PDA

View Full Version : WR Corp Rankings - Broncos #17



LRtagger
07-09-2008, 04:43 PM
No surprise here. He are a ranked in the middle of the pack. I suspect this trend will continue for the remainder of the offseason and into the season. Every columnist will have the Broncos ranked in the middle of the NFL in about every fathomable category. I probably would have ranked us above Atlanta and Philly, but still would have been in the middle of the group.


17. Denver Broncos
Brandon Marshall is one of the best young receivers in the NFL and is only going to get better in his fourth NFL season. He is an explosive athlete with big-time speed and receiving skills. He has a natural setup and can make acrobatic catches downfield. However, this is a questionable group outside of Marshall. Keary Colbert was signed this offseason from Carolina to compete for the No. 2 spot, and while Colbert is a talented player he has struggled with inconsistency throughout his career. Brandon Stokley is an ideal No. 3 receiver who does his best work in the slot. Veterans Darrell Jackson and Samie Parker were also signed during the offseason to provide experience and depth. Jackson was a disappointment last season with the 49ers, while Parker's athleticism makes him an intriguing piece in the passing game.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/news/story?id=3478215&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnfl %2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fid%3d3478215

topscribe
07-09-2008, 04:59 PM
"This is a questionable group outside of Marshall," then "Brandon Stokley is
an ideal No. 3 receiver who does his best work in the slot"? Sounds like a
self-contradiction to me.

Stokley, IMO, is the second-best slot receiver in the game, behind Welker.
That he didn't make a big splash last year was for the same reason D.J. didn't:
he was playing out of position. But he was brought here in the first place
because he confounded defenses from the slot. Even Peyton was crying over
Stokley's departure.

Beyond BMarsh and Stokley, I'll have to agree with the author. The position
is indeed a question mark there. However, Colbert still has skills, and the
reasons were cited as to why his production wasn't better in the last place.
And D-Jack was a good receiver prior to last year.

So, if those two play up to their capabilties (and let's not forget Fast Eddie!),
I would vault them into the top five.

Until then, I regrettably have to agree with the author regarding their rank.

-----

NameUsedBefore
07-09-2008, 05:15 PM
#17 is being pretty lenient... I mean Marshall definitely has what it takes, but his off-field actions and immaturity can't be ignored. Stokely is a slowing slot-receiver. Still a solid player, no doubt, but you can tell he's reaching that point. Beyond those two, who else do we got?

With that, if we're #17 then the next fifteen teams must be in really bad shape :lol:


(Good news is that WRs aren't the only ones who catch the ball. Ask anyone about KC Chiefs' wide receivers and a solid "Meh" would be the best description; ask anyone about the KC Chiefs' receivers and suddenly "Solid" comes into play simply because of Gonzalez; same can be said for Denver with both Graham and Sheffler.)

Requiem / The Dagda
07-09-2008, 05:16 PM
Seems about right, average right now -- but the potential to be good to great, I concur with Top.

topscribe
07-09-2008, 05:42 PM
#17 is being pretty lenient... I mean Marshall definitely has what it takes, but his off-field actions and immaturity can't be ignored. Stokely is a slowing slot-receiver. Still a solid player, no doubt, but you can tell he's reaching that point. Beyond those two, who else do we got?

With that, if we're #17 then the next fifteen teams must be in really bad shape :lol:


(Good news is that WRs aren't the only ones who catch the ball. Ask anyone about KC Chiefs' wide receivers and a solid "Meh" would be the best description; ask anyone about the KC Chiefs' receivers and suddenly "Solid" comes into play simply because of Gonzalez; same can be said for Denver with both Graham and Sheffler.)

Go to :30, :45, and 1:25 of this clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJRhagTmI64&NR=1), then tell me whether Stokley looks
slow to you.

There is another clip showing Stokley running away from the defense for a
TD, but I don't remember now where it is.

-----

underrated29
07-09-2008, 05:50 PM
I cant view the rankings there is no way that philly should be ranked higher than us.

They have reggie brown< Brandon marshall
kevin curtis= djax/colbert
i dont even know their #3
desean jax= fast eddie since neither has played yet.

