PDA

View Full Version : IYO: Who is on the roster bubble? Who gets cut?



broncofaninfla
09-02-2010, 07:25 AM
In your opinion, who is on the roster bubble? Who gets cut?

UnderArmour
09-02-2010, 07:50 AM
Marcus Thomas is going to get cut. Stokely is probably going to go on injured reserve, if not cut outright. Lloyd, Thomas, Decker, Willis, Royal and Gaffney make the roster.

Grover
09-02-2010, 09:07 AM
I'm saying Le Kevin Smith doesn't make the team, but Marcus Thomas does.

Also, given Brady Quinn's struggles, I think it entirely possible that Tebow gets promoted to #2, B. Quinn gets cut, and Broncos sign another QB off the waiver wire who is practice squad eligible. Keeping only 2 active QBs, ala Mike Shanahan.

Having only two QBs means that we could allocate another player to the 53 man roster, and we have a lot of strong candidates at WR, DB and LB to choose from.

Many think Brandon Stokley is on the bubble, I'd go with 2 Quarterbacks if it meant that either had Stokley to throw to.

BroncoNut
09-02-2010, 09:25 AM
phonz

muse
09-02-2010, 09:51 AM
Marcus Thomas is going to get cut.

I disagree, Thomas was rotated with the 1s a lot vs the Steelers as well as playing some nose with the 2s. LK Smith, Chris Baker or Ron Fields will go before Marcus does I think.

UnderArmour
09-02-2010, 10:00 AM
I disagree, Thomas was rotated with the 1s a lot vs the Steelers as well as playing some nose with the 2s. LK Smith, Chris Baker or Ron Fields will go before Marcus does I think.

I don't think Ron Fields goes. If Jamal Williams goes down, there is no serviceable backup. LK Smith and Baker are possibilities. But you're right, didn't notice that.

Elevation inc
09-02-2010, 10:05 AM
top 3 suprise cuts-

BRANDON STOKLEY/CHRIS BAKER/ALPHONSO

Nomad
09-02-2010, 11:09 AM
top 3 suprise cuts-

BRANDON STOKLEY/CHRIS BAKER/ALPHONSO

Just curious and don't recall, has Baker played this preseason???

Lonestar
09-02-2010, 11:09 AM
While I have not studied the tapes like in the past I would be surprised to see baker cut as the kid has long term potential and I suspect will be kept around if for no other reason than to grow into the NT spot. He may never be a Jamal but then there are very few of them.

I think stokely will go via IR or traded if healthy. Or falt released but he he WAS going elsewhere I think they would have done it already so he could catch on with another TEAM.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

honz
09-02-2010, 11:12 AM
Phonz ain't getting cut.

Lonestar
09-02-2010, 11:13 AM
Let me add that game play is not the only thing they rely on but also coaches thoughts, what they do in practice and in meetings.

The coaches may be seeing long term potential in a guy that appears to be clueless in/on the pre season.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

SOCALORADO.
09-02-2010, 11:23 AM
Alphie.

pnbronco
09-02-2010, 11:26 AM
I don't know, all I know is that I hate cut day and have for years. It's tough when you've talked to these kids and realize that their dream could end forever.

CrazyHorse
09-02-2010, 11:38 AM
Hopefully Nate Jones over Alphonso Smith.

underrated29
09-02-2010, 11:42 AM
Hopefully Nate Jones gets cut over Alphonso Smith.



Fixed.

arapaho2
09-02-2010, 12:18 PM
i dont care who gets cut as long as the guys on the roster were the absalute best contributers to winning

BroncoNut
09-02-2010, 12:19 PM
I don't know, all I know is that I hate cut day and have for years. It's tough when you've talked to these kids and realize that their dream could end forever.

at least they had a legitiimate shot at it pn. that's more than can be said for most. If I could have just worn that bronco uni one time. To hear the crowd on gameday as I ran with my teammates through the tunnel to smell the turf, ..... I would die a happy man.

