reward a player when the situation was/is right. They spelled out why Jay wasn't right, Tony wasn't right, Marshall wasn't right. Well Dumervil has been none of what those guys are. What are they going to make up now?

Dumervil has 43 sacks in 4 seasons. That's almost 11 sacks per season. Now lets also consider he has had a different coordinator every season. If that doesn't speak stability then I don't know what does.

Also, I don't recall Lonnie Paxton having to be a multi dimensional player. He got paid MAD money to replace a guy that was better than him. I dont recall you using the same gripe then so why should it apply to

LaMont Jordan was brought in to do one thing. LeKevin Smith and the list goes on. Teams have specialists and always have.

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 11:14 AM
Nobody knows, JRWIZ. Whether he maintains his play is up to the team as much as it is up to Dumervil. However, that is a risk the team has to take. The players, like Dumervil, take a big risk playing on their rookie contracts. He has played it out and been nothing but class. Why can't the Broncos reciprocate that class? After all, they continue to tell us they will when the situation was right. They spelled out why Jay wasn't right, Tony wasn't right, Marshall wasn't right. Well Dumervil has been none of what those guys are. What are they going to make up now?

Dumervil has 43 sacks in 4 seasons. That's almost 11 sacks per season. Now lets also consider he has had a different coordinator every season. If that doesn't speak stability then I don't know what does.

Also, I don't recall Lonnie Paxton having to be a multi dimensional player. He got paid MAD money to replace a guy that was better than him. I dont recall you using the same gripe then so why should it apply to

LaMont Jordan was brought in to do one thing. LeKevin Smith and the list goes on. Teams have specialists and always have.

Paxton has mad long snapping skill and can put the ball in the same spot every time. Dumervil on the other hand is just a one trick pony pass rusher obviously it's harder to find a good long snapper than it is a premiere pass rusher. :coffee:

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 11:32 AM
I was vocal whne Paxton was brought in could have cared less about the others menetioned for the most part they were as good if not better than the mokes we had. PLUS they had a clue on what JOish was looking for.
As for Paxton IIRC leaches contract was about up as it was. And IIRC the money Paxton signed for was about 250K a year more than leach got with the new contract

Yes Doom has been above avaerage overall but not consustent. IIRC without looking at thhe stats 8-12-5-17 whule working in diffenerent schemes

But the rushing the passer is not vrain surgery either hand on ground, pin ears back and go. Now if there is something I'm missing there let me know.

He is a good kid and far diiferent than the others you menetioned and they are gone for those reasons

BUT that does not mean he deserves top five money for being a part time OLB.

By that I mean only having skills at one thing pass rush. Which means sooner or later the OC will negate that by running at him like lots of folks do with freeny. We did it for years so please do not say it can't be done.

Let him improve his game in at least the Run defense then pay him NOT top 5 but an appriorate number.

Not hard to comprehend when you get past he lead the league in sacks in a contract year, in a new scheme that no one had seen before

BTW does anyone know how many of those Gazaillion yards the RBs we faced those last few games came from running at DOOM I'm guess some of them.

I do not hate the guy but I'm not drioling over him like aome here are either.

I suspect he will get a raise in his next contract comenserate with his other abilities. Whether it be in DEN or somewhere else. I will not morn his loss if that happens.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
06-11-2010, 12:20 PM
Easy to call names such as Josh groupies and sad that some do.

Just to be clear, it's ok to talk about people swinging from Jay or Mike's nut sack, or about being Doom groupies, or McDaniels' haters, but using the term "Josh Groupies" is crossing a line and sad?

Did I get that right? :laugh::lol: :laugh: :hypocrisy: :laugh::lol: :laugh:

claymore
06-11-2010, 12:24 PM
Just to be clear, it's ok to talk about people swinging from Jay or Mike's nut sack, or about being Doom groupies, or McDaniels' haters, but using the term "Josh Groupies" is crossing a line and sad?

Did I get that right? :laugh::lol: :laugh: :hypocrisy: :laugh::lol: :laugh:

Sometimes I wonder if Jrwiz is Hot Carl. :laugh:

dogfish
06-11-2010, 12:36 PM
By that I mean only having skills at one thing pass rush. Which means sooner or later the OC will negate that by running at him like lots of folks do with freeny. We did it for years so please do not say it can't be done.



yea, OCs negated freeney so well this year that he got 13.5 sacks, and played in the super bowl. . .

really made him useless, didn't they?


:lol:


if it's so easy to negate doom, why didn't anyone do it this year? what were they waiting for?

Gimpygod
06-11-2010, 12:46 PM
I was vocal whne Paxton was brought in could have cared less about the others menetioned for the most part they were as good if not better than the mokes we had. PLUS they had a clue on what JOish was looking for.
As for Paxton IIRC leaches contract was about up as it was. And IIRC the money Paxton signed for was about 250K a year more than leach got with the new contract

Yes Doom has been above avaerage overall but not consustent. IIRC without looking at thhe stats 8-12-5-17 whule working in diffenerent schemes

But the rushing the passer is not vrain surgery either hand on ground, pin ears back and go. Now if there is something I'm missing there let me know.

He is a good kid and far diiferent than the others you menetioned and they are gone for those reasons

BUT that does not mean he deserves top five money for being a part time OLB.

By that I mean only having skills at one thing pass rush. Which means sooner or later the OC will negate that by running at him like lots of folks do with freeny. We did it for years so please do not say it can't be done.

Let him improve his game in at least the Run defense then pay him NOT top 5 but an appriorate number.

Not hard to comprehend when you get past he lead the league in sacks in a contract year, in a new scheme that no one had seen before

BTW does anyone know how many of those Gazaillion yards the RBs we faced those last few games came from running at DOOM I'm guess some of them.

I do not hate the guy but I'm not drioling over him like aome here are either.

I suspect he will get a raise in his next contract comenserate with his other abilities. Whether it be in DEN or somewhere else. I will not morn his loss if that happens.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

then I find it completely interesting why you root for a particular team? if there are zero players for which you have an affinity why are you rooting why do you care? And again, how are you not being hypocritical when your every post aabout Shanahan is negative and delves into quantum physics level complexity to show how even his good moves and strategies wwere in fact bad? I get favorite sports teams because of the players,, the coaching staff and location. We are shedding great players and beginning to crap on great players of high moral fiber. Is that really the type of team you want to root for? I'm starting to think McDaniels could open up a gas chamber and you'd be explaining how that is good for motivation.

Bosco
06-11-2010, 12:49 PM
You do realize that MOST of the conversation in this thread is simply people responding to the McDaniels' groupies who keep saying that Dumervil is a one dimensional scrub who doesn't deserve anything more than a journeyman's contract?

And they're wrong.

T.K.O.
06-11-2010, 12:53 PM
just got off the horn with doom,says all is well and he will sign his tender saturday afternoon or sunday morning.
then his agent will continue to work on an extension through the summer!:nixon:
there will be peace in the valley !

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 01:00 PM
yea, OCs negated freeney so well this year that he got 13.5 sacks, and played in the super bowl. . .

really made him useless, didn't they?


:lol:


if it's so easy to negate doom, why didn't anyone do it this year? what were they waiting for?


Lets see, did freeny lead them to the superbowl all by himself or did they have a HOF QB and great offense make that happen.

The OC took DOOM out of the picture in his third year IIRC getting less than half the sacks he did the year before. 5 IIRC .

So it is a matter of time before it happens. he may still get 6-12 but I doubt he break 12 or so a year from this point on UNLESS the rest of the D picks it up.

Tned
06-11-2010, 01:05 PM
Lets see, did freeny lead them to the superbowl all by himself or did they have a HOF QB and great offense make that happen.

The OC took DOOM out of the picture in his third year IIRC getting less than half the sacks he did the year before. 5 IIRC .

So it is a matter of time before it happens. he may still get 6-12 but I doubt he break 12 or so a year from this point on UNLESS the rest of the D picks it up.

Wow, only 12 sacks. Throw him to the curb. I keep forgetting how we've been churning out 6-12 sack guys for years. NOT!!!!

dogfish
06-11-2010, 01:05 PM
Lets see, did freeny lead them to the superbowl all by himself or did they have a HOF QB and great offense make that happen.

The OC took DOOM out of the picture in his third year IIRC getting less than half the sacks he did the year before. 5 IIRC .

So it is a matter of time before it happens. he may still get 6-12 but I doubt he break 12 or so a year from this point on UNLESS the rest of the D picks it up.

what?

stop making stuff up!

