PDA

View Full Version : How 'bout Jarvis Moss!



honz
09-21-2008, 08:13 PM
No, he didn't have a sack, but he did show some signs of life. He had a nice contain on Bush early in the game that forced Bush to run back inside straight into a tackle. He got pressure on Brees on a 3rd down that caused an errant throw and he was split seconds away from recording sacks on a couple plays. He also made the last tackle of the game before the Saints WR could make a pitch.:D

Personally, I thought he played decently for a young, project DLineman. There is still hope that he may turn into a player.

G_Money
09-21-2008, 08:23 PM
We need to play him in every game.

A lot.

Because our D is terrible, and the only chance we have to pull out of it is for some of the young guys to actually turn into Real Players.

Moss, Crowder, Thomas and Doom need to play every game. Engleberger is not potentially a main part of the future of this franchise. We need to know what our recent DL picks can do. Even if the scheme is a total failure we can at least see if Moss can hold an edge or rush a passer.

And we need to know that ASAP.

~G

hamrob
09-21-2008, 09:05 PM
No, he didn't have a sack, but he did show some signs of life. He had a nice contain on Bush early in the game that forced Bush to run back inside straight into a tackle. He got pressure on Brees on a 3rd down that caused an errant throw and he was split seconds away from recording sacks on a couple plays. He also made the last tackle of the game before the Saints WR could make a pitch.:D

Personally, I thought he played decently for a young, project DLineman. There is still hope that he may turn into a player. A young project Dlineman??? What the hell are you talking about?

This is a guy that we traded up in the 1st round for. We gave up a #1 and a #3 for this guy.

His name wasn't even called today other than for being offsides! Look, I'm crossing my fingers for him...because we need help. But don't go saying he played pretty well for being a project player. You don't spend a 1st and 3rd on a project player...this guy needs to seriously step up!

topscribe
09-21-2008, 09:38 PM
A young project Dlineman??? What the hell are you talking about?

This is a guy that we traded up in the 1st round for. We gave up a #1 and a #3 for this guy.

His name wasn't even called today other than for being offsides! Look, I'm crossing my fingers for him...because we need help. But don't go saying he played pretty well for being a project player. You don't spend a 1st and 3rd on a project player...this guy needs to seriously step up!

That was exactly my thought: project player?

-----

honz
09-21-2008, 09:39 PM
A young project Dlineman??? What the hell are you talking about?

This is a guy that we traded up in the 1st round for. We gave up a #1 and a #3 for this guy.

His name wasn't even called today other than for being offsides! Look, I'm crossing my fingers for him...because we need help. But don't go saying he played pretty well for being a project player. You don't spend a 1st and 3rd on a project player...this guy needs to seriously step up!
He was definitely a project when we drafted him...he is a physical specimen and has tons of upside. Also, he DID make some plays today. He was the only guy besides Doom to get any pressure on Brees.

Did we give up too much to get him...yeah, we did unless he somehow turns into an absolute beast, but that is not the point of this thread. It is what it is and he is a Broncos player for the next couple of years, and I saw some encouraging signs today. DLineman generally take a while to develop...just take a look at Mario Williams rookie year.

honz
09-21-2008, 09:41 PM
That was exactly my thought: project player?

-----
Did the Broncos draft him as a project? Maybe not, but that is what he is now.

Meh, I just thought he played pretty well and thought he showed some signs that he could turn into a player.

topscribe
09-21-2008, 09:41 PM
He was definitely a project when we drafted him...he is a physical specimen and has tons of upside. Also, he DID make some plays today. He was the only guy besides Doom to get any pressure on Brees.

Did we give up too much to get him...yeah, we did unless he somehow turns into an absolute beast, but that is not the point of this thread. It is what it is and he is a Broncos player for the next couple of years, and I saw some encouraging signs today. DLineman generally take a while to develop...just take a look at Mario Williams rookie year.

Yeah well, the next time the Broncos spend a #1 and a #3 to reach for a
project player, I think I'll just kick the TV screen in.

-----

topscribe
09-21-2008, 09:43 PM
Did the Broncos draft him as a project? Maybe not, but that is what he is now.

Meh, I just thought he played pretty well and thought he showed some signs that he could turn into a player.

I hope so, Honz. I'm just glad they got some good players out of the rest of
that draft so that, if Moss does bust, it won't be a total loss.

I have really pulled for him, but I'm running out of patience.

-----

honz
09-21-2008, 09:43 PM
Yeah well, the next time the Broncos spend a #1 and a #3 to reach for a
project player, I think I'll just kick the TV screen in.

-----
It is what it is, brotha. Maybe I used a poor choice of words, but you guys are still free to comment on his performance rather than my choice of words...I have always considered him as a project though.

ApaOps5
09-21-2008, 09:46 PM
I am willing to bet he is inactive next week and probably deservedly so.

topscribe
09-21-2008, 09:46 PM
It is what it is, brotha. Maybe I used a poor choice of words, but you guys are still free to comment on his performance rather than my choice of words...I have always considered him as a project though.

I didn't mean to do that, Honz. Sorry. I'm just to the limit with him, is all.

Of course, I hope he works out. And I understand this is essentially his rookie
season. So I'm willing to wait a little longer. I'm sure Shanny's relieved at that. :D

-----

hamrob
09-21-2008, 10:27 PM
I hope he pans out as well. Just to come clean...I wanted to draft him. I liked Willis better...but knew we didn't have enought to get him...so, I wanted Moss. Boy, I was wrong. So Far.

I'm trying to stay positive...but teams just can't have three DE's that weigh 260 or less playing every play for them (Engleberger, Moss, Doom). Watching that game today...it was way too easy for the Tackles to push these guys out of the pocket. I mean you're talking 300-325 on 245-265lb guys. Once in a while they might get around them...but not very often...as evidenced by the first 3 games.

We need guys who can rush the passer and who can physically (via strength, size & speed) blow up the pocket. Playing LB's at DE isn't the receipe...obviously!

lex
09-21-2008, 11:05 PM
I think one of the things thats stunting Moss' playing time is both he and Dumervil are not the best at run defense. We cant afford to have two guys like that and since Dumervil has been better at rushing the passer, that leaves Moss as the odd man out. If we saw Moss play more, we might see more accelerated progress. I kind of hope we trade Dumervil this year and sign Peppers or Suggs.

dogfish
09-21-2008, 11:10 PM
moss was absolutely a project player. . . what else can you call a guy with a total of THIRTEEN college starts? a guy that was drafted very much on potential rather than production? a guy that barely even saw the field before his last college season? moss was raw as sushi, he's pretty much the definition of a project player-- his draft status doesn't change that, even if it does influence people's expectations of him. . . unlike an accomplished four-year starter like crowder or dumervil, moss was chosen for his pure athletic ability, not his refined technique. . .


seriously, people don't think first rounders can be projects? look no farther than matt jones. . .

omac
09-21-2008, 11:13 PM
This is a reason I was pissed when Moss said he wouldn't gain the weight, that he'll just get stronger. Well, come on, Moss, get stronger. We're waiting ....

lex
09-21-2008, 11:16 PM
moss was absolutely a project player. . . what else can you call a guy with a total of THIRTEEN college starts? a guy that was drafted very much on potential rather than production? a guy that barely even saw the field before his last college season? moss was raw as sushi, he's pretty much the definition of a project player-- his draft status doesn't change that, even if it does influence people's expectations of him. . . unlike an accomplished four-year starter like crowder or dumervil, moss was chosen for his pure athletic ability, not his refined technique. . .


seriously, people don't think first rounders can be projects? look no farther than matt jones. . .