Nomad
09-02-2010, 12:23 PM
i dont care who gets cut as long as the guys on the roster were the absalute best contributers to winning

True! I'm not attached to any one player and I want the same, players who will give us the best chances to win. I appreciate Stokley for what he has done but if it's his time to go then so be it.

dogfish
09-02-2010, 12:48 PM
at least they had a legitiimate shot at it pn. that's more than can be said for most. If I could have just worn that bronco uni one time. To hear the crowd on gameday as I ran with my teammates through the tunnel to smell the turf, ..... I would die a happy man.

touching sentiment. . . but it's okay. . . i'm sure many of them secretly envy the opportunites you've had to run shoeless through the wildflowers in springtime. . .

LTC Pain
09-02-2010, 12:58 PM
at least they had a legitiimate shot at it pn. that's more than can be said for most. If I could have just worn that bronco uni one time. To hear the crowd on gameday as I ran with my teammates through the tunnel to smell the turf, ..... I would die a happy man.

You think smelling the turf is an asperation of a rookie trying make the roster??? :laugh::eek::shocked::lol::rolleyes:

Traveler
09-02-2010, 01:20 PM
Stokley isn't going anywhere. I think JMFMcD made it pretty clear last week when he let go of Akin Ayodele.

He wanted to give those guys that weren't in the team plans a chance to catch on with another team.

I'm guessing that if they didn't plan of keeping BS, they would have cut him last week.

BroncoNut
09-02-2010, 01:39 PM
You think smelling the turf is an asperation of a rookie trying make the roster??? :laugh::eek::shocked::lol::rolleyes:

I was trying to be ultra dramatic. Like Ray Liotta (shoeless Joe Jackson) in Field of Dreams.

OldschoolFreak
09-02-2010, 01:39 PM
Is Nate Jones PS eligible?

BroncoNut
09-02-2010, 01:41 PM
touching sentiment. . . but it's okay. . . i'm sure many of them secretly envy the opportunites you've had to run shoeless through the wildflowers in springtime. . .

do you ever drive over a creekbed and wonder if you'll ever again go wading like you did when you were a kid? I did yesterday. ah.,,, nevermind, sometimes I get a little silly and nostalgic,

pnbronco
09-02-2010, 03:03 PM
Is Nate Jones PS eligible?

No he's been in the league for 7 years. With Dallas for 4 years and MIA 2.

Northman
09-02-2010, 03:11 PM
at least they had a legitiimate shot at it pn. that's more than can be said for most. If I could have just worn that bronco uni one time. To hear the crowd on gameday as I ran with my teammates through the tunnel to smell the turf, ..... I would die a happy man.

Whatever you say Rudy.

Bosco
09-02-2010, 06:05 PM
My roster projection

QB- (3) Orton, Quinn, Tebow
HB- (3) Moreno, Buckhalter, Ball
FB- (1) Larsen
WR-(6) Lloyd, Thomas...Royal, Stokley...Gaffney, Decker
TE- (3) Graham, Quinn, Branson
OL- (8) Clady, Beadles, Walton, Kuper, Harris, Daniels, Hochstein, S.Olsen
DL- (8) Williams, Bannan, McBean, Fields, Green, L. Smith, Thomas, Baker
LB (8) DJ, Woodyard, Haggan, Mays, Ayers, Hunter, Moss, Atkins
CB (6) Bailey, Goodman, Cox, Smith, Jones, Thompson
S (4) Dawkins, Hill, Bruton, McBath
ST (3) Prater, Colquitt, Paxton

IR - Dumervil

PUP - Reid, who replaces Atkins if he is activated.

Suspended - White, who replaces Hall when he is activated.

OldschoolFreak
09-02-2010, 06:14 PM
My roster projection

QB- (3) Orton, Quinn, Tebow
HB- (3) Moreno, Buckhalter, Ball
FB- (1) Larsen
WR-(6) Lloyd, Thomas...Royal, Stokley...Gaffney, Decker
TE- (3) Graham, Quinn, Branson
OL- (8) Clady, Beadles, Walton, Kuper, Harris, Daniels, Hochstein, S.Olsen
DL- (8) Williams, Bannan, McBean, Fields, Green, L. Smith, Thomas, Baker
LB (8) DJ, Woodyard, Haggan, Mays, Ayers, Hunter, Moss, Atkins
CB (6) Bailey, Goodman, Cox, Smith, Jones, Thompson
S (4) Dawkins, Hill, Bruton, McBath
ST (3) Prater, Colquitt, Paxton

IR - Dumervil

PUP - Reid, who replaces Atkins if he is activated.

