PDA

View Full Version : Picking No 2 is it really this easy?



Pages : [1] 2

lgenf
02-08-2011, 10:31 AM
SO, the draft is upcoming and with a new HC that has clearly an uphill battle on D, is it really as easy as waiting for Carolina to choose either Fairley or Bowers and then us choosing the other guy?

These two guys seem to be the clear choice for this years Defensive line top picks and to someone that is not all that familiar with John Fox or a Denver front office, it sure does seem like our #2 pick is going to be an easy one to make.

Our other picks may be a little harder to dial in, as you need to see who is there and what holes they can fill, and of course it will depend on Champ, maybe testing the FA waters if the CBA gets in place sooner rather then later.

Not going to speculate on trading Orton for picks, or trading down #2, b/c clearly Denver cannot afford to trade out of the 2 spot b/c clearly those top two guys are too big to pass on.

SOCALORADO.
02-08-2011, 11:00 AM
What if Fox decided to go BPA and in his opinion the BPA at #2 was WR AJ Green?!?!?
Dude is supposed to be the real deal, and where ever he goes he will make an immediate impact.
DEN would then have D.Thomas and AJ Green for TT to throw to. Along with Royal and Decker. Might make Tebows life alot easier.

Then in the 2nd (2 picks) DEN takes,
J.J. Watt DE/DT WISC
Stephen Paea DT ORE ST
3rd
Jurrell Casey DT USC

The 4-3 DT and DE depth is amazing in this draft.
Within the top 3 rounds are a whole bunch of top notch, NFL level talented players.

*NOTE* THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION OF WHAT DEN/FOX-ELWAY SHOULD DO.
I AM SIMPLY OFFERING AN EXAMPLE FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION.
AGAIN, I SOCALORADO IN NO WAY SUPPORT THIS VIEW.

Nomad
02-08-2011, 11:06 AM
What if Fox decided to go BPA and in his opinion the BPA at #2 was WR AJ Green?!?!?
Dude is supposed to be the real deal, and where ever he goes he will make an immediate impact.
DEN would then have D.Thomas and AJ Green for TT to throw to. Along with Royal and Decker. Might make Tebows life alot easier.

Then in the 2nd (2 picks) DEN takes,
J.J. Watt DE/DT WISC
Stephen Paea DT ORE ST
3rd
Jurrell Casey DT USC

The 4-3 DT and DE depth is amazing in this draft.
Within the top 3 rounds are a whole bunch of top notch, NFL level talented players.

*NOTE* THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION OF WHAT DEN/FOX-ELWAY SHOULD DO.
I AM SIMPLY OFFERING AN EXAMPLE FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION.
AGAIN, I SOCALORADO IN NO WAY SUPPORT THIS VIEW.

Wouldn't surprise me....it is the BRONCOS drafting you know!! You have to peek through your fingers and hold your breath each draft especially in the 1st!!

Traveler
02-08-2011, 11:08 AM
What if Fox decided to go BPA and in his opinion the BPA at #2 was WR AJ Green?!?!?
Dude is supposed to be the real deal, and where ever he goes he will make an immediate impact.
DEN would then have D.Thomas and AJ Green for TT to throw to. Along with Royal and Decker. Might make Tebows life alot easier.

Then in the 2nd (2 picks) DEN takes,
J.J. Watt DE/DT WISC
Stephen Paea DT ORE ST
3rd
Jurrell Casey DT USC

The 4-3 DT and DE depth is amazing in this draft.
Within the top 3 rounds are a whole bunch of top notch, NFL level talented players.

*NOTE* THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION OF WHAT DEN/FOX-ELWAY SHOULD DO.
I AM SIMPLY OFFERING AN EXAMPLE FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION.
AGAIN, I SOCALORADO IN NO WAY SUPPORT THIS VIEW.

I was making this same case in another thread. It's not what I want them to do, but you have to get value regardless of position when selecting this high.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 11:11 AM
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/633/180/106813687_display_image.jpg?1294922891

this is who we'll be taking

Traveler
02-08-2011, 11:11 AM
Wouldn't surprise me....it is the BRONCOS drafting you know!! You have to peek through your fingers and hold your breath each draft especially in the 1st!!

I stopped watching th draft in 2000. Never knew what Denver would do. And my reaction after the pick was usually, "What the ****!"

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 11:12 AM
Our new Defensive Coordinator was a Defensive Backs coach last year. With arguably the best Corner prospect ever coming out, you think they're gonna pass on him?

Juriga72
02-08-2011, 11:12 AM
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/633/180/106813687_display_image.jpg?1294922891

this is who we'll be taking

I would throw up if thats who we take......NOTHING against the kid.. BUt damn..... there's ONE side of the ball we need to fix. D E F E N S E (Front SEVEN only) anything other than that and I will turn in my "Direct Tv NFL Package".....lol

Sorry...Fixed it for those confused.....

SOCALORADO.
02-08-2011, 11:12 AM
I was making this same case in another thread. It's not what I want them to do, but you have to get value regardless of position when selecting this high.

*DISCLAIMER*
I, SOCALORADO, STOLE TRAVELER'S IDEA/OPINION/SCENARIO.

I couldnt remember who it was that came up with this possibility, so i just posted anyways! HA!
It is a possibility, and we really have no idea how this coaching staff and FO value these palyers.

underrated29
02-08-2011, 11:14 AM
Our new Defensive Coordinator was a Defensive Backs coach last year. With arguably the best Corner prospect ever coming out, you think they're gonna pass on him?