:lol:


our own pathetic DC took elvis out of the picture in '08, not anything OCs did. . . if OCs could take him out they would have last year, period-- they couldn't. . . .

dogfish
06-11-2010, 01:06 PM
Wow, only 12 sacks. Throw him to the curb. I keep forgetting how we've been churning out 6-12 sack guys for years. NOT!!!!

getting 12 sacks in a year = getting negated

Krugan
06-11-2010, 01:07 PM
Lets see, did freeny lead them to the superbowl all by himself or did they have a HOF QB and great offense make that happen.

The OC took DOOM out of the picture in his third year IIRC getting less than half the sacks he did the year before. 5 IIRC .

So it is a matter of time before it happens. he may still get 6-12 but I doubt he break 12 or so a year from this point on UNLESS the rest of the D picks it up.

You keep arguing that off year, that number that just doesnt match up to the rest. It wasnt about the OC taking doom out of the picture, the defense as a whole, was out of the picture.

I think if you look at dooms 3rd year, you will see that the WHOLE D was off. Not just his numbers.

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 01:19 PM
then I find it completely interesting why you root for a particular team? if there are zero players for which you have an affinity why are you rooting why do you care? And again, how are you not being hypocritical when your every post aabout Shanahan is negative and delves into quantum physics level complexity to show how even his good moves and strategies wwere in fact bad? I get favorite sports teams because of the players,, the coaching staff and location. We are shedding great players and beginning to crap on great players of high moral fiber. Is that really the type of team you want to root for? I'm starting to think McDaniels could open up a gas chamber and you'd be explaining how that is good for motivation.
Guess you have missed the fact that I have been a Bronco fan since before their first game and had season tickets while in HS saving the money for mowing lawns all summer, to go to games from from day one to 1979 when I moved out of state for good. being transferred with a great promotion to Upstate NY. Following them from there was next to impossible then transferred to LA where it was easier as I could go to Raider and SAN games each year.

SO why Am I bronco fan?

It is not because of a single or group of players. Although I have had my favorites over the years.

I did not jump on the band wagon like most of the members here after they got John or jay or TD.

I my friend probably have spent more time waiting in the urinal line at old MILE HIGH than you have as being a fan.


I want what is best for the club not individuals Star or scrub player they are my BRONCOS .

BEing in management for more then 4 DEcades gives my insight that some do not have and it is obvious to me listening to the spend it all fans that they would run this team into bankruptcy in a heartbeat in an uncapped year just to win a few more games. To sign popular players fan favorites at any cost.

Without any regards to what happens next year or 4 years from now.

We were in cap hell for almost a decade with mikeys FA recruitments most of whom were duds when they got here. OK players but tally overpriced.

All the while screwing up the drafts for almost a decade for first day players the ones that good/great teams build their franchises with.

NAme more than 5 first day players from 1999 to 2005 that signed a second contract name more than 2 players that signed a third contract that was not a redo for cap purposes (giving them upfront money to get under the cap) .



As GM and or HC they have to balance out what is best for the team long term and what does it take to win now.

mikey never did that I believe that this FO is trying to build for the future while getting as many winners as they can today. I believe that was an edict that Pat put in place after seeing what mikey did for years.

Now does that help to understand WHY I'm a bronco fan.

Why are you?

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 01:23 PM
Wow, only 12 sacks. Throw him to the curb. I keep forgetting how we've been churning out 6-12 sack guys for years. NOT!!!!

who the hell was in charge for YEARS before this kid came to town.

mikey never gave a damn about defense we all know that if he had he could have had lots of FA for that matter lots of Talented DL types over the years he chose to pass on in the draft.

SO lets not play that card OK.

hell the ones that were worth a crap he ALLOWED to leave because he did not have the space under that cap or waited to long to try to resign them.

claymore
06-11-2010, 01:32 PM
who the hell was in charge for YEARS before this kid came to town.

mikey never gave a damn about defense we all know that if he had he could have had lots of FA for that matter lots of Talented DL types over the years he chose to pass on in the draft.

SO lets not play that card OK.

hell the ones that were worth a crap he ALLOWED to leave because he did not have the space under that cap or waited to long to try to resign them.
Mike spent more high draft picks on defense then he did offense.

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 01:35 PM
what?

stop making stuff up!

:lol:


our own pathetic DC took elvis out of the picture in '08, not anything OCs did. . . if OCs could take him out they would have last year, period-- they couldn't. . . .

So his skill level was the same and no one planned against him it was all Slowitts fault KNOWING his job was on the line he took him out of the game? Makes sense to me.


getting 12 sacks in a year = getting negated

which year did he get 12 his second then he went to 5 in his third year, after the OCs found a way to slow him down. then by switching out of the DE position he got 17. If you look at his play this past year there were games he did not get near the QB and got NO sacks and there were games where he got a couple. the first half of the season he was on pace to break the 22 record in about the 14th game or so from that point on he was very off and on.

Do you not see a pattern here?


You keep arguing that off year, that number that just doesnt match up to the rest. It wasnt about the OC taking doom out of the picture, the defense as a whole, was out of the picture.

I think if you look at dooms 3rd year, you will see that the WHOLE D was off. Not just his numbers.

see above I'm sure there was some OC and some our own ineptitude in the numbers swinging like they were.

BUT I remember lots of folks ragging on Doom for disappearing in his third year, with many saying he would never be able to transform into a OLB that he did not have the ability to play with out his hand on the ground.

So now most have jumped on the give him top money because he lead the league ONE year when the previous leader had been hurt most of the year. Most likely the only reason he did not repeat.

Krugan
06-11-2010, 01:50 PM
So his skill level was the same and no one planned against him it was all Slowitts fault KNOWING his job was on the line he took him out of the game? Makes sense to me.



which year did he get 12 his second then he went to 5 in his third year, after the OCs found a way to slow him down. then by switching out of the DE position he got 17. If you look at his play this past year there were games he did not get near the QB and got NO sacks and there were games where he got a couple. the first half of the season he was on pace to break the 22 record in about the 14th game or so from that point on he was very off and on.

Do you not see a pattern here?



see above I'm sure there was some OC and some our own ineptitude in the numbers swinging like they were.

BUT I remember lots of folks ragging on Doom for disappearing in his third year, with many saying he would never be able to transform into a OLB that he did not have the ability to play with out his hand on the ground.

So now most have jumped on the give him top money because he lead the league ONE year when the previous leader had been hurt most of the year. Most likely the only reason he did not repeat.

This isnt about bandwagon for me, Doom has been a good egg, and played at a very solid level for the majority of his career. He also meets the standard for high character players, that seems to be the hot spot for this leadership group.

All I am saying is, this team hasnt even batted an eye at shipping out the talent that seems to not quite be high character, but its farting around in making a statement to a player that has performed.

They NEED to pay Doom just to show that there is a reward for being a stand up guy, not to mention he is 90% of our sacks over the last 4 years.(number may not be correct, as it is assumed in previous posts that "im sure" the oc's had something to do with it, along with the other possiblities such as craptastic overall defense)

Northman
06-11-2010, 01:52 PM
They NEED to pay Doom just to show that there is a reward for being a stand up guy, not to mention he is 90% of our sacks over the last 4 years.(number may not be correct, as it is assumed in previous posts that "im sure" the oc's had something to do with it, along with the other possiblities such as craptastic overall defense)


Exactly. :salute:

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 02:14 PM
This isnt about bandwagon for me, Doom has been a good egg, and played at a very solid level for the majority of his career. He also meets the standard for high character players, that seems to be the hot spot for this leadership group.

All I am saying is, this team hasnt even batted an eye at shipping out the talent that seems to not quite be high character, but its farting around in making a statement to a player that has performed.

They NEED to pay Doom just to show that there is a reward for being a stand up guy, not to mention he is 90% of our sacks over the last 4 years.(number may not be correct, as it is assumed in previous posts that "im sure" the oc's had something to do with it, along with the other possiblities such as craptastic overall defense)



Mostly you are on the money

I have no issue with giving him a decent contract. one commensurate wit his actual skills.

The bone of contention is is he worth top 5 money like some are willing to give him for being 1/3 of an OLB. great at sack, lousy at being able to drop back in coverage, and mediocre at best at run defense.

TO some that sack thingy is all he needs to do, after all ALL teams have specialists..:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

To me and a few others being paid top 5 money means you have to be able to do all of those things at least well.

I have stated that IF our new HC and GM give him the money that they must see something in him that I do not.