Suspended - White, who replaces Hall when he is activated.

Looks pretty close to spot on. I'd quibble over the Stokley/Willis cut but other than that, looks pretty much right.

nevcraw
09-02-2010, 09:33 PM
Can Willis and Stokes both make it?

I have a bad feeling if he gets cut --stokely would send up on either the chargers or the Chiefs..

TXBRONC
09-02-2010, 10:30 PM
phonz

I think it's very possible after tonight's preformance.

Northman
09-02-2010, 10:32 PM
I think McD will have too much pride to cut Phonz. Chances are Stokely and Jones will be cut as far as notables.

dogfish
09-02-2010, 10:59 PM
U29 and i were talking about it, and we both agreed-- there's no way we cut willis at this point. . . i don't know if we cut stokes or actually keep seven receivers, but i just don't believe that we're going to cut him after he's been this consistently productive the entire offseason. . .

Northman
09-02-2010, 11:10 PM
U29 and i were talking about it, and we both agreed-- there's no way we cut willis at this point. . . i don't know if we cut stokes or actually keep seven receivers, but i just don't believe that we're going to cut him after he's been this consistently productive the entire offseason. . .


Aside from his drops in the first game i think he has rebounded well since then. Stokely has been missing in action pretty much.

Ziggy
09-02-2010, 11:23 PM
Willis is a lock. I'm guessing Stokely is the odd man out. With Bannan being able to swing to NT, either Baker or Fields will more than likely get the axe. I think that Cassius Vaughn may be the DB that gets left behind, but if he clears waivers will be put on the practice squad.

Maybe Xanders can work some magic and trade a few guys with talent for conditional late round picks. It's unlikely, but there is an outside possibility.

Of the other notables that might get cut, I'd say Jarvis Moss could be a surprise cut. He's just too much of a liability against the run. Hochstien would be my choice for the 2nd surprise, but only if Eric Olson came out of this game healthy. He went down in the 3rd quarter, and I never heard the final word on that.

There is of course, always a chance that a few guys magically end up on the IR with injuries that seemed to appear out of thin air.

frauschieze
09-02-2010, 11:23 PM
Did Stokely even play tonight? I don't remember seeing him at all.

Bosco
09-02-2010, 11:24 PM
Did Stokely even play tonight? I don't remember seeing him at all.

He hasn't played all preseason to my knowledge. He's injured apparently.

dogfish
09-02-2010, 11:43 PM
Aside from his drops in the first game i think he has rebounded well since then. Stokely has been missing in action pretty much.

literally, not pretty much-- he's been hurt. . .

and i don't hold it against him-- IMO it's not a matter of him earning a spot at this point, the coaching staff knows what they have with him. . . to me it's more a question of A.) how many receivers can we/do we keep, and B.) can they justify keeping a backup WR who has well-documented durability issues (clearly born out by the fact that he's dinged now), doesn't play special teams, and has to be managed pretty carefully in terms of his snaps. . .

don't get me wrong. . . i like stokley, a lot-- and i'd be happy to have him on the team this year. . . i even think there's a chance we could keep seven receivers to start the season, although it's unusual. . . but if we go with six, i just don't see how they can justify giving up a player with willis' long term potential to keep a vet with such clear limitations for another year or two. . .

i'd honestly much rather keep stokes than lloyd-- i know whose hands and separation i'm more comfortable with on third down, where mr. stokley has proven to be quite clutch over his career. . . guy's well worth a roster spot for that aspect alone. . . but we certainly can't throw thomas out there at this point. . . i highly doubt we could have even if he got every possible snap in TC and the preseason, but he didn't even get that. . .