Yup.

lgenf
02-08-2011, 11:15 AM
What if Fox decided to go BPA and in his opinion the BPA at #2 was WR AJ Green?!?!?
Dude is supposed to be the real deal, and where ever he goes he will make an immediate impact.
DEN would then have D.Thomas and AJ Green for TT to throw to. Along with Royal and Decker. Might make Tebows life alot easier.

.

honestly I think with the chance Thomas will be back, healthy and prove his worth from last years number 1 pick, Gaffney, Lloyd and Royal (let's keep the fingers crossed) I think we are honestly set at WR with a solid 4 in that position and you never know who you can get in FA to be a solid contributor the way Gaff was this year.

I think with the WORST D in the league, you have to address that with your highest pick, you can use lower picks and take the BEST OF THE REST available as you were saying, draft the best talent on the baord no matter the position, but Dumerville is no sure thing that he won't be injured again and if he was the BIG reason it went from OK or Decent on D to toilet bowl this year, then I think you need to get a bandaid on that and beef up your line.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 11:15 AM
I would throw up if thats who we take......NOTHING against the kid.. BUt damn..... there's ONE side of the ball we need to fix. D E F E N S E anything other than that and I will turn in my "Direct Tv NFL Package".....lol

do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.

Nomad
02-08-2011, 11:18 AM
do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.

And an LSU product!!:woot:

SOCALORADO.
02-08-2011, 11:19 AM
honestly I think with the chance Thomas will be back, healthy and prove his worth from last years number 1 pick, Gaffney, Lloyd and Royal (let's keep the fingers crossed) I think we are honestly set at WR with a solid 4 in that position and you never know who you can get in FA to be a solid contributor the way Gaff was this year.

I think with the WORST D in the league, you have to address that with your highest pick, you can use lower picks and take the BEST OF THE REST available as you were saying, draft the best talent on the baord no matter the position, but Dumerville is no sure thing that he won't be injured again and if he was the BIG reason it went from OK or Decent on D to toilet bowl this year, then I think you need to get a bandaid on that and beef up your line.

In the current financial environment and with a looming CBA issue, teams may be looking for long term investments that will pay off financially for the team down the road.
A player like AJ Green might make more sense in this regard.
He could be a superstar that like TT, will be a sort of "cash cow" for the team.
Just sayin theres alot we dont know about the FO and what they think.

Juriga72
02-08-2011, 11:20 AM
do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.
Yup I do.....
We dont need a corner back......DUh
d-line
d-line
d-line
Linebacker
linebacker
CORNER...

what we need

Nomad
02-08-2011, 11:24 AM
In the current financial environment and with a looming CBA issue, teams may be looking for long term investments that will pay off financially for the team down the road.
A player like AJ Green might make more sense in this regard.
He could be a superstar that like TT, will be a sort of "cash cow" for the team.
Just sayin theres alot we dont know about the FO and what they think.

I guarantee if the BRONCOS draft Green, the fans will have a total meltdown and instant lack of confidence in Elway/Xanders/Fox!!

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 11:25 AM
so when they let champ walk and Cox goes to prison you're still suggesting passing on the best corner prospect ever when you can get quality D-line in the second round.

Denver Native (Carol)
02-08-2011, 11:27 AM
Unless the Broncos change their mind, Xanders stated that the Broncos would draft the best player available for their needs.

Nomad
02-08-2011, 11:27 AM
Unless the Broncos change their mind, Xanders stated that the Broncos would draft the best player available for their needs.

Receiver is not a need, IMO!!

Denver Native (Carol)
02-08-2011, 11:29 AM
Receiver is not a need, IMO!!

I agree - again, if the Broncos draft best player available for their needs, IMO, it will be on the defensive side.

broncofaninfla
02-08-2011, 11:29 AM
M Dareus will be in the mix as the draft approaches. We could easily select him at the two spot as well.

underrated29
02-08-2011, 11:29 AM
so when they let champ walk and Cox goes to prison you're still suggesting passing on the best corner prospect ever when you can get quality D-line in the second round.




He is not the best CB prospect ever. Not close.

Infact, there is rumors that he will be moved to saftey.



He excells at run coverage, press coverage, and zone coverage. He is good at man to man but not great.



Prince amakumara is much better at man coverage than he is

Nomad
02-08-2011, 11:30 AM
so when they let champ walk and Cox goes to prison you're still suggesting passing on the best corner prospect ever when you can get quality D-line in the second round.

If they believe Peterson is the BPA and a can't miss, then so be it! I don't agree because I would like a beast of a dlineman, but I would be highly pissed if they draft offense with the 2nd pick!!

lgenf
02-08-2011, 11:30 AM
In the current financial environment and with a looming CBA issue, teams may be looking for long term investments that will pay off financially for the team down the road.
A player like AJ Green might make more sense in this regard.
He could be a superstar that like TT, will be a sort of "cash cow" for the team.
Just sayin theres alot we dont know about the FO and what they think.

agreed, we don't know MUCH, but we do have history, and I'm not thinking that FOX who is a run first guy is going to look at his WR corps and say, yep need more of those guys.

And I don't think Elway wants to be run out of town for not addressing the single biggest problem the Broncos have which is the D side of the ball

The D Back thing is interesting, and although he has the possibility of being a shut down corner, and a good punt/kick returner I think that decision completely depends on if there is any progress with Bailey, not necessarily a deal in place, but is there progress and are they close. If they are close and the CBA thing blows up in everyone's face then, I think the attitude will be the same from both sides, "hey we are close and will pick this up once the CBA is closed" and you don't worry about a corner, but if the two sides are no where close to eachother then maybe the LSU kid gets a really close look

SOCALORADO.
02-08-2011, 11:33 AM
I guarantee if the BRONCOS draft Green, the fans will have a total meltdown and instant lack of confidence in Elway/Xanders/Fox!!