But, rewarding him with bank breaking guaranteed money because he is a great kid and lead the league in sack one year when the perennial leaders were injured for most of the year well is not a good Idea.

since he was only a OLB for one year lets see what he can do to hone those other skills before selling the farm for him. If he is concerned about a career ending injury insurance is avail to cover that contingency until he proves to be more than a one trick pony for one year.

Zweems56
06-11-2010, 02:18 PM
Not sure why this is even still in discussion. They're not giving him bank breaking money as evidenced by the fact that there isn't a deal done yet, and they're also not going to let him go either. Deal will be done at some point for probably right at top 5 money, but not past top 10 money.

/thread

T.K.O.
06-11-2010, 02:38 PM
DOOM is a BADAZZ !
and i hope he is a bronco for years to come !:salute:

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 02:50 PM
Not sure why this is even still in discussion. They're not giving him bank breaking money as evidenced by the fact that there isn't a deal done yet, and they're also not going to let him go either. Deal will be done at some point for probably right at top 5 money, but not past top 10 money.

/thread

lets hope they do come to an agreeable number and he remains a bronco for years.

he is an asset to the team.

Denver Native (Carol)
06-11-2010, 03:42 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15278366

As the Broncos first mandatory minicamp got underway Friday morning, Champ Bailey, DJ Williams and Elvis Dumervil stood together, joking on the sidelines.

The Broncos and Dumervil may have plenty of work to do before they can agree on a new contract, but that Dumervil was here, yucking it up with his teammates, was certainly a positive sign.

Dumervil showed up for the mandatory camp as expected despite being the only veteran player not under contract.

"I'm trying not to bite my tongue and trying not to say too much at the same time, but he's a guy that we need," Bailey said. "And I wish things would work out a lot faster than they are. Hopefully by the time when it counts, the season, we'll have it done. Because we need him."

Dumervil participated in everything in the two-hour practices except full-team drills, just like he has since voluntary practices started in late May.

The team has told Dumervil, via letter, that he has until Monday to sign his restricted free agent tender worth $3.168 million. Should Dumervil choose not to sign, the team could reduce his 2010 salary to about $630,000.

"We've got plenty of time here in the next couple of days. I'm sure everything is going to work out fine," coach Josh McDaniels said.

McDaniels said Broncos general manager Brian Xanders is continuing to work with Dumervil's agent on a new long-term contract that has "nothing to do with" the restricted free agent tender situation.

"We want to continue to push to get everything done that we want to get done, which is to have him here for a long time," McDaniels said. "So, there's no negative tone at all. We're going to do the best we can to make sure he's here for as long as we can keep him."

With Dumervil not participating in team drills, former first-round draft pick Jarvis Moss saw plenty of time with the first-team base defense Friday. Robert Ayers, a first-round pick in 2010, spent most of Friday's practice on the sideline as a "coaching decision," McDaniels said.

On offense, second-year wide receiver Kenny McKinley worked as the team's third wide receiver, behind Jabar Gaffney and Eddie Royal, ahead of veteran Brandon Lloyd, while rookie offensive linemen Zane Beadles spent most of the practice at left guard.

Beadles spent much of May and early June practicing at tackle.

T.K.O.
06-11-2010, 03:49 PM
"Robert Ayers, a first-round pick in 2010, spent most of Friday's practice on the sideline as a "coaching decision," McDaniels said."


oh no....

oh crap !


OH SH*& !
:shocked:

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 04:04 PM
The sky is falling the sky is falling. OMG what are we going to do.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
06-11-2010, 04:06 PM
Ayers, the Broncos' No. 18 overall draft pick in 2009 and a rookie disappointment, has been demoted. Jarvis Moss, the Broncos' first-round pick in 2007 who has been a three-year disappointment, and undrafted rookie Kevin Alexander have been working with the first team.

well hey, there we go!

screw dumervil, we have jarvis moss and kevin alexander!

solved!


if that midget one-trick pony won't sign for the vet minimum and love of the TEAM, hell with 'im. . . we'll just play moss and alexander-- think of all the money we could save if there was still a salary cap. . .

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 04:07 PM
"Robert Ayers, a first-round pick in 2010, spent most of Friday's practice on the sideline as a "coaching decision," McDaniels said."


oh no....

oh crap !


OH SH*& !
:shocked:

Could mean they want to get someone behind him playing time.

Could mean they are happy with his progress and/or want tio rest him.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 06:15 PM
what?

stop making stuff up!

:lol:


our own pathetic DC took elvis out of the picture in '08, not anything OCs did. . . if OCs could take him out they would have last year, period-- they couldn't. . . .

Dumervil had hand injury in '08 as well as being in a bad scheme.

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 06:53 PM
well hey, there we go!

screw dumervil, we have jarvis moss and kevin alexander!

solved!


if that midget one-trick pony won't sign for the vet minimum and love of the TEAM, hell with 'im. . . we'll just play moss and alexander-- think of all the money we could save if there was still a salary cap. . .

Maybe I'm mistaken but wasn't McDaniels counting on Ayers to be a starter this year?

T.K.O.
06-11-2010, 08:12 PM
it is very possible that the team is required to notify doom of the rules regarding rfa contracts and tenders.
i doubt they did this to piss him off when they have been in negotiations.
i would bet it's a legal issue that they inform him what happens when a tender goes unsigned.
and i doubt it means they would not gladly give him at least the 3.? mil if they can't work out a deal by the 15th.
just more press drama if you ask me !:salute:

OK so you did'nt believe me when i said it......
how about when the coach says it

On the Broncos' written correspondence with Dumervil
"There's the normal policy and procedure with the CBA. We're certainly not unique in that at all. There are so many teams that have done that. We'd like to have all our players under contract in training camp. There's certainly no message sent with that at all. Hopefully, like I said, we're working with Gary to get something done. It has nothing to do with (sending a message). We'd like to have everybody under contract at training camp. It's simple."

On whether the team could lower their offer to Dumervil as time goes on
"I'm not going to get into this. We have plenty of time here in the next couple days. I'm sure everything is going to play out fine."

Northman
06-11-2010, 08:16 PM
Maybe I'm mistaken but wasn't McDaniels counting on Ayers to be starter this year?

Ooops. :lol:

Northman
06-11-2010, 08:17 PM
OK so you did'nt believe me when i said it......
how about when the coach says it

On the Broncos' written correspondence with Dumervil
"There's the normal policy and procedure with the CBA. We're certainly not unique in that at all. There are so many teams that have done that. We'd like to have all our players under contract in training camp. There's certainly no message sent with that at all. Hopefully, like I said, we're working with Gary to get something done. It has nothing to do with (sending a message). We'd like to have everybody under contract at training camp. It's simple."

On whether the team could lower their offer to Dumervil as time goes on
"I'm not going to get into this. We have plenty of time here in the next couple days. I'm sure everything is going to play out fine."

Jay Cutler is our guy........wait..... :lol:

Softskull
06-11-2010, 08:27 PM
Could mean they want to get someone behind him playing time.

Could mean they are happy with his progress and/or want tio rest him.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Come on, they're resting him on the first day of minicamp? And a second year guy doesn't need the reps? Hmmm.

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 08:55 PM
Come on, they're resting him on the first day of minicamp? And a second year guy doesn't need the reps? Hmmm.

So you think that Moss has the edge now?

I suspect that because he got the majority of the reps in all of the OTAs he is getting some rest . but then I could be wrong about moss being the best also.

there seems to be a lot of odd rotations going on from what I read in the mini camp thread.

TIME will tell

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 10:33 PM
Dang if Ayers needs rest because OTAs were grueling what does that say about the kind of shape he's in? :shocked: OTAs are not rigorous compared to camp.

broncohead
06-11-2010, 11:25 PM
McD probably wants to see where those other guys are at. They are probably on the bubble and playing for a roster spot where Ayers is not.

TXBRONC
06-11-2010, 11:41 PM
McD probably wants to see where those other guys are at. They are probably on the bubble and playing for a roster spot where Ayers is not.

Maybe but the report says he was demoted which is different than just letting guys who are behind him get reps. Tebow took snaps 2nd in 7 on 7 drills but he's still the 3rd string quarterback atm.

Lonestar
06-11-2010, 11:58 PM
McD probably wants to see where those other guys are at. They are probably on the bubble and playing for a roster spot where Ayers is not.

Seems awfully logical to me.

Good post.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
06-12-2010, 12:21 AM
Maybe but the report says he was demoted which different than just letting guys who are behind him get reps. Tebow took snaps 2nd in 7 on 7 drills but he's still the 3rd string quarterback atm.

:lol:

Yeaaaaa. They arent going to say demoted when he's trying to look at the other talent. Amazing.