But brandon and djax and colbert and stokes is way better to me than brown (who is more like a number 2) kevin curtis (who is a number 2) and desean (rookie) and their 3rd wr (whoever he is)


Then like someone said we got graham and scheff- vs and oft injured (forgot his name) TE, who is very good but always hurt.


But i understand the ranking. I will bet lots of money that we will be closer to top 10 wr core before the season is over.

Timmy!
07-09-2008, 09:21 PM
Too low, but not by much. Honestly....Atlanta and Philly.....riiiiiiight.

I'd have the Broncos around 12-14.

Stargazer
07-10-2008, 05:46 AM
Marshall is entering his 3rd season, whereas the article mention he's entering his 4th.

hamrob
07-10-2008, 08:27 AM
"This is a questionable group outside of Marshall," then "Brandon Stokley is
an ideal No. 3 receiver who does his best work in the slot"? Sounds like a
self-contradiction to me.

Stokley, IMO, is the second-best slot receiver in the game, behind Welker.
That he didn't make a big splash last year was for the same reason D.J. didn't:
he was playing out of position. But he was brought here in the first place
because he confounded defenses from the slot. Even Peyton was crying over
Stokley's departure.

Beyond BMarsh and Stokley, I'll have to agree with the author. The position
is indeed a question mark there. However, Colbert still has skills, and the
reasons were cited as to why his production wasn't better in the last place.
And D-Jack was a good receiver prior to last year.

So, if those two play up to their capabilties (and let's not forget Fast Eddie!),
I would vault them into the top five.

Until then, I regrettably have to agree with the author regarding their rank.

-----Actually, Stokely made a very "Big Splash" last year. In fact, if you check his stats...it was the 2nd best year of his career. I think this group is better that #17. If Marshall comes to play this year...this is a top #10 unit IMO.

Lonestar
07-10-2008, 11:02 AM
Actually, Stokely made a very "Big Splash" last year. In fact, if you check his stats...it was the 2nd best year of his career. I think this group is better that #17. If Marshall comes to play this year...this is a top #10 unit IMO.

good post till you stated top ten..

You forget that mikey likes to run the ball.. the only time we have been heavy into passing the ball is when all of our RB were down for the count or totally ineffective.

underrated29
07-10-2008, 11:16 AM
good post till you stated top ten..

You forget that mikey likes to run the ball.. the only time we have been heavy into passing the ball is when all of our RB were down for the count or totally ineffective.



True JR, but i think they mean more along the lines of talent at WR or best group of wr, not overall production. For that very reason you mentioned, some teams with great recieving cores run the ball more than they pass, so their numbers will be low.

turftoad
07-10-2008, 11:26 AM
True JR, but i think they mean more along the lines of talent at WR or best group of wr, not overall production. For that very reason you mentioned, some teams with great recieving cores run the ball more than they pass, so their numbers will be low.

You mean like Philly and Atlanta?

I think we're ranked about right, maybe to high.

Marshall is great if he can keep his head out of his butt. Stokley is a good slot but is getting long in the tooth.

The rest, bahhh......... Djax is over rated and Colbert has proved nothing.

underrated29
07-10-2008, 11:39 AM
No philly and atl have horrible wr.

Reggie brown on any other team would be a #2 at best. Kevin curtis has been a #2 his whole life. Desean is a rook so we cant go their yet, and I dont even know who their #3 is.

Atl- has roddy white- who is vastly overrated. HE could be GREAT, but unfortunaltey he has tons of mental lapses, last year was his so called breakout year, but he is nothing.

Who are their #2 and #3? clayton? Or is that tampa? Clayton is talented but he also has proved nothing yet. I would rate both of them the same as colbert. Well white is a higher rating than colbert, because he can be great. I just dont know about colbert.

hamrob
07-10-2008, 02:13 PM
good post till you stated top ten..

You forget that mikey likes to run the ball.. the only time we have been heavy into passing the ball is when all of our RB were down for the count or totally ineffective.Call it wishful hoping...but I think our offense is set to explode. The big if is if they can stay healthy!

I could easily see Jay throwing for 4,000 yards and 30 TD's while at the same time us having a back rush for 1,300 to 1,500 yards. I'm more worried about the RB's then I am the WR's.