Dude DEN fans are beyond meltdowns.
You been around the last couple years?
I dont think fans will be second guessing Elway.
But what if D.Thomas has some serious lingering issues with his foot,
that we as fans just dont know about?
What if Elway realizes he needs a true superstar for Tebow to throw to and that he cant count on DThomas?
Who knows!
Also the $$$$$$$$ being spent on the 2nd pick in the draft is insane. Unless of course theres some kind of agreement in the near future.
Money is part of the BPA formula. The money spent better be well spent, and not on a bust. DEN cant afford to waste the money anymore.
I know thats alot of "what ifs" but thats where were at right now.
Just sayin.

Ravage!!!
02-08-2011, 11:39 AM
If we draft offense early, and spend dthe rest of the picks on defense, is that REALLY ignoring the defensive side of the ball? No. But if you are going to spend a first round pick on a player, then I would prefer they get one that is going to be a long-time starter than purely picking a position-of-need.

Everyone knows that this team needs a defensive front, but I don't agree that its going to be solved purely by whom we pick with the #2 pick.

lgenf
02-08-2011, 11:43 AM
Also the $$$$$$$$ being spent on the 2nd pick in the draft is insane. Unless of course theres some kind of agreement in the near future.
Money is part of the BPA formula.

There is NO WAY the money will be an issue this year, there WILL BE a rookie wage scale.

The whole entire lock-out and killing of the current CBA by the owners is because they want the players to get less of the overall revenue.

Since the owners are not going to agree to anything that keeps the revenue where it is, that means the players are going to get less. How much is in the negotiations.

Now if the players are getting less, they have to decide on how to devide it up, since the owners want a rookie scale and the current and former players have no loayalty to new inbound talent, that will be a concession the players offer up and both sides agree on.

There is NO WAY there is no rookie scale in this new CBA - that's not to say that it will go into effect immediately, some of the new terms of this CBA may have future start dates, but NO WAY this one doesn't start to control the costs of unproven rookies in the NFL.

vandammage13
02-08-2011, 11:54 AM
#2 pick is easy...If Carolina doesn't take Fairley, then he's your man. If Carolina takes Fairley, then you take Peterson. No rocket scientists required for this one.

BroncoStud
02-08-2011, 11:55 AM
Yup I do.....
We dont need a corner back......DUh
d-line
d-line
d-line
Linebacker
linebacker
CORNER...

what we need

If Champ isn't coming back we damn sure need a CB. We're not even sure that Parrish Cox isn't going to prison yet and he may face NFL sanctions. I have no problem taking Peterson, he is going to be a difference-maker and those players are never bad to have.

Safety is a MAJOR need for us and has been since Atwater and Braxton retired. If we re-sign Champ I think it might be smart to draft Peterson and move him to Safety anyway, he is built for it.

lgenf
02-08-2011, 12:03 PM
If Champ isn't coming back we damn sure need a CB. We're not even sure that Parrish Cox isn't going to prison yet and he may face NFL sanctions. I have no problem taking Peterson, he is going to be a difference-maker and those players are never bad to have.

Safety is a MAJOR need for us and has been since Atwater and Braxton retired. If we re-sign Champ I think it might be smart to draft Peterson and move him to Safety anyway, he is built for it.

anyone got any info on if COX has any court appearances before the draft?

Denver Native (Carol)
02-08-2011, 12:11 PM
This site has us taking Bowers - good writeup with "what ifs" addressed

http://www.draftcountdown.com/sub/Mock-Draft-A.php

This site also has us taking Bowers - and possible others

http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php

This site either Bowers or Peterson

http://newnfldraft.com/

This site Peterson

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-mock-draft-post-senior-bowl-012911

TXBRONC
02-08-2011, 12:27 PM
do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.

Maybe but I think it will be a defensive lineman.

dogfish
02-08-2011, 12:28 PM
Our new Defensive Coordinator was a Defensive Backs coach last year. With arguably the best Corner prospect ever coming out, you think they're gonna pass on him?

yes-- one can only hope. . .


so when they let champ walk and Cox goes to prison you're still suggesting passing on the best corner prospect ever when you can get quality D-line in the second round.

**** yes! absolutely. . .

Juriga72
02-08-2011, 12:49 PM
do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.

Hey MBB... I guess you missed a whole bunch of games too huh... Lets see....

LAST two years-
Denver Broncos record when holding opp UNDER 100 yards rushing???????


10-2

when holding opp UNDER 200 yards passing????

4-10
How about UNDER 150 yards passing????? want to guess?

3-3!!!!!!! YEAH!!!! baby thats awesome!!!!!!!!

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. "Lets draft a CONERBACK!!!!!!!"

seems pretty simple to understand "how to win a game" huh?

Have YOU ever watched a game?

lgenf
02-08-2011, 01:08 PM
alright folks, let's keep it civil in here

my last thread got out of hand and I have yet to mention TT in this one;)

Bullgator
02-08-2011, 01:41 PM
Early guess... will change for sure in the upcoming days... I'll prolly start a thread about who goes where, when and why + my projected broncos draft picks

1) Panthers- Fairly DT AU
2) Broncos- Marcel Darius DT Bama (or Bowers)
3) Bills- Da'Quan Bowers DE Clemson(or Daruis)
4) Bengals- Julio Jones WR Bama
5) Cards- Patrick Peterson CB/S LSU
6) Browns- Von Miller OLB/DE A&M
7) Niners- Ryan Mallet QB Ark
8) Titans- Cam Newton QB AU
9) Cowboys- Mark Ingram RB Bama
10) Redskins- Blaine Gabbert QB Mizzou

Juriga72
02-08-2011, 01:46 PM
Lets remember..... Its really hard for a qb to complete a pass when he is on his back with a large angry man sitting on his head...