What makes it obvious he was drafted on upside and not as a finished product, is who they took with the pick after him as a way of hedging their bets.

Retired_Member_001
09-22-2008, 04:36 AM
We need to play him in every game.

A lot.

Because our D is terrible, and the only chance we have to pull out of it is for some of the young guys to actually turn into Real Players.

Moss, Crowder, Thomas and Doom need to play every game. Engleberger is not potentially a main part of the future of this franchise. We need to know what our recent DL picks can do. Even if the scheme is a total failure we can at least see if Moss can hold an edge or rush a passer.

And we need to know that ASAP.

~G

I really don't understand why Engleberger is getting playing time over TIM CROWDER! It's crazy. I don't understand Shanahan's fetish with average Defensive Ends. Yes he is a decent, hard working DE, but he's not Tim Crowder. How are the young DE's going to get a chance when Engleberger is getting all the playing time?

drewloc
09-22-2008, 06:15 AM
What is even more interesting is that Crowder was moved to inactive instead of someone else. I really would like to see all of our young guys playing. That's the only way they can possibly get better imo.:salute:

gobroncsnv
09-22-2008, 06:58 AM
I know that Engleberger is not going to be our best DE, especially for a pass rush... but I gotta give the guy props for his hustle and backside pursuit. His best work is against the run, especially when they run to the other side, you'll see him chase the plays down, and eliminate the cutback. No doubt, the kids need to start stepping up their game, because right now, they are not the best we have, nor do they give us the best chance to win. I want them to practice their way onto the field, and realize they have to earn it.

BigDaddyBronco
09-22-2008, 09:41 AM
I know that Engleberger is not going to be our best DE, especially for a pass rush... but I gotta give the guy props for his hustle and backside pursuit. His best work is against the run, especially when they run to the other side, you'll see him chase the plays down, and eliminate the cutback. No doubt, the kids need to start stepping up their game, because right now, they are not the best we have, nor do they give us the best chance to win. I want them to practice their way onto the field, and realize they have to earn it.

I thought Engleberger was one of the few DEF players that played decently yesterday. He had a good hustle play where he forced a fumble which was returned for a TD, he had some good backside persuit and will hustle to make tackles downfield.

He got owned by Brees and Bush on the rollouts, but most would get owned by those two.

Overall he and DJ played decently, but everyone else (Champ had a couple of good plays) was week.

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 09:47 AM
What is even more interesting is that Crowder was moved to inactive instead of someone else. I really would like to see all of our young guys playing. That's the only way they can possibly get better imo.:salute:

Even worse is Crowder started 13 games last year. Now he is an inactive. Until this line gets addressed this team will be squeeking out wins and come play off time if they are there and the D is still playing this way it will be a quick playoff season for Denver fans.

EDIT: Whoops, he didn't start he played in 13 games starting 1. Thanks Cicero for pointing out my error.

CoachChaz
09-22-2008, 09:49 AM
I like Engleberger simply because he busts his butt on every play. But if hustle and work ethic are given priority over results, then Shanny needs to be smacked in the mouth a few times. In very limited playing time, Crowder netted 4 sacks last year. I'd be willing to bet Engleberger doesnt get more than that playing full time.

BigDaddyBronco
09-22-2008, 09:51 AM
Watching Moss get man-handled by their back-up LT on that bull rush was painful, but the next play was a run and one of their OLine pushed Moss off the pile and he flew sideways 3 or 4 yards. He just doesn't have the mass, so he'll need speed and quickness to make it in the league. I'm not sure he really has that either. Might as well get him out there to see if they should unload him at some point, he is not going to get better sitting on the bench.

:tsk:

BigDaddyBronco
09-22-2008, 09:53 AM
I like Engleberger simply because he busts his butt on every play. But if hustle and work ethic are given priority over results, then Shanny needs to be smacked in the mouth a few times. In very limited playing time, Crowder netted 4 sacks last year. I'd be willing to bet Engleberger doesnt get more than that playing full time.

I agree, if we were solid on the rest of the defense and needed a hustle-type player it would make sense to play him all the time. Seems like we're so bad we need to get the kids some experience. Maybe at the end of the year they'll be better.

CoachChaz
09-22-2008, 09:53 AM
Watching Moss get man-handled by their back-up LT on that bull rush was painful, but the next play was a run and one of their OLine pushed Moss off the pile and he flew sideways 3 or 4 yards. He just doesn't have the mass, so he'll need speed and quickness to make it in the league. I'm not sure he really has that either. Might as well get him out there to see if they should unload him at some point, he is not going to get better sitting on the bench.

:tsk:

He's just stuck being a tweener. Doesnt really have the complete skill set to be a LB and not big enough to play the line.

BigDaddyBronco
09-22-2008, 09:55 AM
He's just stuck being a tweener. Doesnt really have the complete skill set to be a LB and not big enough to play the line.

He needs to get some creatine or something. :tsk:

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 09:57 AM
He needs to get some creatine or something. :tsk:

Problem is he doesn't want to gain weight. He said he is staying at 245 and its just not possible to get heavier.

In the locker room they asked him how he played yesterday. He said he played good. He also said he is happy running with the second string while being interviewed on The FAN during training camp.

This sounds like a guy satisfied with just getting by. Or in other words a perfect Raider player.

CoachChaz
09-22-2008, 09:59 AM
Problem is he doesn't want to gain weight. He said he is staying at 245 and its just not possible to get heavier.

In the locker room they asked him how he played yesterday. He said he played good. He also said he is happy running with the second string while being interviewed on The FAN during training camp.

This sounds like a guy satisfied with just getting by. Or in other words a perfect Raider player.

Just there for the paycheck. Such a shame. I really thought he'd be a good one when I watched him in HS

underrated29
09-22-2008, 10:10 AM
Apa,

why do you think he will be inactive against the chefs? I think he will be active. he better be. The chefs have a terrible rebuilt oline, that has no cohisevness yet. If he struggles with them, then i think we know more about what he needs to do.

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 10:15 AM
Apa,

why do you think he will be inactive against the chefs? I think he will be active. he better be. The chefs have a terrible rebuilt oline, that has no cohisevness yet. If he struggles with them, then i think we know more about what he needs to do.