I think this is the most depth we've had in a long time. A good running game only opens things up for the WR's...when teams try to stack the box and leave the recievers with 1 on 1 on the outside.

dogfish
07-10-2008, 02:19 PM
if marshall isn't suspended, i think this group deserves to be ranked higher, and i expect them to prove it. . . everyone is acting like darrell jackson just suddenly forgot how to play because he had a down year in a tremendously pitiful offense with a weak quarterback, terrible line and no other legitimate receivers-- but if you look at his numbers from pretty much every other year in his career, the guy is a very solid #2 WR. . . and stokley is an excellent #3. . . i don't see how san diego's receivers (#8 on this list) or pittsburgh's (#9) are any better than ours. . .

Lonestar
07-10-2008, 02:36 PM
Call it wishful hoping...but I think our offense is set to explode. The big if is if they can stay healthy!

I could easily see Jay throwing for 4,000 yards and 30 TD's while at the same time us having a back rush for 1,300 to 1,500 yards. I'm more worried about the RB's then I am the WR's.

I think this is the most depth we've had in a long time. A good running game only opens things up for the WR's...when teams try to stack the box and leave the recievers with 1 on 1 on the outside.

I do not see the depth just a bit more quality and IF we stay healthy then all is good.. But we ALL saw what happened when Lepsis went south with the ACL injury early on 2006.. One player deep at most positions as we speak because we have had to have perfect drafts the last 3 years and all of them are now getting experience and for the most part PLAY..

We are indeed set to explode but will it be consistent enough to get us a winning season.. I do not think so.. Way to young in almost all positions.. 2009 and later IF we can re sign some of the kiddies we drafted 3-5 years ago..

topscribe
07-10-2008, 02:45 PM
good post till you stated top ten..

You forget that mikey likes to run the ball.. the only time we have been heavy into passing the ball is when all of our RB were down for the count or totally ineffective.


True JR, but i think they mean more along the lines of talent at WR or best group of wr, not overall production. For that very reason you mentioned, some teams with great recieving cores run the ball more than they pass, so their numbers will be low.

Actually, piling up big rushing yards can open up the passing and actually
have an increasing effect on passing yards (and vice versa).

You remember 2004, when the Broncos amassed 2,333 total rushing yards,
yet Jake passed for 4,089 and a 7.8 Y/A. The passing game for the Broncos
depends on the success in running. If the Broncos can run it, receivers will
be open. If they can't, then it will depend on how good those receivers are
in getting separation: They cannot be "average" receivers in such a situation.

In BMarsh and Stokley, they do not have "average" receivers. If the Broncos
can run the ball as they have in the past, then that will be enough. If not,
then at least one of the other guys had best be better than "average." It's
that simple.

-----

Lonestar
07-10-2008, 03:01 PM
Actually, piling up big rushing yards can open up the passing and actually
have an increasing effect on passing yards (and vice versa).

You remember 2004, when the Broncos amassed 2,333 total rushing yards,
yet Jake passed for 4,089 and a 7.8 Y/A. The passing game for the Broncos
depends on the success in running. If the Broncos can run it, receivers will
be open. If they can't, then it will depend on how good those receivers are
in getting separation: They cannot be "average" receivers in such a situation.

In BMarsh and Stokley, they do not have "average" receivers. If the Broncos
can run the ball as they have in the past, then that will be enough. If not,
then at least one of the other guys had best be better than "average." It's
that simple.

-----

but 2004 was when the ROE was in effect giving the WR complete free reign on the field.. Lots of teams piled up major yards that year..

I agree IF they can run the ball the passing game becomes that much more effective..

I do not see it yet this year.. 2009

topscribe
07-10-2008, 03:18 PM
but 2004 was when the ROE was in effect giving the WR complete free reign on the field.. Lots of teams piled up major yards that year..

I agree IF they can run the ball the passing game becomes that much more effective..

I do not see it yet this year.. 2009

Well, with Nalen and Hamilton coming back and Holland beside them, we've
got the hogs to do it. So that will depend on Selvin and/or Torain, which you
are right by implication, they are question marks until they show it on the
field.

But, as I mentioned, one of the others besides BMarsh (and he needs to
straighten up and be here) and Stokley, one of the others needs to step
up and be "above" average. If that happens, then they will vault themselves
into the top ten, maybe the top five.