I dont think even Cutler has THAT kinda arm strength. Granted there is no Suh in this draft..... but we can still get Bowers/Fairly and THEN possibly some FA help.

BroncoStud
02-08-2011, 01:55 PM
anyone got any info on if COX has any court appearances before the draft?

No clue but it's a bad situation regardless, Goodell isn't going to be happy either way this one comes out.

Juriga72
02-08-2011, 01:57 PM
No clue but it's a bad situation regardless, Goodell isn't going to be happy either way this one comes out.

INNOCENNT till proven guilty, and he's just charged right now.

No reason to replace someone who might not be gone.... GRANTED it could turn bad quickly, but I bet this takes place after the draft (Trial)........

underrated29
02-08-2011, 02:01 PM
Early guess... will change for sure in the upcoming days... I'll prolly start a thread about who goes where, when and why + my projected broncos draft picks

1) Panthers- Fairly DT AU
2) Broncos- Marcel Darius DT Bama (or Bowers)
3) Bills- Da'Quan Bowers DE Clemson(or Daruis)
4) Bengals- Julio Jones WR Bama
5) Cards- Patrick Peterson CB/S LSU
6) Browns- Von Miller OLB/DE A&M
7) Niners- Ryan Mallet QB Ark
8) Titans- Cam Newton QB AU
9) Cowboys- Mark Ingram RB Bama
10) Redskins- Blaine Gabbert QB Mizzou




I do not see anyway possible that the bills let cam newton slip through their fingers. He is the perfect compliment to their offense, and lets not forget, that last year buffalo was either going to take tebow of spiller- they waivered back and forth many times until they took CJ...look for them to go QB this year in as close a form as possible to TT..Newton.

PAINTERDAVE
02-08-2011, 02:10 PM
This site has us taking Bowers - good writeup with "what ifs" addressed

http://www.draftcountdown.com/sub/Mock-Draft-A.php

This site also has us taking Bowers - and possible others

http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php

This site either Bowers or Peterson

http://newnfldraft.com/

This site Peterson

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-mock-draft-post-senior-bowl-012911


Carol... thanks for all you do to be so helpful on the board.
You always come up with informative and interesing sources.

Kudos.

hotcarl
02-08-2011, 02:36 PM
this has us taking pouncey

http://www.clownpenis.fart

Bullgator
02-08-2011, 03:29 PM
this has us taking pouncey

http://www.clownpenis.fart

Mike Pouncy? as what? hes an excellent tackle but take it from me hes a horrible center 3rd or 4rth round at best as a center... he is no Maurkice

Dzone
02-08-2011, 03:39 PM
Lets hope there is someone as good as Tim Tebow with the second overall pick! A defensive version of Tebow to lead the D.

Bullgator
02-08-2011, 03:45 PM
Lets hope there is someone as good as Tim Tebow with the second overall pick! A defensive version of Tebow to lead the D.

I say we clone Tim and have a 22 Tims running around 11 on O and 11 on D... no kicker/puner tho.. we can give that spot to KO :D

HORSEPOWER 56
02-08-2011, 03:48 PM
There's a LOT of scouting, workouts, pro days, etc that still have to happen before we hand in our pick to Goodell at the draft. I'd like to think it is as easy as Fairley, Bowers, or Dareus depending on who Carolina selects and who we like best of the remaining 2, but you just don't know until the name is called.

I have faith that our new FO triumvirate will make the right choice when the time comes.

Bullgator
02-08-2011, 03:53 PM
I do not see anyway possible that the bills let cam newton slip through their fingers. He is the perfect compliment to their offense, and lets not forget, that last year buffalo was either going to take tebow of spiller- they waivered back and forth many times until they took CJ...look for them to go QB this year in as close a form as possible to TT..Newton.

Good point...however my feeling is that the bills are "ok" with their current QB Ryan Fitzpatrick enough to address the needs they have on a porous Defense.

Ryan's stats are stellar for 2010 considering hes a noob and his OL isn't great.

His stats are as follows:
255 att. 441 comp. 3,000 yards with 23 TD and 15 Ints and a better than ave QB rating of 81.8

He also ran well -269 yards for a nice 6.7 ave. AND he graduated from Harvard lol

Cam Newton will go a lot sooner than most people expect though...

the whole debacle in Tennessee over fisher/young has left a void in the owners heart for a "young" like dual threat... i see Cam going to the titans

TXBRONC
02-08-2011, 03:58 PM
There's a LOT of scouting, workouts, pro days, etc that still have to happen before we hand in our pick to Goodell at the draft. I'd like to think it is as easy as Fairley, Bowers, or Dareus depending on who Carolina selects and who we like best of the remaining 2, but you just don't know until the name is called.

I have faith that our new FO triumvirate will make the right choice when the time comes.

I agree I think they will select one of the guys that you listed. They might even be able to move down a spot or two and still pick of the three guys you nameed.

Denver Native (Carol)
02-08-2011, 05:05 PM
2. Denver Broncos
Marcell Dareus | DT | Alabama [Jr.]
The key for John Fox's defense is to have heavy horsepower up front.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=pfw-20110208_2011_mock_draft_10

vandammage13
02-08-2011, 05:18 PM
Mike Pouncy? as what? hes an excellent tackle but take it from me hes a horrible center 3rd or 4rth round at best as a center... he is no Maurkice

Hmmm....Hard to see how you came to the conclusion that he's an excellent tackle, considering he's never played the position. Mike Pouncey's natural position is Guard. 2 year starter at guard. He just played center last year because Maurkice left and they had no one else that could play center. He'll most likely play guard in the pros.