and we're pretty much committed to royal in the slot at this point-- can't risk mucking with his development more by moving him back outside fulltime after he spent all offseason getting ready to play the slot. . . so, lloyd makes the roster pretty much by default. . .

unless decker or willis comes down with a "mysterious injury" in the next day or so, there's going to be a tough choice to make at both WR and corner. . .

i also suspect that daniels starting at OLG and beadles getting a number of reps at OT would suggest that baptiste is on the bubble as well. . . i could see us going with eight OLs another year, but not now-- not unless they absolutely have to, which they shouldn't unless clady or kupes has a setback. . . i'm thinking they want to start daniels, use beadles as a swing tackle and hochstein to back up all the interior spots. . .

we'll see how it plays out, but i'd really prefer at this point that we just put doom on IR. . . i'm NOT one of the people writing the season off, at all, but i'm also not convinced that we're the kind of contenders that can afford to lose a young positional reserve/ST player to keep an unused roster spot for the majority of the year. . .

if injuries end up hitting in the regular season, what are the odds that they decide at that point to put him on IR so we can sign some badly neeed depth? i think it's borderline-inevitable, and i'd rather keep a solid young guy that's had a year or two in our system (willis, vaughn, thompson, olsen, whoever), than end up signing the equivalent of calvin lowery midseason when we could've kept a guy with some possible long term value. . .

may as well just bite that bullet now, and committ to giving elvis a full year to heal and rehab completely rather than risk rushing him back. . . we just signed him to a huge deal that makes him a centerpiece of our defense going forward-- no need to rush him back for a few games, he's going to be here for years to come. . .

Bosco
09-03-2010, 12:08 AM
I noticed in the highlights that they appeared to sending Willis on more of those short, quick routes. To me that says that Josh probably went into this game going "Let's see if Matt can run the same routes Royal and Stokley do".

If Willis performed well, I think Stokley is probably looking for a job.

Magnificent Seven
09-03-2010, 12:18 AM
Brady Quinn!

Magnificent Seven
09-03-2010, 12:20 AM
Cut Day is not fun for everyone....

Buff
09-03-2010, 12:51 AM
Willis is a lock. I'm guessing Stokely is the odd man out. With Bannan being able to swing to NT, either Baker or Fields will more than likely get the axe. I think that Cassius Vaughn may be the DB that gets left behind, but if he clears waivers will be put on the practice squad.

Maybe Xanders can work some magic and trade a few guys with talent for conditional late round picks. It's unlikely, but there is an outside possibility.

Of the other notables that might get cut, I'd say Jarvis Moss could be a surprise cut. He's just too much of a liability against the run. Hochstien would be my choice for the 2nd surprise, but only if Eric Olson came out of this game healthy. He went down in the 3rd quarter, and I never heard the final word on that.

There is of course, always a chance that a few guys magically end up on the IR with injuries that seemed to appear out of thin air.

I agree Willis is a lock, but I don't see any way Moss gets cut. We're too thin at OLB and he's had his best off/preseason as a Bronco.

Buff
09-03-2010, 01:05 AM
Interesting McD quotes from Andrew Mason:


So many receivers, so few spots. Or are there?

“There might be more spots than you think,” Broncos coach Josh McDaniels said.

“We’re going to keep the best players on the team, and if that means we go heavy at receiver or cornerback or somewhere else because we feel like we have better depth there, then that’s the decision we’re going to make.”

“Certainly we’re not going to go too light at any spot to put our team in jeopardy,” McDaniels said, “but we feel like we’ve got a lot of guys at (wide receiver) that can help us.”

http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2010/09/02/wr-broncos-might-have-enough-room-at-the-inn/

dogfish
09-03-2010, 02:58 AM
that sounds like seven receivers and six corners to me. . .

royal, gaffney, lloyd, decker, thomas, stokley and willis at WR-- bailey, goodman, cox, jones, smith and thompson at corner most likely, IMO. . . although those last three may not be set in stone, with vaughn maybe having some chance to beat one of those. . . still think he's most likely the PS candidate, though. . .