Because KC is abysmal at the passing game. They are a running team with someone who usually is a great back. Moss is horrid at pass rushing but he is pathetic at rush defense. He is a liability and he also didn't do crap yesterday. I expect to see Crowder active and Moss inactive.

underrated29
09-22-2008, 10:22 AM
Because KC is abysmal at the passing game. They are a running team with someone who usually is a great back. Moss is horrid at pass rushing but he is pathetic at rush defense. He is a liability and he also didn't do crap yesterday. I expect to see Crowder active and Moss inactive.



I hope not, but i think you might be right.

MOtorboat
09-22-2008, 10:27 AM
Because KC is abysmal at the passing game. They are a running team with someone who usually is a great back. Moss is horrid at pass rushing but he is pathetic at rush defense. He is a liability and he also didn't do crap yesterday. I expect to see Crowder active and Moss inactive.

Abysmal is being nice.

That surely means Tyler Thigpen is going to look like a stud...the next coming of Fran Tarkenton next week.

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 10:42 AM
I was watching the morning game and kept watching the cbs scores on the bottom and Thigpen was 1 for 10 passing with -1 yds and 1 INT. I chuckled and almost, almost, found myself feeling sorry for KC Fans. But then I remembered its the Chiefs.

Requiem / The Dagda
09-22-2008, 10:43 AM
Even worse is Crowder started 13 games last year. Now he is an inactive. Until this line gets addressed this team will be squeeking out wins and come play off time if they are there and the D is still playing this way it will be a quick playoff season for Denver fans.

He played in 13, he started one.

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 10:45 AM
He played in 13, he started one.

Thanks I was trying to find this post as I just realized I misspoke. I heard them say that on the FAN and for some reason it stuck.

hamrob
09-22-2008, 11:04 AM
The plain and simple truth...is that we don't have the talent on defense to compete.

Jarvis Moss & Tim Crowder are busts. Doom is overrated and probably (truly) weighs in at around 250lbs. Engleberger hustles...yes...but is an overacheiver that wouldn't make the cut on most NFL teams. Ekubon is past his time and was only average at best to begin with. Our DT's are doing an o.k. job...but our DE's are next to terrible. Add to that our poor safety play and pathetic LB's (Bailey & Webser)...and there is just no way our defense helps us out this year.

We need to rebuild the D.

Zweems56
09-22-2008, 11:18 AM
Speaking of Moss, Whats up with Boss? He's playing DL now and winborn is the Sam? Greg confused.

topscribe
09-22-2008, 11:23 AM
I believe some of us are a bit hard and premature on the LBs. Boss is just
working himself back into the lineup, and into a new team and scheme, after
being out most of the preseason and the first regular season game.

Actually, before I give a lot of credibility to any comments about Webster, I
would like to know whether those commenting actually attended the games
and where they sat.

Mtnman, for instance, is there for every home game, and he sits pretty close
to the 50-yard line, as I understand. He reported that Webster has generally
been where he was supposed to be the last couple games, filling gaps and
giving good pursuit.

I really have no problem with the LBs.

It seems the Broncos need improvement at safety, especially at Manuels
position (McCree looks like a player to me). However, I still maintain that if
the Broncos had only an "average" pass rush, the playing level of the LBs
and secondary would appear to improve dramatically.

The defense doesn't need an overhaul. It needs another true pass-rushing
DE to complement Dumervil and another decent DT to spell Robertson and
Thomas.

And maybe a different DC?

-----

hamrob
09-22-2008, 11:30 AM
Webster and Bailey are exposed in the passing game. You mean to tell me that you haven't noticed that? OR That you have to be at the actual game to see that they are liabilities?

Watch the replay of this game and tell me that Boss Bailey doesn't look like a tall gangly girl out there...getting beat on every play. Nate Webster is plenty good on a straight line...other than that...he is a liability...who cannot cover a RB or a TE to save his life.

39 of 48....all teams need to do...is isolate our LB's and off they go.

No...this defense...needs alot more than a DE and DT to all of a sudden become formidable! Sorry.

topscribe
09-22-2008, 11:48 AM
Webster and Bailey are exposed in the passing game. You mean to tell me that you haven't noticed that? OR That you have to be at the actual game to see that they are liabilities?

Watch the replay of this game and tell me that Boss Bailey doesn't look like a tall gangly girl out there...getting beat on every play. Nate Webster is plenty good on a straight line...other than that...he is a liability...who cannot cover a RB or a TE to save his life.

39 of 48....all teams need to do...is isolate our LB's and off they go.

No...this defense...needs alot more than a DE and DT to all of a sudden become formidable! Sorry.

I have watched replays. I also, as I said, listen closely to those who have
there. Have you been there?

Get better production out of the DL, and all the sudden it isn't so easy to
isolate the LBs or secondary. Forget about the back seven until the front
four are solved. That is where it all starts. Did you happen to see the Super
Bowl game?

We have people here who think all the sudden no one is any good on the
defense. Even Champ is getting bashed. This is ridiculous. Fix the front four.
Then, yes, you will see a tremendous difference in the defense.

-----

hamrob
09-22-2008, 12:48 PM
I have watched replays. I also, as I said, listen closely to those who have
there. Have you been there?

Get better production out of the DL, and all the sudden it isn't so easy to
isolate the LBs or secondary. Forget about the back seven until the front
four are solved. That is where it all starts. Did you happen to see the Super
Bowl game?

We have people here who think all the sudden no one is any good on the
defense. Even Champ is getting bashed. This is ridiculous. Fix the front four.
Then, yes, you will see a tremendous difference in the defense.

-----I understand where you're coming from...but I don't agree. The front 4 will not be fixed this year. In fact...I think our DT's are doing pretty darn good. The problem is that we don't have the personnel on defense to succeed...i.e. playmaking atheletes. Yes, that includes the DE's but also our MLB, our SAM and our Safeties.

That's way too much to overcome on Defense. The positive is...we have an easy schedule and our defense won't be exposed...I mean really exposed...until the end of the year, when we start playing better teams again.

Say what you want...but outide of Champ, DJ, Thomas, Robertson and maybe Bly...our defensive personnel is extremely poor at best.

As far as being at the games...I haven't been this year...but I have been to several Broncos games...and actually being at a game hardly qualifies someone as more of an expert then someone whose watching it on TV...with a million replays!

Poet
09-22-2008, 12:59 PM
moss was absolutely a project player. . . what else can you call a guy with a total of THIRTEEN college starts? a guy that was drafted very much on potential rather than production? a guy that barely even saw the field before his last college season? moss was raw as sushi, he's pretty much the definition of a project player-- his draft status doesn't change that, even if it does influence people's expectations of him. . . unlike an accomplished four-year starter like crowder or dumervil, moss was chosen for his pure athletic ability, not his refined technique. . .


seriously, people don't think first rounders can be projects? look no farther than matt jones. . .