Bullgator
02-08-2011, 06:00 PM
Hmmm....Hard to see how you came to the conclusion that he's an excellent tackle, considering he's never played the position. Mike Pouncey's natural position is Guard. 2 year starter at guard. He just played center last year because Maurkice left and they had no one else that could play center. He'll most likely play guard in the pros.

Correct i meant guard.. he is a great pulling guard

oubronco
02-08-2011, 07:38 PM
Take Dareus with #2 then Taylor or Paea with our fist 2nd then we could get the best MLB maybe Greg Jones with our second 2nd

The defense would be a helluva lot better than last year

Lonestar
02-08-2011, 07:47 PM
Wouldn't surprise me....it is the BRONCOS drafting you know!! You have to peek through your fingers and hold your breath each draft especially in the 1st!!

Actually Monmouth is now in WAS and now they are saying whqo in the heck is that guy after his pick.

Now in den Any ones guess is as good as Anyone elses.

Im Going to trust the new guys until such time as I and most everyone else says WTF is that huh and why are we drafting him in rounds 1-3. He was a late day three guy.

Then I will start to worry like I did before Josh.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

oubronco
02-08-2011, 07:51 PM
We might've found our trade bitch


Bills | Cornerback a draft priority?
Tue, 08 Feb 2011 08:02:28 -0800

The Buffalo Bills could target the cornerback position early in the 2011 NFL Draft, according to CBSSports.com.

hotcarl
02-08-2011, 07:53 PM
Correct i meant guard.. he is a great pulling guard

you should click the link to find out, again that link is http://www.clownpenis.fart

atwater27
02-08-2011, 08:49 PM
Then I will start to worry like I did before Josh.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bwa ha ha. This was funny.

Buff
02-08-2011, 09:08 PM
We might've found our trade bitch


Bills | Cornerback a draft priority?
Tue, 08 Feb 2011 08:02:28 -0800

The Buffalo Bills could target the cornerback position early in the 2011 NFL Draft, according to CBSSports.com.

No one is going to trade up to #2 to draft a cornerback. Ever.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-08-2011, 09:10 PM
It's not as easy as Fairley/Bowers. A couple of other options there. I personally want Dareus. An argument can be made for Peterson. I think we have a better chance at goin DT than DE than we do Bowers and then being able to land a legit DT in round 2.

WARHORSE
02-08-2011, 09:41 PM
Mike Mayock says in his opinion there are 9, count em, 9 DEs that he has of first round grades. He said 6 or 7 he believes for sure will come off the board
in the first.

If Denver believes that as well, or the board stacks up in that manner, then taking Peterson becomes a real possibility because Denver can sign Champ, draft Peterson and then take DE and DT in round two. The first pick in round two is at the top, meaning one of those DEs with a first round grade will most likely be there.



Also, dont be surprised to see Denver move to get higher picks next year.
Especially if they think this is a two year project.

If Orton is traded for a two, we may be open to trading into next years draft with one of the three second rounders we aquired.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 09:52 PM
Hey MBB... I guess you missed a whole bunch of games too huh... Lets see....

LAST two years-
Denver Broncos record when holding opp UNDER 100 yards rushing???????


10-2

when holding opp UNDER 200 yards passing????

4-10
How about UNDER 150 yards passing????? want to guess?

3-3!!!!!!! YEAH!!!! baby thats awesome!!!!!!!!

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. "Lets draft a CONERBACK!!!!!!!"

seems pretty simple to understand "how to win a game" huh?

Have YOU ever watched a game?

Alright, *******. Youre the one who said we needed to draft D E F E N S E, when I posted a picture of a Cornerback and then went back and edited your post to say front seven.

Not once did I say I wanted Peterson. I do think Peterson is a safer pick for us than ANY of the D-Lineman that are projected that high. Even if we do take Peterson with our number 2 that will mean that the majority of Free Agency and draft will be devoted to front seven.

Fairley and Bowers both have huge question marks. Almost every scout says Peterson is about as sure as you can get.

Right Now I want Bowers, Peterson, Dareus, and then Fairley.

As I have stated before it is over twice as likely to draft a bust D-Lineman in the top half of the first round as it is to draft a Secondary Player. If they screw this pick up it sets us back even farther.

I Eat Staples
02-08-2011, 09:53 PM
I lol at the thought of Cam Newton as an NFL QB. But then I remember we have Tebow, and I can't laugh that loud.

hamrob
02-08-2011, 10:08 PM
I think it will end up being an easy pick........if we stay at #2, the most logical choices are:

Bowers
Fairly
Dareus
Peterson

As for Bowers...if he is there, I really think he will be our pick. He would be almost too perfect across from Doom. He's a big kid who can both rush the passer and is solid against the run. However, if by chance, we decide that Ayers can be a stud opposite Doom in the 4-3...then, we may decide on one of the two DT's instead.

At that point, the most logical selection is Fairley who is a dominant player when he wants to be. The problem with Fairley may be his maturity level. He's already said he doesn't want to play where it's cold. For a kid to make a statement like that...right before the most important 4mos. of his life...is mind boggling. Do we really want to take a chance on a Haynesworth clone? If not, well then we have a decision to make.