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 01:20 AM
MCD Sat a bunch of guys last years OTa's as coaching decisions.....even alphonso smith sat 1 day.....who knows what the reason is but i doubt it should be big enough to cause the stir on this board it has so far.....im sure ayers will be just fine....

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 01:21 AM
the bigger story is maybe our 2007 1st rd pick moss is finally showing something worth a damn, maybe he will avoid the bust title by contributing for a change

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 01:24 AM
i mean really people perrish cox started ahead of both champ and andre goodman in drills friday at times, lets create conspiracy about that to....

Northman
06-12-2010, 02:13 AM
i mean really people perrish cox started ahead of both champ and andre goodman in drills friday at times, lets create conspiracy about that to....

Did they say Champ was demoted?

Lonestar
06-12-2010, 03:58 AM
Much ado about nothing.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 09:54 AM
Did they say Champ was demoted?

its no different its the DP making much ado about nothing.....i have no worries about ayers maybe he was late, maybe it was a personal thing.....no one knows especially the DP who consistently assumes all kinds of crap its June for christs sake...ayers could be the very last guy getting reps and i wouldnt care.....

Training camp and pre-season, thats when pads go on and boys become men....talk to me then if moss, that UDFA, kirlew, and atkins are still ahead of ayers....then we have a problem.....

demoted....jesus where did they get that info from....hilarious...ayers is sitting becasue of a coaching decision....so that meas he is demoted????

no at worst he is in the dog house for reasons only probally he and MCD know....

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 09:56 AM
Did they say Champ was demoted?

no but i will start andre goodman was sitting behind perrish cox some friday so it means he is demoted....see the DP should hire me to....LOL:beer::D

pnbronco
06-12-2010, 11:23 AM
its no different its the DP making much ado about nothing.....i have no worries about ayers maybe he was late, maybe it was a personal thing.....no one knows especially the DP who consistently assumes all kinds of crap its June for christs sake...ayers could be the very last guy getting reps and i wouldnt care.....

Training camp and pre-season, thats when pads go on and boys become men....talk to me then if moss, that UDFA, kirlew, and atkins are still ahead of ayers....then we have a problem.....

demoted....jesus where did they get that info from....hilarious...ayers is sitting becasue of a coaching decision....so that meas he is demoted????

no at worst he is in the dog house for reasons only probally he and MCD know....

IMO everyone is trying to get "the story" out there before anyone else, so they throw a bunch of junk out there and see if anyone bites.

It's June and what that means is they are in their last formal mini camp before training camp actually starts at the end of July. If we are in the same place at the end of pre season then it's a story, not now.

Northman
06-12-2010, 12:48 PM
no but i will start andre goodman was sitting behind perrish cox some friday so it means he is demoted....see the DP should hire me to....LOL:beer::D

Actually, its not the same thing Ele which is what TX and i were getting at. You dont go out on a limb and say a guy is demoted unless there is more too it than that. Now, they could be wrong like you said but even that is assumption on your part. But i do find it very odd that they dont mention "demoted" in regards to any other player out there. Obviously we are going to see players switching roles throughout TC and PS but again none of those players were strapped with the "demoted" title so it does beg to question whats going on there. Just because you simple dont agree with it doesnt make the story untrue.

dogfish
06-12-2010, 03:40 PM
demoted....jesus where did they get that info from....hilarious...ayers is sitting becasue of a coaching decision....so that meas he is demoted????

no at worst he is in the dog house for reasons only probally he and MCD know....

man, if that's the case, i sure hope McD's doghouse isn't a deep, dark, inescapable dungeon like shanahan's. . . :shocked:

we've already seen hillis get buried so deep he didn't come out with his job. . .

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 03:43 PM
Actually, its not the same thing Ele which is what TX and i were getting at. You dont go out on a limb and say a guy is demoted unless there is more too it than that. Now, they could be wrong like you said but even that is assumption on your part. But i do find it very odd that they dont mention "demoted" in regards to any other player out there. Obviously we are going to see players switching roles throughout TC and PS but again none of those players were strapped with the "demoted" title so it does beg to question whats going on there. Just because you simple dont agree with it doesnt make the story untrue.

and just becasue you do agree with it doesnt make it true either.....what i see is people pick and choose what they want to belive from the DP when it suits them..im guilty of it as well...my stance now is i dont belive any of that crap till i see it...all the BS paige, kizla, and klis spew is enough to fly every hot air ballon in the world:lol:

like i said how do you know MCd wasnt just irritated with something he did the day before or the week earlier in passing camp....and said chill for a day..it happens in the NFL All over the place....shanny loved sitting players for a day under the coaching decision mantra...more often than not a media writer assumes coaching decision is bad and creates a stretch of the truth becasue they dont have anything concrete to grasp there fingers around....its there job fine...but if ayers is sucking 3rd/4th string come TC then maybe they are on to something...just becasue a DP writer said it....doesnt mean demoted is what went down....should we assume tebow is getting promoted every time he is ahead of quinn, what if orton sits a practice...does that mean he aint the starter..teh DP can easily stretch that and have with many thigs before..????

the fact is the players are moving all over the place and the broncos depth chart doesnt take shape till early august, so when a writer says a player is demoted because he was sitting for a day but know one else backs that up.....and its only june for christs sakes...i tend to call the BS flag...since 90% of the teams have very little idea who is in what position on a depth chart....if the denver FO doesnt know there own depth chart right now...how does the DP???? they phycsic???? if so they need to to hook me up on how to get a million dollars quick:lol::beer:

you and i realtively take the same approach on alot of things but a article about ayers supposed demotion in june is just hilarious to me, when the broncos dont have a real depth chart till august...ayers is back end then? fine we got a story....but if we can give moss 4 years to get his crap staright, im pretty 1 day for ayers isnt a big deal:lol:

Elevation inc
06-12-2010, 03:47 PM
man, if that's the case, i sure hope McD's doghouse isn't a deep, dark, inescapable dungeon like shanahan's. . . :shocked:

we've already seen hillis get buried so deep he didn't come out with his job. . .

lol, remember mike bell...lol that was nearly identical to me, for the hillis thing...i belive hillis wanted to be the RB, MCD wanted him to be a FB, and it went down hill from there....exactly what went down with mike bell after very good rookie stint...lol

dogfish
06-12-2010, 03:48 PM
all the BS paige, kizla, and klis spew is enough to fly every hot air ballon in the world:lol:



woody could inflate an onion sack. . . .

Ravage!!!
06-12-2010, 04:44 PM
who the hell was in charge for YEARS before this kid came to town.

mikey never gave a damn about defense we all know that if he had he could have had lots of FA for that matter lots of Talented DL types over the years he chose to pass on in the draft.

SO lets not play that card OK.

hell the ones that were worth a crap he ALLOWED to leave because he did not have the space under that cap or waited to long to try to resign them.

I keep reading this from you...

But how many picks did we use on the BIG need at DT/DL this year? What? We spent it all on offense????? ow is it we aren't hearing the same criticisms about this coaching/FO's draft choice?? Oh, I know....Damn that Mike Shnahan did it to us AGAIN!!!

Lonestar
06-12-2010, 06:39 PM
and just becasue you do agree with it doesnt make it true either.....what i see is people pick and choose what they want to belive from the DP when it suits them..im guilty of it as well...my stance now is i dont belive any of that crap till i see it...all the BS paige, kizla, and klis spew is enough to fly every hot air ballon in the world:lol:

like i said how do you know MCd wasnt just irritated with something he did the day before or the week earlier in passing camp....and said chill for a day..it happens in the NFL All over the place....shanny loved sitting players for a day under the coaching decision mantra...more often than not a media writer assumes coaching decision is bad and creates a stretch of the truth becasue they dont have anything concrete to grasp there fingers around....its there job fine...but if ayers is sucking 3rd/4th string come TC then maybe they are on to something...just becasue a DP writer said it....doesnt mean demoted is what went down....should we assume tebow is getting promoted every time he is ahead of quinn, what if orton sits a practice...does that mean he aint the starter..teh DP can easily stretch that and have with many thigs before..????

the fact is the players are moving all over the place and the broncos depth chart doesnt take shape till early august, so when a writer says a player is demoted because he was sitting for a day but know one else backs that up.....and its only june for christs sakes...i tend to call the BS flag...since 90% of the teams have very little idea who is in what position on a depth chart....if the denver FO doesnt know there own depth chart right now...how does the DP???? they phycsic???? if so they need to to hook me up on how to get a million dollars quick:lol::beer:

you and i realtively take the same approach on alot of things but a article about ayers supposed demotion in june is just hilarious to me, when the broncos dont have a real depth chart till august...ayers is back end then? fine we got a story....but if we can give moss 4 years to get his crap staright, im pretty 1 day for ayers isnt a big deal:lol:


actually Kliss, Kieger and Jones are pretty good Reporters don't opinionated the story or guess much.