But a project player is someone who you think can be good. A first rounder is someone that you expect to be very very good.

That is the main reason why I hesitate to call a first round player a project player.

topscribe
09-22-2008, 01:01 PM
I understand where you're coming from...but I don't agree. The front 4 will not be fixed this year. In fact...I think our DT's are doing pretty darn good. The problem is that we don't have the personnel on defense to succeed...i.e. playmaking atheletes. Yes, that includes the DE's but also our MLB, our SAM and our Safeties.

That's way too much to overcome on Defense. The positive is...we have an easy schedule and our defense won't be exposed...I mean really exposed...until the end of the year, when we start playing better teams again.

Say what you want...but outide of Champ, DJ, Thomas, Robertson and maybe Bly...our defensive personnel is extremely poor at best.

As far as being at the games...I haven't been this year...but I have been to several Broncos games...and actually being at a game hardly qualifies someone as more of an expert then someone whose watching in on TV...with a million replays!

Are you forgetting Dumervil, Ham? He hasn't all the sudden become camp
fodder, just because his hand is wrapped up and he can't use all his weapons,
which is likely part of the problem, BTW.

I do believe, also, that we need to give Boss a bit more time. He is apparently
still recovering from his high ankle sprain as he works his way into a new
defense with a new scheme. Remember, he did not have the benefit of most
of the preseason to do that.

I also am happy with McCree. I think his play has been fine, IMO.

But Robertson, Thomas, D.J., Dumervil, Champ, and Bly make up a pretty good
core, it would seem. The others don't have to be superstars. Just be where
they are supposed to be, when they are supposed to be. That is, outside of
a pressing need for another true pass rusher to complement Dumervil.

Regarding being at the game, I can look down and observe the entire flow
and scheme if I am there. If I am watching it on TV, I get to see the QB then
the WR after the QB has thrown the ball. Or I get to see the QB then the RB
after the QB has handed it off. Even most of the replays are focused on the
ball. I have attended a couple games with a friend who brought a little battery
driven TV with him . . . neat. Best of both worlds.

But I don't mean to demean your take on it. I will listen to you, yes, because
you have some very insightful views. However, I will also place great credibility
on those who were there and could see the whole thing develop.

-----

honz
09-22-2008, 02:49 PM
But a project player is someone who you think can be good. A first rounder is someone that you expect to be very very good.

That is the main reason why I hesitate to call a first round player a project player.
Project players *are* expected to be good...in a couple of years after they develop.

I didn't even like the Moss pick, but to give up on him already is ludicrous IMO. Also, it's not Moss' fault that the Broncos gave up too much to get him.

turftoad
09-22-2008, 02:52 PM
But a project player is someone who you think can be good. A first rounder is someone that you expect to be very very good.

That is the main reason why I hesitate to call a first round player a project player.

You mean like Vince Young?? :D

hamrob
09-22-2008, 03:09 PM
Are you forgetting Dumervil, Ham? He hasn't all the sudden become camp
fodder, just because his hand is wrapped up and he can't use all his weapons,
which is likely part of the problem, BTW.

I do believe, also, that we need to give Boss a bit more time. He is apparently
still recovering from his high ankle sprain as he works his way into a new
defense with a new scheme. Remember, he did not have the benefit of most
of the preseason to do that.

I also am happy with McCree. I think his play has been fine, IMO.

But Robertson, Thomas, D.J., Dumervil, Champ, and Bly make up a pretty good
core, it would seem. The others don't have to be superstars. Just be where
they are supposed to be, when they are supposed to be. That is, outside of
a pressing need for another true pass rusher to complement Dumervil.

Regarding being at the game, I can look down and observe the entire flow
and scheme if I am there. If I am watching it on TV, I get to see the QB then
the WR after the QB has thrown the ball. Or I get to see the QB then the RB
after the QB has handed it off. Even most of the replays are focused on the
ball. I have attended a couple games with a friend who brought a little battery
driven TV with him . . . neat. Best of both worlds.

But I don't mean to demean your take on it. I will listen to you, yes, because
you have some very insightful views. However, I will also place great credibility
on those who were there and could see the whole thing develop.

-----fair enough. Good post. I really do hope that our defense can get better...I'm just a skeptic...and a little disapointed at this juncture. I thought they looked good in the preseason against the likes of Dallas and Green Bay. But, the last two weeks they've looked absolutely brutal.

I mean...allowing a qb to go 39 of 48...sure, your LB's are going to pad their tackle stats...but that's only because they can't defend the pass. Can you recall just one nasty hit on a receiver yesterday?

Nevertheless, here's to hoping they get better! :beer:

topscribe
09-22-2008, 03:17 PM
Project players *are* expected to be good...in a couple of years after they develop.

I didn't even like the Moss pick, but to give up on him already is ludicrous IMO. Also, it's not Moss' fault that the Broncos gave up too much to get him.

Yes, I don't believe in giving up on Moss right now. He is in effectively his first
year, and he is still learning the professional level and working into football
shape.

We just have to understand that he is indeed a project. We have no choice now.

Nonetheless, in view of his scouting reports, I would not have given up what
the Broncos gave up to get him. But then, who am I? :noidea:

-----

xzn
09-22-2008, 04:58 PM
I thought Nate Webster played his best game as a Bronco yesterday. Besides the obvious TD return I don't recall any missed tackles and it seemed like he was all over the field making tackles. That said, I agree that upgrading MLB is a draft priority.

I think that Boss has the athletic potential and with his brother's influence I think he can be the answer at Sam, even though he's been a little dissapointing so far.

Marquand Manuel is my current least favorite starter on the squad! He licks rhinoceros gonads! FS is an area that also needs a massive talent upgrade in the draft.

Engerlberger is steady but he is certainly not the long term answer. Hopefully we have the cap space to bring in a proven FA DE, since we seem to not know how to draft one. Either that or it somehow clicks for Moss and Crowder and they start to play up to their respective draft positions.

For this year my best hope is that we improve enough to be at least "bad", which would be a big upgrade from our current mode of "atrocious". For next year, with the draft and FA I think we could become an average to slightly above average defense by improving MLB, FS and LE.

G_Money
09-22-2008, 05:50 PM
Don't add any frontline DL players til we get a scheme that works.

No first round picks, no high-priced free agents. We had a retarded scheme last year and I advocated leaving the DL alone except for depth or a run-stuffer because we just didn't know what anybody we already had could actually do. We're looking at the same problem this year.

We know we're playing two strong safeties essentially instead of one FS and one SS. I want that FS in the draft.

We know Nate Webster is not the captain of the defense, nor is he a starting MLB for any playoff squad in the NFL sans ours. So that's a need.