Traveler
09-03-2010, 04:34 AM
My surprise cut:

Jarvis Green! Other than the fumble recovery in Detroit, the guy has been invisible since signing with the team. Couldn't beat out McBean?

What I wouldn't give to see our OL and DL play the the opposing teams side of the ball like MN did last night.

underrated29
09-03-2010, 11:16 AM
Interesting McD quotes from Andrew Mason:



http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2010/09/02/wr-broncos-might-have-enough-room-at-the-inn/


that sounds like seven receivers and six corners to me. . .

royal, gaffney, lloyd, decker, thomas, stokley and willis at WR-- bailey, goodman, cox, jones, smith and thompson at corner most likely, IMO. . . although those last three may not be set in stone, with vaughn maybe having some chance to beat one of those. . . still think he's most likely the PS candidate, though. . .



Aha- What I have been saying all along. The two above quotes further back up my guess....yes it is still a guess, but If I was a coach I would do just that.

7wr -6cbs stokes, willis and phonz all make the team and phonz is ahead of syd. Im telling ya







My surprise cut:

Jarvis Green! Other than the fumble recovery in Detroit, the guy has been invisible since signing with the team. Couldn't beat out McBean?

What I wouldn't give to see our OL and DL play the the opposing teams side of the ball like MN did last night.




While it would make some sense, because he has not been the lights out guy, we lack little depth there and Mcbean has really responded well. I do not see how we could afford to cut him though, who would backup mcbean? We let peterson go- Thomas- I dont know- so therefore I think he stays.







PS- Dogfish I had a good time drinking and talking football with ya last night! More of you locals should have shown up.

muse
09-03-2010, 11:41 AM
My surprise cut:

Jarvis Green! Other than the fumble recovery in Detroit, the guy has been invisible since signing with the team. Couldn't beat out McBean?

What I wouldn't give to see our OL and DL play the the opposing teams side of the ball like MN did last night.

He was never meant to beat McBean, he was signed as a nickel rusher, he said so himself. He's gotten some pressure, not as much as Holliday, but he's drawn a couple of holding penalties.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 11:43 AM
U29 and i were talking about it, and we both agreed-- there's no way we cut willis at this point. . . i don't know if we cut stokes or actually keep seven receivers, but i just don't believe that we're going to cut him after he's been this consistently productive the entire offseason. . .

I think like year we'll kee six wide receivers. Gaffney, Royal, Lloyd, Thomas, Decker, and either Willis or Stokley.

Traveler
09-03-2010, 12:01 PM
He was never meant to beat McBean, he was signed as a nickel rusher, he said so himself. He's gotten some pressure, not as much as Holliday, but he's drawn a couple of holding penalties.

Really? Denver paid him a $2.5 million signing bonus plus $800,000 salary. That's a lot of cheeze for a second stringer. And very little production.

dogfish
09-03-2010, 12:09 PM
PS- Dogfish I had a good time drinking and talking football with ya last night! More of you locals should have shown up.

definitely, man. . . we'll have to give give the scrubs another chance sometime. . .

broncofaninfla
09-03-2010, 01:13 PM
Really? Denver paid him a $2.5 million signing bonus plus $800,000 salary. That's a lot of cheeze for a second stringer. And very little production.

I totally agree and have been arguing this for a while. We should have kept Holliday who is much better than Green while playing the same role. I can't help but think if Green wasn't a former Patriot he wouldn't even be on this team. Same with Le Kevin.

Bosco
09-03-2010, 02:05 PM
I totally agree and have been arguing this for a while. We should have kept Holliday who is much better than Green while playing the same role. I can't help but think if Green wasn't a former Patriot he wouldn't even be on this team. Same with Le Kevin.

Green has been outperforming Holliday for most of his career and is several years younger.

broncofaninfla
09-03-2010, 02:13 PM
Green has been outperforming Holliday for most of his career and is several years younger.