That said woody and kliza are something that every once in a while get it almost correct.

I sure miss Schefter he was the best at getting it right.

Lonestar
06-12-2010, 06:41 PM
this seemed to be the freshest news on this not sure if someone posted it or not as I've been away


Broncos, Dumervil unsettled on contract situation
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
POSTED: 06/12/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

There are various ways for the average American to view a contract dispute between a mega-million-dollar franchise and a millionaire athlete.

One would be that Broncos linebacker Elvis Dumervil, who makes a living playing football, should be doing backflips at getting paid $3.168 million this year.

This might be the worldly, teacher-scientist-fireman perspective.

Then there's the myopic, dreamy outlook from within the professional football galaxy, where Dumervil is grossly underpaid coming off a 17-sack NFL season. To the players who share his universe, the Broncos have no choice in the matter. They must pay Dumervil, who is looking for a long-term contract.

"I'm trying not to bite my tongue and trying not to say too much at the same time," said Broncos star cornerback Champ Bailey, who wouldn't mind slipping to second highest-paid on the Broncos' salary list. "But he's a guy that we need. And I wish things would work out a lot faster than they are."
The Broncos guaranteed $8.06 million to pass rusher Jarvis Moss, a first-round pick in 2007, and $9.7 million to pass rusher Robert Ayers, a first-round pick in 2009. For that combined $17.76 million expense, the Broncos have received 3.5 sacks in four combined seasons from Moss and Ayers.

To offset that disappointing return on their investment, the Broncos have paid $2.015 million over the previous four years to Dumervil, who in turn gave them 43 sacks.

It's not that the Broncos do not want to pay Dumervil. They're just not ready to give Dumervil a $65 million-plus contract with a $40 million-plus guarantee that would put him among the five highest-paid pass rushers in the NFL.

Dumervil's contract situation overshadowed even Tim Tebow and the quarterback competition Friday as the Broncos opened their mandatory, three-day minicamp.

"I didn't want the whole circus and controversy with the media, but it's out there, obviously," Dumervil said.

Negotiations between Broncos general manager Brian Xanders and Dumervil's agent, Gary Wichard, had been moving, if at considerable arm's length. The bargaining sessions were rattled when the Broncos sent a letter to Dumervil this week stating that if he didn't sign his $3.168 million tender by Monday, the team would exercise the right to cut his 2010 salary to 10 percent above what he made last year.

This was not the collective bargaining rule stating clubs must notify such intentions to their unsigned restricted free agents by June 1. This was a second letter, meant specifically for Dumervil, sent earlier this week that the Broncos weren't obligated to issue.

"No, but we're certainly not unique at all," Broncos coach Josh McDaniels said. "We'd like to have all the players under contract in training camp. There's certainly no message sent with that at all."

New England's Logan Mankins, and San Diego receiver Vincent Jackson, who starred at Widefield High School, were among the many unsigned restricted free agents who received similar formal threats. The letters have irritated the recipients while causing some, such as Jackson and Chargers teammate Marcus McNeill, to make counter-threats of not signing the tender and holding out of training camp.

Dumervil had a far less hostile reaction.

"Being here, going on my fifth year, I've seen a lot, so I'm not surprised by anything, really," he said.

He will sign his tender by Monday. And with or without a new contract, he is likely to show up for the first day of training camp. Holdouts rarely work, anyway, and they figure to have less impact with the possibility of a league work stoppage in 2011.

Said Bailey: "Being the professional that he is, he's done everything by the book, since Day One. I expect him to do it from here on out. . . . He doesn't have to be here. And they don't have to pay him. I mean he wouldn't be wrong by not being here, but I think it says a lot about him by being here because he's not actually under contract. I know he wants to know the system, and know his teammates. And it feels good to me, as a guy who has been around a while to have a guy take that approach."
http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_15281582

turftoad
06-13-2010, 10:21 AM
Robert Ayers residing in the doghouse
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on June 12, 2010 7:13 PM ET
Do the Broncos have the next Vernon Gholston on their hands?

It's way too early to call 2009 first-round pick Robert Ayers a bust, but a deeply disappointing rookie season has only turned worse this offseason.

Ayers worked with the second team defense at linebacker for the second straight day at minicamp on Saturday, despite Elvis Dumervil sitting out 11-on-11 drills.

Asked if Ayers was being punished, coach Josh McDaniels said, "I'm not going to talk about it."

The former college defensive end struggled converting to linebacker last season, making only 19 tackles. Ayers only has to look up on the depth chart to remember that his first-round status will continue to provide him chances.

Now lining up as Broncos starter at minicamp: 2007 No. 17 overall pick Jarvis Moss.

Northman
06-13-2010, 10:54 AM
Guess there was nothing to his "demotion".


*snicker*

nevcraw
06-13-2010, 10:59 AM
Robert Ayers residing in the doghouse
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on June 12, 2010 7:13 PM ET
Do the Broncos have the next Vernon Gholston on their hands?

It's way too early to call 2009 first-round pick Robert Ayers a bust, but a deeply disappointing rookie season has only turned worse this offseason.

Ayers worked with the second team defense at linebacker for the second straight day at minicamp on Saturday, despite Elvis Dumervil sitting out 11-on-11 drills.

Asked if Ayers was being punished, coach Josh McDaniels said, "I'm not going to talk about it."

The former college defensive end struggled converting to linebacker last season, making only 19 tackles. Ayers only has to look up on the depth chart to remember that his first-round status will continue to provide him chances.

Now lining up as Broncos starter at minicamp: 2007 No. 17 overall pick Jarvis Moss.

so was he told to sit out or was he running second string? I have now read both..

Elevation inc
06-13-2010, 11:04 AM
Guess there was nothing to his "demotion".


*snicker*

*snicker back at ya*.....:lol:

June thats all i have to say...there is no such thing as a demotion in june just ask jarvis moss 4 years after he was drafted...2 sacks in 4 years and he gets chances...im sure there really is nothing to the demotion....other than ayers made a mistake somewhere and is being put on notice....punishment maybe...demotion??? well like i said its june...cant demote someone when there isnt even a depth chart....all you can do is move bodies around...

Northman
06-13-2010, 11:09 AM
*snicker back at ya*.....:lol:

June thats all i have to say...there is no such thing as a demotion in june just ask jarvis moss 4 years after he was drafted...2 sacks in 4 years and he gets chances...im sure there really is nothing to the demotion....other than ayers made a mistake somewhere and is being put on notice....punishment maybe...demotion??? well like i said its june...cant demote someone when there isnt even a depth chart....all you can do is move bodies around...

True dat but you have to admit when someone gets in McD's doghouse it usually does not end well for said player.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 11:12 AM
So we have rosenhaus who ever the hell he is saying he has been demoted because of his play so far.

Let's see if I have this correct. Doom had 42 tackles as a full time OLB.
Ayers had 17 playing spot duty at best. IIRC of those 42 tackles 17 were sacks if my math is correct that means 25 actual other tackles to 17. Does not seem to be that much difference after every thing is said and done.

I know that many love doom to much to see the obvious but some do not.

Ayers is not part of the Doom contract issue and probably should be in a thread of its own.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

turftoad
06-13-2010, 11:15 AM
So we have rosenhaus who ever the hell he is saying he has been demoted because of his play so far.

Let's see if I have this correct. Doom had 42 tackles as a full time OLB.
Ayers had 17 playing spot duty at best. IIRC of those 42 tackles 17 were sacks if my math is correct that means 25 actual other tackles to 17. Does not seem to be that much difference after every thing is said and done.

I know that many love doom to much to see the obvious but some do not.

Ayers is not part of the Doom contract issue and probably should be in a thread of its own.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Those 17 sacks were 17 more than Ayers had. Just sayin.

Northman
06-13-2010, 11:25 AM
Those 17 sacks were 17 more than Ayers had. Just sayin.

Well, Dware only had 45 tackles last year and less sacks. Must mean he sucks too. :lol:

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 11:41 AM
Well, Dware only had 45 tackles last year and less sacks. Must mean he sucks too. :lol:

Which was 40 some odd tackle less than he normally has must mean he had an off year due to an injury.

While doom had he best numbers that were HALF of Wares average numbers.