DE is a need...but right now we can't even get pressure on blitzes. Once we have a scheme that at least SOMETIMES gets pressure with the guys we have, we can look into upgrading the talent. The Ravens had a defense that worked, went away from it DT-wise and watched Ray Lewis turn into an average LB, then got a huge DT again and turned the defense back into a good one again. They re-acquired the talent that fit their scheme.

We haven't gotten a scheme yet so we don't really know what DL talent we need. Let's figure THAT out before we start spending tens of millions of dollars in FA money or draft bonuses for guys who might turn into average players here too.

~G

topscribe
09-22-2008, 06:41 PM
Don't add any frontline DL players til we get a scheme that works.

No first round picks, no high-priced free agents. We had a retarded scheme last year and I advocated leaving the DL alone except for depth or a run-stuffer because we just didn't know what anybody we already had could actually do. We're looking at the same problem this year.

We know we're playing two strong safeties essentially instead of one FS and one SS. I want that FS in the draft.

We know Nate Webster is not the captain of the defense, nor is he a starting MLB for any playoff squad in the NFL sans ours. So that's a need.

DE is a need...but right now we can't even get pressure on blitzes. Once we have a scheme that at least SOMETIMES gets pressure with the guys we have, we can look into upgrading the talent. The Ravens had a defense that worked, went away from it DT-wise and watched Ray Lewis turn into an average LB, then got a huge DT again and turned the defense back into a good one again. They re-acquired the talent that fit their scheme.

We haven't gotten a scheme yet so we don't really know what DL talent we need. Let's figure THAT out before we start spending tens of millions of dollars in FA money or draft bonuses for guys who might turn into average players here too.

~G

Well, that's kind of a two-fold proposition, G. The way it appears, the Broncos need to:

1. Decide what scheme they want to do, then acquire the talent for it

2. But in the meantime, assess what talent is there and design the scheme accordingly

The better coaches can do #2. Coyer was okay at it, especially for the desperate
lack of talent the Broncos had at that time. Bates, however, stunk up the joint in
that area, and it looks as if Slowik doesn't know what the hell to do.

I don't know what the hell to do, either . . . but then, I'm not the coach.

-----

dogfish
09-22-2008, 06:45 PM
Well, that's kind of a two-fold proposition, G. The way it appears, the Broncos need to:

1. Decide what scheme they want to do, then acquire the talent for it

2. But in the meantime, assess what talent is there and design the scheme accordingly

The better coaches can do #2. Coyer was okay at it, especially for the desperate
lack of talent the Broncos had at that time. Bates, however, stunk up the joint in
that area, and it looks as if Slowik doesn't know what the hell to do.

I don't know what the hell to do, either . . . but then, I'm not the coach.

-----


maybe what the hell we need to do is start by getting a good coach. . . ron rivera, san diego's current LB coach and chicago's former DC, would be high on my list. . . i'll have to pay attention to who's out there as the season progresses, but i'd gladly take somebody from jim johnson's staff if he has a proven assistant that's ready to move up. . . as bad as our D's been, i though hiring from within was a mistake-- i sure hope we don't do it again (assuming that slowik will be gone by the end of the year at the latest, which i am assuming as long as the unit contines to struggle this badly). . . .

Poet
09-22-2008, 07:36 PM
Project players *are* expected to be good...in a couple of years after they develop.

I didn't even like the Moss pick, but to give up on him already is ludicrous IMO. Also, it's not Moss' fault that the Broncos gave up too much to get him.

But first round picks are expected to be good, project players are not expected to be good, they are just literally a project. Something that, if it does not work out, does not hurt you.

If your first rounder fails you, it hurts you. You want proof, look at my Bengal's draft picks in the nineties.

I just can't see it.

honz
09-22-2008, 07:47 PM
But first round picks are expected to be good, project players are not expected to be good, they are just literally a project. Something that, if it does not work out, does not hurt you.

If your first rounder fails you, it hurts you. You want proof, look at my Bengal's draft picks in the nineties.

I just can't see it.
Okay, is "upside pick" a better term? Moss was a fairly unproven and unpolished player coming out of college that had a lot of upside. That's all I'm trying to say.

topscribe
09-22-2008, 08:28 PM
Okay, is "upside pick" a better term? Moss was a fairly unproven and unpolished player coming out of college that had a lot of upside. That's all I'm trying to say.

Yes, I think we're now dealing in some rather fruitless semantics. The fact is,
the Broncos drafted Moss, expecting him to be an impact player, and ended
up with a project. It shouldn't happen that way . . . I think we can all agree
to that . . . but it is what it is.

-----

Broncolingus
09-22-2008, 08:46 PM
...and ended up with a project. --

...or a 'tool?'

How ya been, Top?

Inkana7
09-22-2008, 08:56 PM
That was exactly my thought: project player?

-----

He is the definition of a project player. A staph infection kept him from really playing two years in college, and a broken leg last year kept him from playing.

Jarvis Moss has all the physical skills of an elite pass-rusher, he's just not refined. His technique is elementary. Dumervil came out of college with all the technique and moves of a veteran. Moss did not. He will take time.

beezer
09-22-2008, 09:19 PM
Maybe we could try the 3-4 with doom, moss, bailey and DJ...Then Robertson. Powell and peterson, crowder and a fat guy. Yeah, someone like Greg Kragen at NT, some real beef...

Both moss and doom are too light.

ApaOps5
09-22-2008, 09:42 PM
One of the reasons the Jets let go of Robertson is that he sucked in the 3-4 at NG. Denver doesn't have the players to run the 3-4. I would prefer more blitzing and just live and die by the big play.

gobroncsnv
09-22-2008, 10:18 PM
I don't yet think we've given any of our last 4 DC's the talent that they need upfront to have a dominant dline. Said it before elsewhere, not since 97-98 have we been able to engage even reasonable pressure in the most critical parts of the game, let alone on routine plays. For my money, get ANY semblance of talent, so that you have something to scheme with. This aspect of the game is SO crucial, and when you see other teams that do it so well, as opposed to how our guys look, it is mindboggling. We keep trying to change the driver when the car doesn't have enough pistons.

Hawgdriver
09-22-2008, 11:49 PM
I understand where you're coming from...but I don't agree. The front 4 will not be fixed this year. In fact...I think our DT's are doing pretty darn good. The problem is that we don't have the personnel on defense to succeed...i.e. playmaking atheletes. Yes, that includes the DE's but also our MLB, our SAM and our Safeties.

That's way too much to overcome on Defense. The positive is...we have an easy schedule and our defense won't be exposed...I mean really exposed...until the end of the year, when we start playing better teams again.

Say what you want...but outide of Champ, DJ, Thomas, Robertson and maybe Bly...our defensive personnel is extremely poor at best.

As far as being at the games...I haven't been this year...but I have been to several Broncos games...and actually being at a game hardly qualifies someone as more of an expert then someone whose watching it on TV...with a million replays!

I'm curious about the playmaking athletes point.