-----

Lonestar
07-10-2008, 04:03 PM
Well, with Nalen and Hamilton coming back and Holland beside them, we've
got the hogs to do it. So that will depend on Selvin and/or Torain, which you
are right by implication, they are question marks until they show it on the
field.

But, as I mentioned, one of the others besides BMarsh (and he needs to
straighten up and be here) and Stokley, one of the others needs to step
up and be "above" average. If that happens, then they will vault themselves
into the top ten, maybe the top five.

-----

lots of potential on the team but lots of youth and that always means inconsistent play..


2009 and beyond

topscribe
07-10-2008, 04:29 PM
lots of potential on the team but lots of youth and that always means inconsistent play..


2009 and beyond

Well actually, yes, there is youth at the OTs, and that concerns me. But
Nalen, Hamilton, and Holland do not represent youth. Neither does the WR
corps. Only Fast Eddie is the youth there; the rest are experienced. Same
with TE. It may or many not make a difference at RB. Many RBs have made it
big as rookies . . . witness Adrian Peterson and our own Mike Anderson.

But you and I probably need to pull this back to the topic, partner. :D

-----

Lonestar
07-10-2008, 06:06 PM
:focus:

WR not a 17 as we speak IMO..

Retired_Member_001
07-11-2008, 02:50 PM
I'm going to repeat what I said in my, "Broncos wide receivers could be special article", we could be a top 5 receiving team, but we could also be a bottom 5 receiving team. It all depends on how certain things develop. The key factor will be whether Brandon Marshall can stay in line. If you've got a good attitude Brandon Marshall in your lineup, you are already half way there. It then matters on Darrell Jackson, Brandon Stokley and Eddie Royal (forget Colbert). One of those needs to develop into a "good" 2nd option next season. I'd put my money on Royal or Jackson, Stokley does much better in the slot.

dogfish
09-15-2008, 11:57 PM
:bump:


so, two weeks in how do you all feel about this? #17 my ass!


wookie said this group could be special, and he was right-- gold star for you, hairball. . .




#17 is being pretty lenient...

With that, if we're #17 then the next fifteen teams must be in really bad shape :lol:




how's that foot taste, NUB?


:D

NameUsedBefore
09-16-2008, 12:02 AM
Tastes great.

hamrob
09-16-2008, 12:26 AM
Hey, I saw this coming! Check the posts. I thought Jay would explode and so he has. What I didn't see? Royal having the impact that he has has so far!

topscribe
09-16-2008, 12:48 AM
In his presser today, Stokley said he thinks this group is better than the one
he was with at Indy. That would make them maybe the best in the league,
top to bottom. BMarsh may be becoming the best receiver in the league, and
the surprise emergence of Fast Eddie really delivers some clout. Add to that
Stokley, who has a strong argument as the best slot receiver, and that TE
corps, and who is better than that?--Especially with Cutler firing the shots.

No doubt about it: Denver is top three, if not the best.

-----

Hawgdriver
09-16-2008, 12:53 AM
In his presser today, Stokley said he thinks this group is better than the one
he was with at Indy. That would make them maybe the best in the league,
top to bottom. BMarsh may be becoming the best receiver in the league, and
the surprise emergence of Fast Eddie really delivers some clout. Add to that
Stokley, who has a strong argument as the best slot receiver, and that TE
corps, and who is better than that?--Especially with Cutler firing the shots.

No doubt about it: Denver is top three, if not the best.

-----

I dunno...they have something special up in the Pacific Northwest...;)

I will say this--McNabb is making some no-names look decent. I agree that we have a great group, but take Cutler out of the equation and this debate would never have a chance. I still like Boldin/Fitzgerald as the best #1/#2, but if you expand the definition of WR corp I like ours better.

topscribe
09-16-2008, 01:04 AM
I dunno...they have something special up in the Pacific Northwest...;)

I will say this--McNabb is making some no-names look decent. I agree that we have a great group, but take Cutler out of the equation and this debate would never have a chance. I still like Boldin/Fitzgerald as the best #1/#2, but if you expand the definition of WR corp I like ours better.

You think Cutler is BMarsh's and Fast Eddie's excellence? You've got to be
kidding me. And word out of camp was that nobody could cover Stokley. Is
that because Cutler was QB, or does Stokley run his own routes? That's just
silly.