OK we get it, you love all things Mcd but how about proving this one. There isn't a stat out there that proves that Green is anywhere near the player Holliday has been.

claymore
09-03-2010, 03:21 PM
Im going out on a limb and gonna say Baker.

pnbronco
09-03-2010, 03:30 PM
Im going out on a limb and gonna say Baker.

yeah that was a big limb could of even been a tree trunk or was it a bridge.....:laugh:...Clay at least I know some things will never change....:D

Bosco
09-03-2010, 04:09 PM
OK we get it, you love all things Mcd but how about proving this one. There isn't a stat out there that proves that Green is anywhere near the player Holliday has been.

You don't need stats. Look at their body of work. Jarvis Green has made a pretty good career out of playing as a nickel pass rush specialist in the 3-4. Vonnie Holliday has bounced around the league as a 4-3 DE/DT and the only two teams to use him as a DE in the 3-4 (Miami and Denver) both let him walk after just one year.

Again though, I bet it had less to do with play and more to do with age.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 05:01 PM
I totally agree and have been arguing this for a while. We should have kept Holliday who is much better than Green while playing the same role. I can't help but think if Green wasn't a former Patriot he wouldn't even be on this team. Same with Le Kevin.


Green has been outperforming Holliday for most of his career and is several years younger.

Well Broncofaninfla I don't know why Green is here over Holiday but I can tell you what it aint. It's not because of production as you hit upon Holiday by leaps and bounds has out played Green. Sorry Bosco what you said isn't accurate.

Just take the first eight years of player and it's not even close.

Holliday: 42.5 sack in his first eight years.

Green: 28 sacks in his first eight years.

Just for laughs here are their total tackles over the same period of time.

Holiday: 355 total tackles

Green: 232 total tackles

underrated29
09-03-2010, 05:06 PM
Well Broncofaninfla I don't know why Green is here over Holiday but I can tell you what it aint. It's not because of production as you hit upon Holiday by leaps and bounds has out played Green. Sorry Bosco what you said isn't accurate.

Just take the first eight years of player and it's not even close.

Holliday: 42.5 sack in his first eight years.

Green: 28 sacks in his first eight years.

Just for laughs here are their total tackles over the same period of time.

Holiday: 355 total tackles

Green: 232 total tackles




Let me introduce you all to OWNAGE. You can meet him in the above post.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 05:11 PM
You don't need stats. Look at their body of work. Jarvis Green has made a pretty good career out of playing as a nickel pass rush specialist in the 3-4. Vonnie Holliday has bounced around the league as a 4-3 DE/DT and the only two teams to use him as a DE in the 3-4 (Miami and Denver) both let him walk after just one year.

Again though, I bet it had less to do with play and more to do with age.

That again is not accurate Holliday was with Miami for four years before coming to Denver. Which also means for the last 5 years he's been playing in 3-4 defense. Holliday's numbers are better over that stretch.

underrated29
09-03-2010, 05:23 PM
That again is not accurate Holliday was with Miami for four years before coming to Denver. Which also means for the last 5 years he's been playing in 3-4 defense. Holliday's numbers are better over that stretch.



Didnt he play with san diego for a while too...?

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 05:28 PM
Didnt he play with san diego for a while too...?

Green Bay, K.C., Miami, and Denver.

Buff
09-03-2010, 05:31 PM
I don't know, if I recall correctly the Patriots brought Holliday in for a workout last year and ultimately didn't sign him (this while Green was still on their roster). So, both the Patriots and Broncos talent evaluators determined Green is a better option than Holliday.

Maybe it's stricly an age thing, I'm not really sure.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 05:42 PM
I don't know, if I recall correctly the Patriots brought Holliday in for a workout last year and ultimately didn't sign him (this while Green was still on their roster). So, both the Patriots and Broncos talent evaluators determined Green is a better option than Holliday.

Maybe it's stricly an age thing, I'm not really sure.

My guess would be that it has to do with although Green is no spring chicken either. Holliday is 35 and Green 31.

Btw Holliday was a lot more productive than Green last year.

Buff
09-03-2010, 05:45 PM
My guess would be that it has to do with although Green is no spring chicken either. Holliday is 35 and Green 31.