I wonder if they would do better in a defense that played to their strengths, instead of forcing them to be the square peg.

When you look at all of the youth on the offense, and how well Bates/Dennison take advantage of each player's strengths, you have to wonder if these players just aren't being used for maximum effectiveness.

I'm not saying they could light it up, but I wonder if there is some kind of inertia to change the basics of how the coaches employ the personnel.

On a different note, I really like how Engelberger can get separation from his blocker on running plays, but I don't know if that's better than giving up nearly 10 yards each time they attempt a pass.

studbucket
09-24-2008, 10:40 PM
From Michael Lombardi (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/09/national-football-post-tavern-talk-27/) at the National Football Post (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/):


Denver defensive linemen Jarvis Moss and Dwayne Robertson need to do something. I just watched them both on tape and it was painful. Moss looks like a blown pick right now.

Fan in Exile
09-25-2008, 08:13 AM
From Vic Lombardi (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/09/national-football-post-tavern-talk-27/) at the National Football Post (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/):

That's Michael Lombardi and I think he's kind of an idiot so I'm not to worried about it. I still think we need to keep playing Moss so that we know what we have with him by next off-season when we can do something about it.

topscribe
09-25-2008, 11:55 AM
Personally, I like Lombardi. I don't necessarily agree with him on Moss . . . yet
. . . but a lot of other people on the boards seem to. I'm one who wants to
give him another year to fully regain his health and strength, maybe put on a
few pounds, and get the experience this year that he missed last year before
I form a final opinion.

-----

studbucket
09-25-2008, 12:04 PM
Personally, I like Lombardi. I don't necessarily agree with him on Moss . . . yet
. . . but a lot of other people on the boards seem to. I'm one who wants to
give him another year to fully regain his health and strength, maybe put on a
few pounds, and get the experience this year that he missed last year before
I form a final opinion.

-----

I agree on Lombardi, I like him.

On Moss, I'm willing to give him a chance, but I've never liked the pick, and had a hard time talking myself into him.

What bothers me most is why we aren't seeing Crowder at all either.

honz
09-25-2008, 12:09 PM
How has Robertson been terrible? He's not getting great penetration on passing plays obviously, but he has made some plays in the running game and the middle of our line seems to be holding up very well on most rushing plays.

topscribe
09-25-2008, 12:25 PM
I agree on Lombardi, I like him.

On Moss, I'm willing to give him a chance, but I've never liked the pick, and had a hard time talking myself into him.

What bothers me most is why we aren't seeing Crowder at all either.

I've wondered about Crowder, too. I think he still has an upside, though. With
Ekuban and Engelberger on that side, it's probably an experience issue more
than anything. But it seems Crowder has more raw talent than either of them,
so the day is coming . . . I hope . . . that Crowder will surface.

Regarding Moss, wow, did I hate that pick!! :mad: Giving up a #1 and a #3 to
move "up" to an underweight DE who started all of 13 games. Now, I'm pulling
like crazy for him so the team won't end up with another blown #1.

-----

Cugel
09-26-2008, 10:01 AM
I really don't understand why Engleberger is getting playing time over TIM CROWDER! It's crazy. I don't understand Shanahan's fetish with average Defensive Ends. Yes he is a decent, hard working DE, but he's not Tim Crowder. How are the young DE's going to get a chance when Engleberger is getting all the playing time?

What's to understand? Tim Crowder is obviously a bust. :coffee:

Don't argue with me! That's obviously the coaches view, not mine.
I'm as reluctant as the next fan to admit that the DL I hoped would be the start of a great DL for the Broncos are turning out to be mediocre or worse.

And God knows, I'm no fan of John Engleberger. I've been waiting impatiently for years for them to cut him.

But, the vote is Shanahan's not mine. Right now, Engleberger is starting because he's the best they've got. They want to win and to do that they have to put the guys on the field they feel are the best. And Crowder right now is 3rd on the depth chart, behind Engleberger, and behind Ekuban too.

Engleberger hasn't been great (when has he ever been that?) but he's playing because the Broncos are trying to prevent teams from running on them the way they did last year. Crowder or Ekuban might be better pass-rushers but Engleberger is more solid against the run. That's the coaches view anyway.

Unless something dramatic happens next off season, Tim Crowder will be cut or traded. That's just the reality. You don't pay a guy 3rd round money if he's going to be a game day inactive player most of the time. You can get a FA off the street to do that for the league minimum. So, unless Crowder miraculously moves up on the depth chart - say goodbye to Tim Crowder.

Moss gets the benefit of the doubt for another season, because he's a #1 draft pick and teams hate to admit they made a busted pick. But, he's closing in on bust status too.

He's locked in behind Dumervil and doesn't look like he'll ever be a starter as long as Doom is there. And clearly, he's not strong enough to play LDE. And as he won't/can't gain the necessary weight his future looks bleak. The Broncos aren't going to renew his contract to pay him 1st round money if he can't start. That means he'll be cut/traded too once his rookie contract expires.

Worse is the situation at DT. If Kenny Peterson is your best DT that's not saying much. So far Marcus Thomas has shown very little and Dewayne Robertson, who they counted on to have a monster season is off to a very slow start.

I had to look up the Broncos stats to see that he'd actually been in the game at all. I haven't heard his name called all season. He has 3 tackles, two solo, 1 assist. No sacks, no pressures, no passes defended, no nothing. :coffee:

It's early yet but this defense is wildly underachieving.

If this continues, Shanahan is going to have to blow up the defense again and start from scratch next season.

Just look at the wild difference in how successful the Broncos offensive draft picks have been compared with the defensive ones:

Offense:

Jay Cutler, 1st round
Tony Sheffler, TE, 2nd round
Brandon Marshall, WR, 4th round
Ryan Clady, LT, 1st round
Eddie Royal, WR, 2nd round

Throw in some undrafted FAs and late round picks like Chris Kuper, Selvin Young and Andre Hall, and you have an entire roster of success stories on offense. Ryan Torain was probably another good pick before he was injured.

Compare the defense:

RDE - Elvis Dumervil, 4th round pick. The success story starts and ends here.
RDT - Marcus Thomas, 4th round. So far, no cigar. Much hype little performance. Jury's still out on him. But at least he's starting, not that they have much choice.
LDT - Dewayne Robertson. He had 57 tackles last year. This year he's been utterly invisible with 3 in 3 games, on a pace for 12 overall. Plus, his degenerative knee condition that caused other teams to give up on him is flaring up and causing him to miss practices.

It's pretty obvious that physically he's not the player he was last season, and he might wind up retiring soon if he just can't do any better.

He's looking like that sports car that looks good on the outside, but as it keeps breaking down and costing you a mint in repairs, you finally figure out why that previous owner was so eager to unload it to you at a great price! :laugh:

Kenny Peterson is his backup and might actually wind up starting. That is not good news for Bronco fans.