Not sure why you can't see that.
While I see that it was Dooms first year as an OLB the facts are he has never been able to play the run I do not see him ever being at Wares level and we will not even factor in the third part of being an OLB being able to drop back and cover a reciever.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
06-13-2010, 11:46 AM
Which was 40 some odd tackle less than he normally has must mean he had an off year due to an injury.

While doom had he best numbers that were HALF of Wares average numbers.

Not sure why you can't see that.
While I see that it was Dooms first year as an OLB the facts are he has never been able to play the run I do not see him ever being at Wares level and we will not even factor in the third part of being an OLB being able to drop back and cover a reciever.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


Doom was out 2 games last year so he also was injured. And Ware trying to cover a reciever is not any better than Doom. Doom had 3 less PD than Ware and 1 less in the FF dept and all this in his first year as OLB in a brand new scheme. So basically in his first year at a true position that benefits him he is already almost on par with the top guy in the league but i dont know why you cant see that.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 12:08 PM
Doom was out 2 games last year so he also was injured. And Ware trying to cover a reciever is not any better than Doom. Doom had 3 less PD than Ware and 1 less in the FF dept and all this in his first year as OLB in a brand new scheme. So basically in his first year at a true position that benefits him he is already almost on par with the top guy in the league but i dont know why you cant see that.

Without looking at the "stat" page I seem to recall that doom started every game. But could be wrong. Never said that ware was great about droppoing back just that he could.

As for the rest of your stats. Let's just say that Doom has been doing the exact same thing he has always done since college. Rush the passer albiet it from a different place on the DL this year hand on the ground outside the REAL DE instead of being the DE. So his numbers should be as good as Dwares right now. Since he does not drop in coverage and the. Other 25 tackles he made. Were half of what most OLBs average let's talk about $65 mil when he gets to that level.

Besides it is not up to me or you is it.

Time will tell who is right and who is not. IF they offer him a nut buster or if he is a FT player next year.

Please do not raise the team player aspect or it will send a message stict. That no one will every want to play here again because we don not pay for over inflated egos.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
06-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Without looking at the "stat" page I seem to recall that doom started every game. But could be wrong. Never said that ware was great about droppoing back just that he could.

As for the rest of your stats. Let's just say that Doom has been doing the exact same thing he has always done since college. Rush the passer albiet it from a different place on the DL this year hand on the ground outside the REAL DE instead of being the DE. So his numbers should be as good as Dwares right now. Since he does not drop in coverage and the. Other 25 tackles he made. Were half of what most OLBs average let's talk about $65 mil when he gets to that level.

Besides it is not up to me or you is it.

Time will tell who is right and who is not. IF they offer him a nut buster or if he is a FT player next year.

Please do not raise the team player aspect or it will send a message stict. That no one will every want to play here again because we don not pay for over inflated egos.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


I have looked at the stats and Doom played in 14 games last year. And what ego does Doom have? As for him playing as a pass rusher his entire career that much is true but Ware landed in a much more stable position than Doom did. And again Ware has had more consistency with where he was placed, scheme, and coaching than Doom has. Dont you think if Doom gets better help around him that he will improve more than he already has? I just cant follow the logic of you here. This isnt a guy facing off the field issues, this isnt a guy who crys that he wants out of Denver and he has gave 100% wherever he has been placed on this team and not bitched about it. Now, he has his best year ever when we finally have a little stability (although now Nolan is gone so who knows what will happen to the defense) he has proven that he can be a great player and most certainly the best pass rusher we have had in YEARS. The FACT that he is on par with even the best guy (after 3-4 years himself) after just one year speaks volumes to me. We arent paying anyone else on this team huge money so why not spend it on a guy who definitely deserves it?

Elevation inc
06-13-2010, 12:54 PM
True dat but you have to admit when someone gets in McD's doghouse it usually does not end well for said player.

oh im certain ayers is getting a little reminder and wake up call about what MCD feels is important.....but the MCd did draft ayers...so the leash could be longer than perhaps the other players that left denver....although if MCD boots ayers after a year or 2 all the excuses of how its just ex shanny guys goes out the window:lol:

for all we know this whole thing could be as small as ayers felt entitled to the starting spot across from doom with reid out and haggan inside now...and MCd is simply letting him know, you have to fight for it, nothing is given on this team...lol

BigBroncLove
06-13-2010, 01:02 PM
oh im certain ayers is getting a little reminder and wake up call about what MCD feels is important.....but the MCd did draft ayers...so the leash could be longer than perhaps the other players that left denver....although if MCD boots ayers after a year or 2 all the excuses of how its just ex shanny guys gopes out the window:lol:

for all we know this whole thing could be as small as ayers felt entitled to the starting spot across from doom with reid out and haggan inside now...and MCd is simply letting him know, you have to fight for it, nothing is given on this team...lol

What I think is the biggest change from last year and this year is McD has been emphatic that he will not elaborate on what Ayers issue was, why he was demoted, or how long it will last. He simply said it was, "a coaching decision".

Last year he made several issues well known in the media. Largely dealing with Marshall but to a degree Scheffler. It sent mixed messages being he wanted contract issues kept in house but chose to blab about other internal decisions publicly. IMO it shows a degree of maturity and a step back from what I saw as a double standard last year.

I doubt we'll know what the issue was until its some ways down the road and has become water under the bridge. I would imagine if it was level of play the staff, Ayers, or McD would be somewhat more open about what needs to be corrected and the reason for the shift.

Elevation inc
06-13-2010, 01:03 PM
So we have rosenhaus who ever the hell he is saying he has been demoted because of his play so far.

Let's see if I have this correct. Doom had 42 tackles as a full time OLB.
Ayers had 17 playing spot duty at best. IIRC of those 42 tackles 17 were sacks if my math is correct that means 25 actual other tackles to 17. Does not seem to be that much difference after every thing is said and done.

I know that many love doom to much to see the obvious but some do not.

Ayers is not part of the Doom contract issue and probably should be in a thread of its own.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums



JR you can not compare sacks to tackles.....there is a reason elite DE's get paid so much and it isnt for there 40 some odd tackles numbers....sacks matter in the pros with out them you end up bottom dwelling for long periods of time....

comparing ayers and doom is just ludicrous by using tackle stats.....personally i like ayers and feel he played well last year he was fingertips away from six plus sacks..., but i can not get behind you using both doom and ayers against each other in comparison....

BigBroncLove
06-13-2010, 01:26 PM
Without looking at the "stat" page I seem to recall that doom started every game. But could be wrong. Never said that ware was great about droppoing back just that he could.

As for the rest of your stats. Let's just say that Doom has been doing the exact same thing he has always done since college. Rush the passer albiet it from a different place on the DL this year hand on the ground outside the REAL DE instead of being the DE. So his numbers should be as good as Dwares right now. Since he does not drop in coverage and the. Other 25 tackles he made. Were half of what most OLBs average let's talk about $65 mil when he gets to that level.

Besides it is not up to me or you is it.

Time will tell who is right and who is not. IF they offer him a nut buster or if he is a FT player next year.

Please do not raise the team player aspect or it will send a message stict. That no one will every want to play here again because we don not pay for over inflated egos.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I don't understand why people concentrate on this tackle stat so much and proclaim it to be so below league standards or averages for good players. Here's all the league leaders in sack stats and Dooms 42 tackles, while not a league leader, is more than comparable in comparison to other big players at the DE and OLB position.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=SACKS&conference=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG

Ware had 45 tackles, Allen had 43, Freeney 19 (he played 14 games), Woodley 50, Orakpo 37, Banta Cain 35, Harrison 60, Matthews 37, and so and so on.

Point being, Dooms 42 tackles is not a terrible stat in comparison to other OLB or top DE's. If your saying that his sack numbers make that stat worse, I'm sorry, but I generally prefer a sack to a tackle. That doesn't mean Doom doesn't have ground to cover at his position to be become a more complete player at OLB but hes not this massive liability that people make him out to be either.

That of course is if your relying purely upon stats, which IMO, never tells a whole picture. It easy to get more tackles if say your D is on the field longer, or you have solid DLinemen funneling men to you. Some positions like the Mike LB are tailor made in some defenses to rack all the tackles up. To look at stats IMO in these scenarios are telling a very small part of a very large story.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 01:38 PM
I have looked at the stats and Doom played in 14 games last year. And what ego does Doom have? As for him playing as a pass rusher his entire career that much is true but Ware landed in a much more stable position than Doom did. And again Ware has had more consistency with where he was placed, scheme, and coaching than Doom has. Dont you think if Doom gets better help around him that he will improve more than he already has? I just cant follow the logic of you here. This isnt a guy facing off the field issues, this isnt a guy who crys that he wants out of Denver and he has gave 100% wherever he has been placed on this team and not bitched about it. Now, he has his best year ever when we finally have a little stability (although now Nolan is gone so who knows what will happen to the defense) he has proven that he can be a great player and most certainly the best pass rusher we have had in YEARS. The FACT that he is on par with even the best guy (after 3-4 years himself) after just one year speaks volumes to me. We arent paying anyone else on this team huge money so why not spend it on a guy who definitely deserves it?