It is true that the Broncos have a superb QB to get the ball to them, but he
does not play receiver for them.

I might have agreed with you on Boldin and Fitzgerald three weeks ago, but
I don't think they have it over BMarsh and Fast Eddie now. In fact, in my
nearly half-century of football, I'm not sure I have ever seen anyone so
impossible to cover as is BMarsh. And I watched the likes of Warfield,
John Stallworth, and Rice, et al.

-----

G_Money
09-16-2008, 01:23 AM
There are times when you expect players to speak in hyperbole.

When Rod said he expected Marshall to re-write all his records if he starts using the 6 inches between his ears as more than just a paperweight, it was just God's honest truth.

There isn't anything Marshall can't do on a football field. The phrase, "Man among boys" is overused, but in theory the Chargers were supposed to have one of the better cornerback tandems in the league, and they looked like they didn't belong on the same field with Marshall.

Add in Royal's performance both against San Diego and the supposedly vaunted and verifiably expensive Raiders corners, and then throw Scheff and Stokley into the mix, and I think you'd have to look very favorably on our current receiver corps.

VERY favorably.

~G

Hawgdriver
09-16-2008, 01:23 AM
You think Cutler is BMarsh's and Fast Eddie's excellence? You've got to be
kidding me. And word out of camp was that nobody could cover Stokley. Is
that because Cutler was QB, or does Stokley run his own routes? That's just
silly.

It is true that the Broncos have a superb QB to get the ball to them, but he
does not play receiver for them.

I might have agreed with you on Boldin and Fitzgerald three weeks ago, but
I don't think they have it over BMarsh and Fast Eddie now. In fact, in my
nearly half-century of football, I'm not sure I have ever seen anyone so
impossible to cover as is BMarsh. And I watched the likes of Warfield,
John Stallworth, and Rice, et al.

-----

You're right, our receivers are excellent. When you include the TE and slot receiver, I can't think of a better group playing now. But if we had (for example) Leinart or Vince Young under center, these guys probably wouldn't have the same chance to show us how good they are, and we might miss how good they are.

topscribe
09-16-2008, 01:38 AM
You're right, our receivers are excellent. When you include the TE and slot receiver, I can't think of a better group playing now. But if we had (for example) Leinart or Vince Young under center, these guys probably wouldn't have the same chance to show us how good they are, and we might miss how good they are.

You're right, too. Remember Elway and the "Three Amigos"? Three "average"
receivers whom Elway made to look like something. He would deliver the ball
to them through the tiniest windows. Now, Cutler is doing the same thing.
Except I believe our present receivers far exceed what Elway had.

-----

G_Money
09-16-2008, 01:50 AM
Dan Reeves. Curse you for Ricky Nattiel and Gerald Willhite and Sammy Winder. And your stupid worthless running attack and your circa 1963 offense. When I think of what Elway could have done with Parcells or Johnson or Walsh running the show...

*shakes fist*

Thank God Shanahan got here in time to clean up your mess (and the smudge from Wade) before John retired.

~G

broncosinindy
09-16-2008, 05:50 AM
i think we have a very good blend of options now. we knew Eddie would open more catches for Marshall and if last week was any indication were gonna be good on the top for years. stokley so far has been disappointing to me though

Tned
09-16-2008, 06:48 AM
Dan Reeves. Curse you for Ricky Nattiel and Gerald Willhite and Sammy Winder. And your stupid worthless running attack and your circa 1963 offense. When I think of what Elway could have done with Parcells or Johnson or Walsh running the show...

*shakes fist*

Thank God Shanahan got here in time to clean up your mess (and the smudge from Wade) before John retired.

~G

I'm with you. I am still angry with Reeves. How many games did Reeves play his conservative offense until the Broncos were down, sometimes big, in the late 3rd or 4th quarter and then turn Elway loose to win the game.

If a different coach, and just a little attention paid to beefing up the O-line (~500 sacks or so), Elway would have set all the passing records. It's just about criminal.

hamrob
09-16-2008, 09:14 AM
There are times when you expect players to speak in hyperbole.

When Rod said he expected Marshall to re-write all his records if he starts using the 6 inches between his ears as more than just a paperweight, it was just God's honest truth.