LDE - Engleberger, Ekuban, Crowder. In that order. Says it all. :coffee:

Cugel
09-26-2008, 10:09 AM
BTW: I just saw that S Hamza Abdullah was cut this week. Obviously he wasn't doing the job, but then none of the other safeties are doing their jobs either!

They could just as easily cut the entire roster of safeties, except they need to start somebody. Three games, and the number of times I've watched Denver safeties hopelessly trailing some WR into the endzone is already way too large.

They caught some breaks in the Oakland game because a rookie QB starting his first game overthrew his wide open WRs. But, Rivers and Brees are too good to miss open chances like that, and they didn't. Result: 400 yards passing.

Safety is the weakest link on the entire defense.

Considering that the DL isn't exactly playing great that's saying something! :coffee:

Requiem / The Dagda
09-26-2008, 10:20 AM
Unless something dramatic happens next off season, Tim Crowder will be cut or traded. That's just the reality. You don't pay a guy 3rd round money if he's going to be a game day inactive player most of the time. You can get a FA off the street to do that for the league minimum. So, unless Crowder miraculously moves up on the depth chart - say goodbye to Tim Crowder.

Well, Tim Crowder signed a four year deal worth about three million dollars. He was a second rounder too. Outside the bonuses, he's making around 500k a year playing on the team. That pretty much is league minimum. You don't get much cheaper than that, especially with the price of FA's these days. I don't think that Crowder is a bust, but it's disheartening to see him not playing out there and when he's playing -- not doing much.

I wonder what it is. He played 13 games last year, had four sacks and sixteen tackles and a FR for a TD. A good rookie year for someone who was a rotational player. Now he's doing nothing. Maybe he's just not "there" year developmentally. Maybe they just like Engleberger's and Ekuban's veteranship and game savvy over his right now.

I'm not going to give up on Tim yet. Who would have thought Justin Tuck would have had the year he did last year after his second season in the NFL. (Sidelined by injury, but still.) I don't want to give up on Moss either, but it's hard not to. I guess expectations and labels differ when you bring up round status.

I expect more out of Jarvis because of what we did and where we got him. Doesn't mean I don't think Tim needs to shape up, he does -- obviously, but I really wonder what the source of the problem is there. He seemed to be doing well in camps and impressing -- but then again, that's just camp. I'm really surprised they kept 3 LDE's anyways.

jlarsiii
09-26-2008, 10:43 AM
I have not seen every game this season (it sucks living so close to San Fran), but from what I have seen most teams are not attacking our D-line up the middle. It seems that at least with the running plays the teams have been attacking us on the edges. Because of that I give some credit to our DTs. Maybe they haven't been collapsing the pocket or getting pressure like we all have hoped for, but they are at least holding their own. I personally think that for the 4th round pick we spent on him that Thomas has done fine. I hope for more out of him but you have to admit that most teams would be frickin ecstatic to get solid DT production from a 4th round pick.

The problem is that we just don't get any production from our DEs. It is no secret. Dume has the skills, but he lacks the ideal size. Moss was the unfortunate pick for a scheme that we didn't even run for a full season. I just don't see how he is going to fit into what we do now, but I am willing to wait to see if he can develop. He does have bust written all over him due to his background and the fact he has done nothing to date, but we might as well give him another season to see what he can do. Honestly, what else can we do? It is not like we are going to find a pass rushing stud on the streets to bring in. We really can't get much less production out of our DEs at this point in time.

I had high hopes for our recent D-line draft picks. I have not given up hope yet that they can all become decent to great players for us. Still to this point in time they have been disappointing.

The truly frustrating thing in all of this for me is that I can't come to a conclusion that it is either the scheme (or lack thereof) or the players that are sucking it up. It has to be both at this point in time for lack of a better answer. I just hope our offense continues to click and stay healthy otherwise we will have a very dramatic and painful fall from the top of the division.

omac
09-26-2008, 03:18 PM
Maybe we can trade Moss and Crowder for some mid to late round draft picks; teams might think they still have upside ....

jlarsiii
09-26-2008, 04:53 PM
Maybe we can trade Moss and Crowder for some mid to late round draft picks; teams might think they still have upside ....

Maybe, but it could be a tough sale.

dogfish
09-26-2008, 05:23 PM
Maybe we can trade Moss and Crowder for some mid to late round draft picks; teams might think they still have upside ....


for what they'd bring in trade right now, i think we're better off hanging onto them and trying to develop them. . . especially moss-- he's still very raw, and as hard as it is to be patient, DLs sometimes just take a while to develop. . . justin tuck had like one sack in his first two years, but the G-Men didn't cut bait, and now he's turned into one of the most disruptive and versatile linemen in the league. . .

trading up for a project player isn't the greatest idea, but IMO it's even less recommended to then give up on him before you've had a chance to really find out what kind of return you might be able to get on your investment. . .

Retired_Member_001
09-26-2008, 05:28 PM
Maybe we can trade Moss and Crowder for some mid to late round draft picks; teams might think they still have upside ....

I agree with Dogfish. We wouldn't get much for them, so there's no point in trading them. Let's just see how they develop.

omac
09-26-2008, 05:43 PM
for what they'd bring in trade right now, i think we're better off hanging onto them and trying to develop them. . . especially moss-- he's still very raw, and as hard as it is to be patient, DLs sometimes just take a while to develop. . . justin tuck had like one sack in his first two years, but the G-Men didn't cut bait, and now he's turned into one of the most disruptive and versatile linemen in the league. . .

trading up for a project player isn't the greatest idea, but IMO it's even less recommended to then give up on him before you've had a chance to really find out what kind of return you might be able to get on your investment. . .

I agree with you, but I have doubts about Moss' commitment to get better. The coaching staff wanted him to gain weight, and he decided he didn't want to. He just strikes me as a player that, because he has talent, never really worked hard at getting better. People like to point out that his arsenal of pass rush techniques isn't that great, either. You compare him to Cutler, Brandon, & Tony who worked in the offseason to get their timing down; you compare him to the rookie Royal who's worked hard in college in perfecting his route-running, and worked equaly hard at mastering the playbook. Look at what Elvis can do with his small frame. Because of his physical traits, Moss has potential, but he doesn't seem to have the character.

Npba900
09-27-2008, 06:30 PM
Omac, I think you summed it up!

omac
09-27-2008, 06:58 PM
Omac, I think you summed it up!

Thanks, man. :cheers:

LoyalSoldier
09-27-2008, 09:05 PM
I am always amazed at how fast people want to throw any player under the bus. D-linemen on average take 3 years to develop. Seriously anyone remember how Mario Williams was getting thrown under the bus his rookie year? He doesn't look like a complete dunce any more. Hell even great ones like Strahan didn't do much till their third year.

I seriously get tired of anyone saying "BUST!" before a player has even had time to try.