Do we snatch up Peterson who is immensely talented or do we take a kid like Dareus who is a blue chip prospect at our biggest need position? For me, here's my top 5:

1. Bowers
2. Peterson
3. Dareus
4. Miller
6. Quinn

I'm not sure I would reach for either Quinn or Miller at 2 with Bowers and Peterson on the board...but, I certainly wouldn't bitch about getting either of those guys in the 1st round. However, if Bowers goes #1 overall to Carolina...then, I think we have to take Peterson.

As for Fairley...there's roughly 3 mos. until the draft...things could change. But, for now...I think he's too big of a risk to take in the top 5. He's a stud if he wants to be...but, can you count on him? Making ignorant statements about where you want to play....is unbelievably stupid.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-08-2011, 10:26 PM
same Hamrob from the Mane?

I have found I agree with you on pretty much everything

hotcarl
02-08-2011, 10:57 PM
i think it will end up being an easy pick........if we stay at #2, the most logical choices are:

Bowers
fairly
dareus
peterson

as for bowers...if he is there, i really think he will be our pick. He would be almost too perfect across from doom. He's a big kid who can both rush the passer and is solid against the run. However, if by chance, we decide that ayers can be a stud opposite doom in the 4-3...then, we may decide on one of the two dt's instead.

At that point, the most logical selection is fairley who is a dominant player when he wants to be. The problem with fairley may be his maturity level. He's already said he doesn't want to play where it's cold. For a kid to make a statement like that...right before the most important 4mos. Of his life...is mind boggling. Do we really want to take a chance on a haynesworth clone? If not, well then we have a decision to make.

Do we snatch up peterson who is immensely talented or do we take a kid like dareus who is a blue chip prospect at our biggest need position? For me, here's my top 5:

1. Bowers
2. Peterson
3. Dareus
4. Miller
6. Quinn

i'm not sure i would reach for either quinn or miller at 2 with bowers and peterson on the board...but, i certainly wouldn't bitch about getting either of those guys in the 1st round. However, if bowers goes #1 overall to carolina...then, i think we have to take peterson.

As for fairley...there's roughly 3 mos. Until the draft...things could change. But, for now...i think he's too big of a risk to take in the top 5. He's a stud if he wants to be...but, can you count on him? Making ignorant statements about where you want to play....is unbelievably stupid.

hahahahhaha

JDL
02-08-2011, 11:40 PM
If they believe Peterson is the BPA and a can't miss, then so be it! I don't agree because I would like a beast of a dlineman, but I would be highly pissed if they draft offense with the 2nd pick!!

Very few top 5 DL ever reach the projected status people place on them.

Very few 1st CBs selected fail.. and one of the few who did (Antrel Rolle) became a pro bowl safety.

A great many extremely good DL in the NFL, in fact some of the very best front 7 players, were taken 2nd rd on. This is a very VERY deep DL draft and a lot of quality players will be had... the best pass rusher isn't even going to go in the top 5... people take those DL top 5 they think can be great at both Run/Pass... well, none of the projected top 5 have been consistently great pass rushers, if that's what you want... the best run stuffing DL is Clayborn and best pass rusher is Kerrigan. It's not like there is a Julius Peppers class of prospect in this draft, people, that's always been known. A lot of 1 year wonders who turned it on their last season and Dareus... I'll be happy with any of them, but I don't get this aversion (particularly after everyone SAW the importance of DBs in the Super Bowl clear as day) to selecting a DB, particularly when he is a class individual, high character, work ethic, experienced, defensive playmaker who is routinely rated as the top prospect... the only other guy that ever edges him out is Fairley, but he has as much risk as upside due to character and laziness questions.

JDL
02-08-2011, 11:44 PM
Alright, *******. Youre the one who said we needed to draft D E F E N S E, when I posted a picture of a Cornerback and then went back and edited your post to say front seven.

Not once did I say I wanted Peterson. I do think Peterson is a safer pick for us than ANY of the D-Lineman that are projected that high. Even if we do take Peterson with our number 2 that will mean that the majority of Free Agency and draft will be devoted to front seven.

Fairley and Bowers both have huge question marks. Almost every scout says Peterson is about as sure as you can get.

Right Now I want Bowers, Peterson, Dareus, and then Fairley.

As I have stated before it is over twice as likely to draft a bust D-Lineman in the top half of the first round as it is to draft a Secondary Player. If they screw this pick up it sets us back even farther.

This is so true.

bcbronc
02-09-2011, 12:05 AM
If Denver believes that as well, or the board stacks up in that manner, then taking Peterson becomes a real possibility because Denver can sign Champ, draft Peterson and then take DE and DT in round two. The first pick in round two is at the top, meaning one of those DEs with a first round grade will most likely be there.

.

That's the thing with this draft, do you want the pick of the litter on DL, or are you better off dealing with another big need and exploiting the depth of this class by getting whichever 1st round grade falls a bit?

we need an early pick at S/CB. Where's the value likely to lie at 36: CB/S or DL?


However, if Bowers goes #1 overall to Carolina...then, I think we have to take Peterson.

As for Fairley...there's roughly 3 mos. until the draft...things could change. But, for now...I think he's too big of a risk to take in the top 5. He's a stud if he wants to be...but, can you count on him? Making ignorant statements about where you want to play....is unbelievably stupid.

agreed.

Doom, Ayers and Bowers in the front four on passing downs is a good start imo. All three are versatile enough to play inside or end, even stand up in some sets (in passing situations).

I'm too risk adverse to want Fairley. if it was guaranteed who ever we pick would hit, then I'd be 100% on board with him. But too many red flags for #2, especially from a position with such a high bust rate. my theory, something about just being so physically dominant your whole athletic life doesn't prepare you for the pros.

always risk involved, but why maximize it?