There isn't anything Marshall can't do on a football field. The phrase, "Man among boys" is overused, but in theory the Chargers were supposed to have one of the better cornerback tandems in the league, and they looked like they didn't belong on the same field with Marshall.

Add in Royal's performance both against San Diego and the supposedly vaunted and verifiably expensive Raiders corners, and then throw Scheff and Stokley into the mix, and I think you'd have to look very favorably on our current receiver corps.

VERY favorably.

~GSure...and I can recall several discussions on the this site regarding our Broncos having the best CB tandum in the league...but Chambers and Jackson made them look like they shouldn't have even been on the field. Yes, their very good receivers...BMarsh has an argument for greatness...but Cutler and Rivers make these teams and their receiving corps.

Thnikkaman
09-16-2008, 09:18 AM
You think Cutler is BMarsh's and Fast Eddie's excellence? You've got to be
kidding me. And word out of camp was that nobody could cover Stokley. Is
that because Cutler was QB, or does Stokley run his own routes? That's just
silly.

It is true that the Broncos have a superb QB to get the ball to them, but he
does not play receiver for them.

I might have agreed with you on Boldin and Fitzgerald three weeks ago, but
I don't think they have it over BMarsh and Fast Eddie now. In fact, in my
nearly half-century of football, I'm not sure I have ever seen anyone so
impossible to cover as is BMarsh. And I watched the likes of Warfield,
John Stallworth, and Rice, et al.

-----

I was watching a show on the NFL network last weekend that was called NFL roadmap or something like that, and they had the Slot Man on. They discussed how they use Stokley's size speed and hands to make mis matches out on the field in combination with Cutler's accuracy to disrupt the D-Fence. Without Cutler or another skilled QB, Stokley is above average at best. Its really a symbiotic relationship. Do you think Royal, Marshal, and Stokley look this good if we still have Plummer taking snaps? Do you think Cutler looks like a world beater if he is still playing catch with Lele and Walker?

I think we have caught lightning in a bottle here boys. And god forbid any injuries or the inability to pay these guys, I am very excited about the next 5-10 years as a Bronco fan.

turftoad
09-16-2008, 12:25 PM
Broncos | Marshall sets NFL record
Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:49:40 -0700

Denver Broncos WR Brandon Marshall's 55 catches over his last five games are the most in NFL history over a five-game stretch.

topscribe
09-16-2008, 01:34 PM
Sure...and I can recall several discussions on the this site regarding our Broncos having the best CB tandum in the league...but Chambers and Jackson made them look like they shouldn't have even been on the field. Yes, their very good receivers...BMarsh has an argument for greatness...but Cutler and Rivers make these teams and their receiving corps.

Just off-topic a tad, but the Broncos, Chargers, and Raiders are reputed as
having maybe the best three CB tandems in the league. Yet all three were
torched during these last two weeks. In none of these cases were the
respective teams able to mount much of a pass rush. Just saying . . .

-----

turftoad
09-16-2008, 02:37 PM
Just off-topic a tad, but the Broncos, Chargers, and Raiders are reputed as
having maybe the best three CB tandems in the league. Yet all three were
torched during these last two weeks. In none of these cases were the
respective teams able to mount much of a pass rush. Just saying . . .

-----

Agreed Top. Stopping the pass is all about stopping it at the point of origin, the QB.

underrated29
09-16-2008, 03:01 PM
Very true. Who are the giants corners again? Yeah you might know 1 of them, but not the top 3. Why? because their pass rush is sooo good the qb doesnt hardly have time to throw the ball.

SarahKay
09-16-2008, 05:10 PM
Good read. Although I think we should have been ranked alittle higher. I believe we have one of the best receiveing corps.

Hope Stokley gets the chance to have an impact this season.. he was open quite a bit during Sunday's game.

topscribe
09-16-2008, 05:20 PM
Good read. Although I think we should have been ranked alittle higher. I believe we have one of the best receiveing corps.

Hope Stokley gets the chance to have an impact this season.. he was open quite a bit during Sunday's game.

Well, the article was written in July.

Back then, I could see reasons for the question marks.

-----

SarahKay
09-16-2008, 07:46 PM
Thats the reason then.. didnt look at the date of the article. Thank you. :)