2009: Dumervil, in his first year playing linebacker, was named a Pro Bowl starter after becoming the first Bronco in team history to lead the league in sacks with a club-record 17 (88.5 yds.)... Saw time in all 16 games (14 starts) and added 49 tackles (42 solo), three pass breakups, four forced fumbles and one fumble recovery... Earned first-team All-Pro recognition from the Associated Press, The Sporting News, Pro Football Weekly/PFWA and ESPN.com... Named Pass Rusher of the Year by the NFL Alumni... Received the Darrent Williams Good Guy Award from the Denver media... Set Denver’s single-game sack record with four vs. Cle. (9/20) that tied for the most sacks in a game by an NFL linebacker since 2000... Tied for the second fastest in NFL history to 10 sacks, reaching that mark in six games... Joined Indianapolis defensive end Dwight Freeney as one of two players in history to win a sack title at the NCAA-FBS and NFL levels... Had 11 sacks on third downs that tied for the most in the NFL since at least 1991... Led the league with a Broncos-record seven multiple-sack games.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=5911

He is a good guy SO far no doubt about that BUT after the six game blitz to 10 sacks he was not so hot the last 10 games

He did indeed play in all the games but just started in 14, so while your correct in the 14 game comment your not QUITE correct in saying he only played in 14 games.

I'm sorry that I do not have the love for him that you and several others do, but I just can't see giving him the keys to the bank for doing the same thing he has always done rush the passer from the down position on the LOS. getting 4 sacks against CLE well that is something to write home about.

Again I just can't give him the HUGE contract that every one thinks he deserves. NOT until I see him do something other than be a light in the pants DE cough cough OLB. someone that can be tank out of games by playing directly at him.

Sorry folks that is a position YOU will never change me from.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 01:42 PM
JR you can not compare sacks to tackles.....there is a reason elite DE's get paid so much and it isnt for there 40 some odd tackles numbers....sacks matter in the pros with out them you end up bottom dwelling for long periods of time....

comparing ayers and doom is just ludicrous by using tackle stats.....personally i like ayers and feel he played well last year he was fingertips away from six plus sacks..., but i can not get behind you using both doom and ayers against each other in comparison....

I can dig it but I was just responding to someone else comparing the two.

I agree with you on ayers being close a bunch of times but then he was always playing agains the elite OLT also not a TE or weak ORT.

so that in its self should mean something. but it will not because Josh drafted him and as a Rookie first round draft choice he should have put up Dware stats ahahahahahahahaa.

turftoad
06-13-2010, 01:44 PM
Premier Pro Bowl playmakers get paid. End of story, period.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 01:49 PM
I don't understand why people concentrate on this tackle stat so much and proclaim it to be so below league standards or averages for good players. Here's all the league leaders in sack stats and Dooms 42 tackles, while not a league leader, is more than comparable in comparison to other big players at the DE and OLB position.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=SACKS&conference=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG

Ware had 45 tackles, Allen had 43, Freeney 19 (he played 14 games), Woodley 50, Orakpo 37, Banta Cain 35, Harrison 60, Matthews 37, and so and so on.

Point being, Dooms 42 tackles is not a terrible stat in comparison to other OLB or top DE's. If your saying that his sack numbers make that stat worse, I'm sorry, but I generally prefer a sack to a tackle. That doesn't mean Doom doesn't have ground to cover at his position to be become a more complete player at OLB but hes not this massive liability that people make him out to be either.

That of course is if your relying purely upon stats, which IMO, never tells a whole picture. It easy to get more tackles if say your D is on the field longer, or you have solid DLinemen funneling men to you. Some positions like the Mike LB are tailor made in some defenses to rack all the tackles up. To look at stats IMO in these scenarios are telling a very small part of a very large story.



I agree stats do not tell the whole story but I was not the one to compare Doom to Dware in the first place .

I was merely responding to those that did.

BTW look at Dwares production for all the years he played not just last years numbers you will see it was HALF his normal numbers in both tackles and sacks.

SO throwing out one year numbers for him is not quite telling the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth is it.

I will continue to say that Doom is not a complete OLB that deserves top OLB pay, he is simply a small DE trying to play with the big boys at OLB.

He is a good kid, no problems with him YET, and he deserves a new contract but not elite money. He has not proved he can be elite YET.

Tned
06-13-2010, 01:50 PM
He is a good guy SO far no doubt about that BUT after the six game blitz to 10 sacks he was not so hot the last 10 games


Ok, even discounting his 'fast start' and those 10 sacks, how many Broncos in the last 30 years have had 7 sacks in 10 games? For that matter, how many have had 7 sacks period? Not a long list.

BigBroncLove
06-13-2010, 01:56 PM
I agree stats do not tell the whole story but I was not the one to compare Doom to Dware in the first place .

I was merely responding to those that did.

BTW look at Dwares production for all the years he played not just last years numbers you will see it was HALF his normal numbers in both tackles and sacks.

SO throwing out one year numbers for him is not quite telling the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth is it.

I will continue to say that Doom is not a complete OLB that deserves top OLB pay, he is simply a small DE trying to play with the big boys at OLB.

He is a good kid, no problems with him YET, and he deserves a new contract but not elite money. He has not proved he can be elite YET.

Regarding Ware, that's why I said, in very clear terms IMO, that stats do not tell the whole story.

Also, so long as were looking at the truth, lets concentrate on one year. One year to pick Dumervil off the LOS, get his hand off the ground, learn a new defense, try and learn the ins and outs of coverage, and entirely new gap assignments. All this while dealing with a patch work below average Defensive Line in front of him. To evaluate him in no uncertain terms to someone say Ware who has been playing OLB for some time now is also not telling the truth. Beyond that premier pass rushers get payed in this league.

I know 06, 07, and 08, watching QB's have all day to throw the ball and watch coverage breakdown not as a result of poor CB play exclusively but also ineptitude at the line of scrimmage is not something I'd like to see the Broncos return to. What Doom provides in the backfield in and of itself is enough to warrent a worthwhile investment by the Broncos. Given Dumervil has exceeded every expectation throughout his NFL career doesn't make me think that he cannot become a more complete OLB given more then one season to adjust to the massive change in position he has made.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 02:06 PM
Regarding Ware, that's why I said, in very clear terms IMO, that stats do not tell the whole story.

Also, so long as were looking at the truth, lets concentrate on one year. One year to pick Dumervil off the LOS, get his hand off the ground, learn a new defense, try and learn the ins and outs of coverage, and entirely new gap assignments. All this while dealing with a patch work below average Defensive Line in front of him. To evaluate him in no uncertain terms to someone say Ware who has been playing OLB for some time now is also not telling the truth. Beyond that premier pass rushers get payed in this league.

I know 06, 07, and 08, watching QB's have all day to throw the ball and watch coverage breakdown not as a result of poor CB play exclusively but also ineptitude at the line of scrimmage is not something I'd like to see the Broncos return to. What Doom provides in the backfield in and of itself is enough to warrent a worthwhile investment by the Broncos. Given Dumervil has exceeded every expectation throughout his NFL career doesn't make me think that he cannot become a more complete OLB given more then one season to adjust to the massive change in position he has made.

but you see that Doom may have played a new position but all of his sacks, pressure, FF etc came from doing what he always did coming off the LOS from a hand on the ground position just a few feet farther away from the OLINE. which means instead of beat a ORT each and every time he was paired more so on a TE with help from ORT and maybe RB trying to block him.

He just move a few feet and got less coverage but did the same thing he did in COLLEGE and his first years as a bronco. HAND on the ground DE that can be run against, and not cover like a TRUE OLB should be able to do.

If you look at it that way he should have been balls to the walls in sacks. HE was not playing the elite OLT tackle at all last year IIRC.

BigBroncLove
06-13-2010, 02:14 PM
but you see that Doom may have played a new position but all of his sacks, pressure, FF etc came from doing what he always did coming off the LOS from a hand on the ground position just a few feet farther away from the OLINE. which means instead of beat a ORT each and every time he was paired more so on a TE with help from ORT and maybe RB trying to block him.