Lonestar
02-09-2011, 12:40 AM
Mike Mayock says in his opinion there are 9, count em, 9 DEs that he has of first round grades. He said 6 or 7 he believes for sure will come off the board
in the first.

If Denver believes that as well, or the board stacks up in that manner, then taking Peterson becomes a real possibility because Denver can sign Champ, draft Peterson and then take DE and DT in round two. The first pick in round two is at the top, meaning one of those DEs with a first round grade will most likely be there.



Also, dont be surprised to see Denver move to get higher picks next year.
Especially if they think this is a two year project.

If Orton is traded for a two, we may be open to trading into next years draft with one of the three second rounders we aquired.

ME I'd rather have a stud DT in the first and grab another 2 DL types in round two.. CB is worthless as a teat on a boar if there is no pressure.

Great DL makes good DB's great great DB's elite.


Lets try doing it the right way for once..


as a general rule DL players take a couple of years to become good to great players

Which means that the playoffs most likely are a few years away..

IF we build via the draft.. and not sign or trade for older players.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

BroncoStud
02-09-2011, 01:00 AM
I lol at the thought of Cam Newton as an NFL QB. But then I remember we have Tebow, and I can't laugh that loud.

Newton's a 100X better prospect than Vince Young, who went in the 1st round. He's a damn good player but he is going to have to take a paycut in the NFL, no way they can match what Auburn paid him this season.

WARHORSE
02-09-2011, 01:22 AM
ME I'd rather have a stud DT in the first and grab another 2 DL types in round two.. CB is worthless as a teat on a boar if there is no pressure.

Great DL makes good DB's great great DB's elite.


Lets try doing it the right way for once..


as a general rule DL players take a couple of years to become good to great players

Which means that the playoffs most likely are a few years away..

IF we build via the draft.. and not sign or trade for older players.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


Well I must say you won me over with the 'teat on a boar' example........but.........I still think taking Peterson would be beneficial.

Im not looking at him playing corner, Im looking at him playing safety.
Polumalu and Reed are great examples of what a great playmaking safety can do for a football team.

Doom will be back. Ayers can rush off the line. Draft Cameron Jordan or someone like that, as well as a DT in round two, and we have a nucleus that can grow together.

Petersons instincts, size and ability will make him invaluable. His versatility will allow us to really mix it up on defense. Same with Champ. Ultimately, I think Champ and Peterson switch places. Champ at safety and Peterson at corner.

I agree though.

A good corner is about as useful as a nipple on broom handle without the pass rush.


Spluuuuuuuurt! Ting!

bcbronc
02-09-2011, 02:08 AM
ME I'd rather have a stud DT in the first and grab another 2 DL types in round two.. CB is worthless as a teat on a boar if there is no pressure.

Great DL makes good DB's great great DB's elite.


Lets try doing it the right way for once..


as a general rule DL players take a couple of years to become good to great players

Which means that the playoffs most likely are a few years away..

IF we build via the draft.. and not sign or trade for older players.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

we have too many needs to take 3 straight DL, unless they're clearly BPA, imo.

2 I agree with. but we also need to add a piece to our back 7.

dogfish
02-09-2011, 02:41 AM
That's the thing with this draft, do you want the pick of the litter on DL, or are you better off dealing with another big need and exploiting the depth of this class by getting whichever 1st round grade falls a bit?




we have too many needs to take 3 straight DL, unless they're clearly BPA, imo.

2 I agree with. but we also need to add a piece to our back 7.


are you kidding, meng? you even gotta ask that question?

you abso****ingLUTELY want the pick of the litter! come on, i know you've watched this team with a legendary corner and leftover DLs. . . just because this year's leftovers will be warmer doesn't make 'em not leftovers-- make no mistake at all, the best prospects will be THOROUGHLY picked over before we get back on the board even the second time. . .

yea, there will be some guys there, and yes, some of them should no doubt turn out to be good players. . . but just because this class is DL-heavy doesn't mean good prospects will slip much further than they normally would, at all. . . DL is at an all-time premium in this passing league, everyfreakinbody needs them-- they're going to get snapped up. . .

granted, the sheer depth of the group does insure that there will be some guys left that normally wouldn't be-- you'll get somebody--, but it' not like there will be first-round quality talent just lying around in the third because no one wanted them. . .

probably six to eight DLs will go in the top twenty, and that will be the heart of this talented class--fairley, bowers, dareus, and say maybe jordan, clayborne, and quinn, possibly watt, paea or heyward if they check out. . . something to that effect-- which will still leave a FAR better selection than a typical year, no doubt about that at all. . .

but if we pass in the first and don't trade back in, let's say three-technique is our top need-- not only do we miss fairley, we'll probably miss corey liuget as well. . . is drake nevis or jurrell casey "just as good?" i have no idea, but if scouts generally thought so you'd think those guys would be taken higher as well. . . if you want an edge rusher, is ryan kerrigan just as good as bowers or quinn? if we wanted a five-technique, would you be fine with jared crick when we could've had our choice of dareus, watt and jordan?

i'm not. . . nothing against crick, who could develop into an excellent two-gap end-- i'd be fine with taking him in addition to, say, cameron jordan and phil taylor if we could trade down, or dareus and later jerelle powe if we couldn't trade. . . but i don't want crick as my main upgrade when we could've had guys that project as solid gap holders who can also move and be disruptive. . . just as one example. . .

when you wait to see who falls, by necessity you don't get your pick. . . and while we as fans may think one guy is as good as another, it doesn't mean the team sees them all that way. . . when you want guys that fit a specific scheme and do certain things, there are only going to be so many of them available. . . why wait and let other teams dictate to us the one year we don't HAVE to?