Btw Holliday was a lot more productive than Green last year.

I don't necessarily think stats/sacks are always the best measurement of production for 3-4 D-linemen... But I didn't watch Green play last year, so I really can't say you're right or wrong with much conviction.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 05:54 PM
I don't necessarily think stats/sacks are always the best measurement of production for 3-4 D-linemen... But I didn't watch Green play last year, so I really can't say you're right or wrong with much conviction.

If you're being asked to play nickle defensive end wouldn't that be that be the main thing or one of the main things you would look at.

Just last year alone Holliday had better overall year.

Bosco
09-03-2010, 05:54 PM
Well Broncofaninfla I don't know why Green is here over Holiday but I can tell you what it aint. It's not because of production as you hit upon Holiday by leaps and bounds has out played Green. Sorry Bosco what you said isn't accurate.

Just take the first eight years of player and it's not even close.

Holliday: 42.5 sack in his first eight years.

Green: 28 sacks in his first eight years.

Just for laughs here are their total tackles over the same period of time.

Holiday: 355 total tackles

Green: 232 total tackles

You missed the post above mine where I talked about Holliday playing most of his career as a 4-3 defensive end, while Jarvis Green has always been in a 3-4 defense. These are very different positions with different responsibilities and are simply not comparable.

*Edit* I see you responded to that part in a different post. You were incorrect there though as well as Miami didn't switch to the 4-3/3-4 hybrid defense until Dom Capers took over the defense in 2007. For the record I was also mistaken there as I originally thought the 3-4 switch didn't come until Parcells showed up in 2008 when in fact it was already there.

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 06:01 PM
You missed the post above mine where I talked about Holliday playing most of his career as a 4-3 defensive end, while Jarvis Green has always been in a 3-4 defense. These are very different positions with different responsibilities and are simply not comparable.

*Edit* I see you responded to that part in a different post. You were incorrect there though as well as Miami didn't switch to the 4-3/3-4 hybrid defense until Dom Capers took over the defense in 2007. For the record I was also mistaken there as I originally thought the 3-4 switch didn't come until Parcells showed up in 2008 when in fact it was already there.

:beer:

dogfish
09-03-2010, 06:09 PM
I don't know, if I recall correctly the Patriots brought Holliday in for a workout last year and ultimately didn't sign him (this while Green was still on their roster). So, both the Patriots and Broncos talent evaluators determined Green is a better option than Holliday.

Maybe it's stricly an age thing, I'm not really sure.

i was fine with the move, just based on age alone. . . not that green's young, but 4-5 years difference is a LOT (especially in NFL years) when you're talking about guys over 30. . . i know i wouldn't have felt comfortable with holiday going forward-- not that he didn't play surprisingly well for a stopgap in a limited role last year, but one guy on the defense over 35 is enough. . .

last year i predicted that the defense might fade down the tstretch due to their age, and although lack of depth on the DL might have been a bigger factor, fade they most certainly did. . . the starters in our secondary are all a year older, and we're relying on an old guy to be our upgrade at nosetackle. . . makes a lot of sense to me that they didn't want to bring back any more old guys, which is probably why andra davis was released (which in hindsight doesn't look like such a great move). . .

TXBRONC
09-03-2010, 06:36 PM
i was fine with the move, just based on age alone. . . not that green's young, but 4-5 years difference is a LOT (especially in NFL years) when you're talking about guys over 30. . . i know i wouldn't have felt comfortable with holiday going forward-- not that he didn't play surprisingly well for a stopgap in a limited role last year, but one guy on the defense over 35 is enough. . .

last year i predicted that the defense might fade down the tstretch due to their age, and although lack of depth on the DL might have been a bigger factor, fade they most certainly did. . . the starters in our secondary are all a year older, and we're relying on an old guy to be our upgrade at nosetackle. . . makes a lot of sense to me that they didn't want to bring back any more old guys, which is probably why andra davis was released (which in hindsight doesn't look like such a great move). . .

I also thought that defense might fade but I figured that the problem would be because our last year's because Fields is small for a nose tackle.