Npba900
09-27-2008, 09:47 PM
I am always amazed at how fast people want to throw any player under the bus. D-linemen on average take 3 years to develop. Seriously anyone remember how Mario Williams was getting thrown under the bus his rookie year? He doesn't look like a complete dunce any more. Hell even great ones like Strahan didn't do much till their third year.

I seriously get tired of anyone saying "BUST!" before a player has even had time to try.

Not saying Moss is a bust per say. However, in the off season when Moss made the decision not to put on additional and to get stronger, it sums it up to his performance thus far. Now thats not to say after the season the light will go on and Moss will realize he must put on weight, get stronger and watch more film. His third year can't be a repeat of his first and second years, or he will be a bust.

Simple Jaded
09-27-2008, 10:55 PM
I am always amazed at how fast people want to throw any player under the bus. D-linemen on average take 3 years to develop. Seriously anyone remember how Mario Williams was getting thrown under the bus his rookie year? He doesn't look like a complete dunce any more. Hell even great ones like Strahan didn't do much till their third year.

I seriously get tired of anyone saying "BUST!" before a player has even had time to try.

Michael Strahan averaged 4.5 sacks in four season before exploding for 14 in his 5th season.

He had 1 tackle, 2 assists and one sack in 9 games in his rookie season.

Per ESPN......

LoyalSoldier
09-27-2008, 11:47 PM
Michael Strahan averaged 4.5 sacks in four season before exploding for 14 in his 5th season.

He had 1 tackle, 2 assists and one sack in 9 games in his rookie season.

Per ESPN......

Here is the break down

http://www.nfl.com/players/michaelstrahan/profile?id=STR122552

He had 1 and 4.5 sacks in his first two seasons and then 7.5 in his third year. So his third year was respectable. The following season he had 5 and then he exploded for 14

omac
09-28-2008, 04:58 AM
Here is the break down

http://www.nfl.com/players/michaelstrahan/profile?id=STR122552

He had 1 and 4.5 sacks in his first two seasons and then 7.5 in his third year. So his third year was respectable. The following season he had 5 and then he exploded for 14

Yeah, but Strahan's at least been on the field. His rookie season, he played 9 games. His 2nd year, he played 15 games.

Jarvis Moss only played 6 games his rookie season, but the really telling stat is he was held out as a game day inactive in this seasons first 2 games, even though he didn't have any injuries. That says a whole lot.

And as Npba900 and others have mentioned, the coaching staff wanted him to gain weight, and he refused. It's one thing to do it your way if you're getting things done; it's another when you aren't.

He'd better get good against the run (minimum) soon. No way do you spend a first rounder on a situational player, the way they're using him right now. No comparison to Mario Williams, even in his first year. :coffee:

Bronco9798
09-29-2008, 09:07 AM
Yeah, how about Jarvis Moss??

jrelway
09-29-2008, 10:53 AM
how about our whole defense exept for champ and dj. doom gets a pass because of his hand. but other than that, we got some serious issues.

studbucket
09-29-2008, 12:42 PM
Some more thoughts from Mike Lombardi:


If I were a Bronco fan, after watching that game against the Chiefs I would have no hope for ‘07 first-rounder Jarvis Moss. He played poorly yesterday. The Broncos have no chance at getting any pressure, even against an ineffective Chief offensive line.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/09/national-football-post-diner-news-27/

Cugel
09-29-2008, 12:56 PM
I am always amazed at how fast people want to throw any player under the bus. D-linemen on average take 3 years to develop. Seriously anyone remember how Mario Williams was getting thrown under the bus his rookie year? He doesn't look like a complete dunce any more. Hell even great ones like Strahan didn't do much till their third year.

I seriously get tired of anyone saying "BUST!" before a player has even had time to try.

Look, it's not ME who's saying Moss and Crowder are busts, it's the Denver coaches and Mike Shanahan. We know this because they are NOT starting or even playing very many minutes.

Tim Crowder is #3 on the depth chart! He's behind John Engleberger who is a journeyman DE. Engleberger is decent against the run, but absolutely NO pass-rush ability. Guys like Engleberger are a dime a dozen. You can find them on every team -- backing up in role situations like goal-line and short yardage defenses!

Crowder was inactive against the Raiders and has no tackles this season at all.

Perhaps next year, he'll suddenly blossom into a starter at LDE, but it's a long-shot. You would expect if that is going to happen he would at least show some signs of life this year, and so far he hasn't. No tackles, no assists, no passes defended, no Ints, no FF, no pressures, no sacks, no nothing -- in 3 games no starts either.

Crowder has "bust" written all over him. :coffee:

Moss was the #17 pick of the draft and Denver gave up a 3rd round pick just to move up 4 places to grab him.

But, he's stuck behind Dumervil at RDE. Now, you just don't pay him 1st round money if he's only going to be a backup. But where can he start? He's clearly NOT going to beat out Dumervil at RDE, and he's too small, light-weight to play LDE. So where can he go?

Moss might suddenly blossom into a fearsome pass-rusher somehow, but even if he does, what does the team do with him? Clearly they're NOT going to re-sign him to a big contract and he'll want to be a starter somewhere.

He wants to start and he wants starter money.

So would the Broncos trade Dumervil and keep Moss? That doesn't sound like a good idea! If you have to pay somebody big money, at least give it to the player who's produced! And is there any doubt at all that's Dumervil?

As for Ekuban, his comeback was supposed to be a big thing. It wasn't. He can't beat out Engleberger either, and that's very disappointing. He has a future if only as a backup, but he's no spring chicken and might be cut/retire next season.

Engleberger just keeps chugging along, but he's very mediocre with NO pass-rush ability at all. Totally one dimensional.

Robertson -- For the first time in his career, his degenerative knee with its "bone-on-bone" condition has kept him out of a game. He had 57 tackles last season. This year in 3 games he has 3. That's not great.

He's going to make a lot more money next year if they keep him, and there's little incentive to do so if he's going to be injured and ineffective and only have something like 15 or 16 tackles, no sacks, no FF, etc.

Marcus Thomas hasn't been great, but he hasn't been terrible either. He has NOT shown much pass-rush ability which is disappointing, but he's at least starting, which is more than you can say for Moss/Crowder.

Denver will very probably keep him and re-sign him unless he just wants unrealistic money. He might. DTs get silly money just for showing up these days. If he hit FA he'd probably get $20 million just because he's a starting DT who's young and healthy and who has starter experience, and might improve some in the right scheme with some other talent around him.

Of course, Denver should try and re-sign him and pay him what it takes. You can't replace EVERYBODY all at once and they have enough of a job replacing Moss, Crowder, Engleberger, Ekuban, and possibly Robertson, without having to replace anybody else!

honz
09-29-2008, 01:29 PM
Yeah, Moss was terrible yesterday. I thought he looked decent against the Saints, but he was absolutely atrocious against the Chiefs.