He just move a few feet and got less coverage but did the same thing he did in COLLEGE and his first years as a bronco. HAND on the ground DE that can be run against, and not cover like a TRUE OLB should be able to do.

If you look at it that way he should have been balls to the walls in sacks. HE was not playing the elite OLT tackle at all last year IIRC.

I disagree completely on the level of competition he played and the sacks he achieved. McNeil is a premier LT and Doom beat him. HE was double teamed in the FF against the chargers when he lined up against the chargers RT and an FB. Still he got to Rivers. Hardly anyone, expect a few naysayers, IMO would say that Doom didn't beat heavy competition and overcome several double teams to get to the QB.

Sure every sack leader will have some against ridiculous mismatches such as when the Cowboys pulled an RB to protect Romo against Doom. That doesn't mean Dumervil didn't beat top players to get the sacks he got last year. I also would say if you equally scrutinized other sack leaders you'd see plenty in which they beat inferior competition at the line. In some cases where offensive linemen or TE completely whiffed at the LOS. Something doom never had last year.

And yes, he did best last year at what he knew. It doesn't mean his scope of ability is completely confined to his previous experience. Nor that what he did at other levels of the game were not directly effected by the players he had infront of him. Again, look at how many double teams Field garnered in the last half of the season. Very few. It's a wonder why the defensive breakdown coincided that lack of control at the LOS by the NT (arguably the most important position in a 3-4).

Tned
06-13-2010, 02:18 PM
but you see that Doom may have played a new position but all of his sacks, pressure, FF etc came from doing what he always did coming off the LOS from a hand on the ground position just a few feet farther away from the OLINE. which means instead of beat a ORT each and every time he was paired more so on a TE with help from ORT and maybe RB trying to block him.

He just move a few feet and got less coverage but did the same thing he did in COLLEGE and his first years as a bronco. HAND on the ground DE that can be run against, and not cover like a TRUE OLB should be able to do.

If you look at it that way he should have been balls to the walls in sacks. HE was not playing the elite OLT tackle at all last year IIRC.

Even assuming that you are right, and Doom's success was based on going up against the soft right tackles and TE's, how come the other LOLB's in the league didn't also rack up 17 'easy' sacks?

dogfish
06-13-2010, 02:31 PM
Even assuming that you are right, and Doom's success was based on going up against the soft right tackles and TE's, how come the other LOLB's in the league didn't also rack up 17 'easy' sacks?

because teams just ran right at them and took them out of the game. . .

they'll do it to doom this year, apparently-- i can't figure out why they let him run free last year, but i'm sure it was just an oversight. . .

dogfish
06-13-2010, 02:32 PM
Ware had 45 tackles, Allen had 43, Freeney 19 (he played 14 games), Woodley 50, Orakpo 37, Banta Cain 35, Harrison 60, Matthews 37, and so and so on.

Point being, Dooms 42 tackles is not a terrible stat in comparison to other OLB or top DE's.

don't let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good bashing, bro. . . .

bcbronc
06-13-2010, 04:14 PM
[QUOTE]
He is a good guy SO far no doubt about that BUT after the six game blitz to 10 sacks he was not so hot the last 10 games

lol, come on Jr. 7 sacks in 10 games is an 11 sack pace over 16 games, good for a tie for 7th (with Dware in fact). absolutely nothing wrong with that, unless of course you have absolutely unrealistic expectations.

and that doesn't even factor in things like our dline began to wear out, allowing QBs to step up in the pocket. or that we began to lose games, meaning teams were running out the clock late in games rather than letting Doom pin his ears back.




I'm sorry that I do not have the love for him that you and several others do, but I just can't see giving him the keys to the bank for doing the same thing he has always done rush the passer from the down position on the LOS. getting 4 sacks against CLE well that is something to write home about.


every top sack artists puts up more sacks against some teams and less against others. that's just the nature of the beast.


Again I just can't give him the HUGE contract that every one thinks he deserves. NOT until I see him do something other than be a light in the pants DE cough cough OLB. someone that can be tank out of games by playing directly at him.

if Doom played EXACTLY the same season at 6'5" 275lbs, you'd be all over him. but you have a tendency to make judgements on a player not by what they do in the field, but by their listed size/weight. I've never seen a fan as obsessed by listed measurements as you are.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 04:47 PM
[QUOTE=Jrwiz;994009]


lol, come on Jr. 7 sacks in 10 games is an 11 sack pace over 16 games, good for a tie for 7th (with Dware in fact). absolutely nothing wrong with that, unless of course you have absolutely unrealistic expectations.

and that doesn't even factor in things like our dline began to wear out, allowing QBs to step up in the pocket. or that we began to lose games, meaning teams were running out the clock late in games rather than letting Doom pin his ears back.





every top sack artists puts up more sacks against some teams and less against others. that's just the nature of the beast.



if Doom played EXACTLY the same season at 6'5" 275lbs, you'd be all over him. but you have a tendency to make judgements on a player not by what they do in the field, but by their listed size/weight. I've never seen a fan as obsessed by listed measurements as you are.

So pay him for the 11 sacks that he got ALL by himself.

Not obsessd with his sizE just that he is not a OLB YET he is still playing DE forn a spread location and NOT playing the RUN nor being able to cover someone that he would be responsible to do.

I have to wonder how many of the passes in the flat or to the TE that he normaly would cover gained yards because he was in sack mode instead of OLB mode.

How many of the frachise ruuning records (for the other teams) were where he was suppose to DEFENSE.

Look if they want to pull him off the field in everything but passing downs and pay him a ridiculous sum I have no issue with it.

Just be advised that I call spades spades when it come down to holding him or Josh responsible. Always have always will.


I just do not think they are going to mortgage the staduim for his contract in guaranted money.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

jhildebrand
06-13-2010, 05:11 PM
The Colts didn't have an issue with Freeney's size :coffee:

The Lombardi trophy didn't look abnormally large next to him either.

Funny thing is, in the thread about Alphonso Smurf er Smith some of the same posters are saying size doesn't matter. Which is it? :confused:

Oh wait, size matters when it fits your argument.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 05:20 PM
Did I say anything about him beinga. Midget since he was drafted.

He is what he is a small DE playing OLB from a DEs POV hand in the dirt with NO thought of doing anything BUT rush.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
06-13-2010, 05:28 PM
What's the big deal? Derrick Thomas went to the HoF primarily for rushing the quarterback even though he was listed as a linebacker. In a typical 3-4 your OLBs serve as pass rushers. I don't think that diminishes Dumervil's value in the least.

jhildebrand
06-13-2010, 05:53 PM
Did I say anything about him beinga. Midget since he was drafted.

He is what he is a small DE playing OLB from a DEs POV hand in the dirt with NO thought of doing anything BUT rush.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I think you are playing the size thing a bit much, IMO. If it mattered people would be able to stop him. As of now, teams haven't really been able to.

Lonestar
06-13-2010, 09:05 PM
I think you are playing the size thing a bit much, IMO. If it mattered people would be able to stop him. As of now, teams haven't really been able to.

No what I am saying is he his NOT a PROto-typical OLB in the 3-4 and everyone wnats to pay him as such.

He is and has been a DE rushing from a hand in the dirt ONLY position.

Yet everyon is gaga about him getting 17 sacks. I rememeber hearing all the talk he was on track at the bye of setting a NFL record. Aftr the bye he was good but not record setting in any which way.

I could care less if he is 5-8 or 6-6.

To be paid like a OLB he needs to master something other than hand in the dirt pass rush.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
06-13-2010, 09:59 PM
No what I am saying is he his NOT a PROto-typical OLB in the 3-4 and everyone wnats to pay him as such.

He is and has been a DE rushing from a hand in the dirt ONLY position.

Yet everyon is gaga about him getting 17 sacks. I rememeber hearing all the talk he was on track at the bye of setting a NFL record. Aftr the bye he was good but not record setting in any which way.

I could care less if he is 5-8 or 6-6.

To be paid like a OLB he needs to master something other than hand in the dirt pass rush.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

So you would be ok with them paying him as a 17 sack DE, since that's the way coach McDaniels used him?

TXBRONC
06-14-2010, 06:53 AM
Did I say anything about him beinga. Midget since he was drafted.

He is what he is a small DE playing OLB from a DEs POV hand in the dirt with NO thought of doing anything BUT rush.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


Yeah actually you have. You've brought it up time and time again. In this thread alone you have called him pygmy and have brought up his height several times. It seems to be a big hang up with you. But of course with Alphonso Smith it's no big deal. It must be because he's McDaniels pick.