this has been a dire problem for so long, why in the world wouldn't we want to dedicate our BEST available resources to fix the damn thing and do it right? the steelers and patriots go to super bowls all the frickin' time with average corners-- but never with shitty D-lines. . . we've gone soooo many years just totally ignoring the position-- it's far from over-compensation to saturate it one year, and i don't believe that potentially ignoring the back seven for a season can be any more lethal to the development of a defense than potentially not fixing the DL again. . .

seriously, as far as i'm concerned getting just one DL in the top 50-60 picks is pretty much just saying we really don't care about fixing it all that much. . . given the position's bust rate, relying on one guy to "fix" the problem is a laughable attempt at best. . .

you said it yourself, the value's in DL this year. . . why in the world wouldn't an epically DL-starved franchise take full advantage and grab a bunch of quality prospects? every ****ing year, we sit around these boards and talk about how we need DL, but "the value isn't right," so we can justify drafting other positions with our high picks yet again. . . the value IS right this year, this is the time to take care of it. . . hell with plug and play positions like linebacker, let's get started developing a real line for once-- we've built from the back forward long enough, time to do it the other way. . .

there will be free agency at some point, and there's always next year's draft-- DL has been ignored for a decade, we can get by for one year ignoring some other spot if we have to. . . they won't contract the franchise or anything. . . DLs take the longest to develop, let a core group of them get their growing pains out of the way while tebow does. . . we can add a badass ILB in the next year or two, and give our young DBs a year to develop. . .

besides which, we do have some tradable assets depending on the CBA situation-- orton obviously, and a possible trade back from #2, plus some other misc. stuff like DJ. . . if we could generate an extra second/third or so, no reason we can't grab a DB or 'backer or two. . .

but can we settle for the second- and third-tier developmental guys at those positions for once, and actually get a couple premium DLs the one time they're legitimately in our reach without having to sell the farm to get them? instead of watching everybody else grab the biggest, nastiest and most explosive guys and hoping we get lucky?

instead of taking paea or heyward because they continued to have medical red flags?

instead of just taking a chance with whichever guy dropped because word got around that he popped for steroids at some point?

instead of settling for whichever tackle weighed in twenty pounds light at the combine, or taking our chances on the top athlete with the poor work habits who likes chasing college chicks more than watching film and studying the playbook?

screw that. . . even in a deep class, the guys that drop still drop for some reason or other, which inevitably translates into some form of teams not thinking he was as good as the other guys. . . given the scarcity of DLs, most years we realistically have no choice but to take what falls-- i sure as hell don't want to willingly sacrifice our choice when we do have it. . .


disclaimer: not that i expect the franchise to take the path i advocate, at all. . . quite the contrary-- i expect we'll dedicate a pick or possibly two to it, and very possibly not our premium picks. . . after all, we're the denver broncos-- it's what we do. . . i know elway has made some comments about the problem, but i'm a cynic. . . i do expect the "patch it with whatever's available" philosophy to continue until i see otherwise. . .

JDL
02-09-2011, 03:36 AM
Here's the history for those who don't know

DL selected top 5 since 1990

Cortez Kennedy 1990
Keith McCants 1990
Russell Maryland 1991
Steve Emtman 1992
Sean Gilbert 1992
John Copeland 1993
Dan 'big daddy' Wilkinson 1994
Simeon Rice 1996
Cedric Jones 1996
Darrell Russell 1997
Andre Wadsworth 1998
Courtney Brown 2000
Gerard Warren 2001
Justin Smith 2001
Julius Peppers 2002
Dewayne Robertson 2003
Mario Williams 2006
Gaines Adams 2007 (RIP)
Chris Long 2008
Glenn Dorsey 2008
Tyson Jackson 2009
Ndamukong Suh 2010
Gerald McCoy 2010

4 out 23 truly dominant players. There are not a lot of players on that list capable of turning around a D, a few solid players, starters, etc.. but true impact players? 17.4% chance, even less when you consider Carolina may very well take one of them before us (it has been very rare that you've had two dominant DL taken top 5. Really only ever was 1985 (where 3 went Bruce Smith, Ray Childress and Chris Doleman went, so not impossible.) The only point being that the league isn't devoid of great DL... they just are selected later on because as I've mentioned, the guys that go top 5, have the perfect size and are considered to have the 'potential' to be great at both run/pass... truth is that most great DL are good at one or the other and even the great ones? that isn't necessarily the case... Cortez Kennedy was a stud, but he wasn't Warren Sapp or John Randle caliber pass rusher inside.. he only twice had more than 6.5sacks in a season.. he was more of a penetrator disruptor who would get you 6 sacks and totally blow up an opponents run game.

So, I would just say to be very careful when pigeon holing your beliefs into DL or nothing mode. I trust the Broncos front office to evaluate all the players and determine the very best prospect for the Broncos... there are 4 likely choices, but I wouldn't confine myself to just them necessarily, but would be hard to pass on the top 4.

Patrick Peterson DB - has potentially everything (remember guys like Easley and Lott were drafted as CBs, so was Rod Woodson and became all-pro safeties as well during their career It isn't a bad thing to say he can play both.) High character player, that offenses are afraid to throw at and did so very infrequently, mainly because he has the ability with the ball in his hands to take it all the way. One of very few high end junior prospects that showed up to the Senior Bowl to talk to teams (including Denver.)

Nick Fairley DT - Mean nasty, disruptive inside. Can literally overwhelm the interior. Has had issues with personal fouls, cheap shots and taking plays off and may have anger issues or maturity issues controlling his emotions. 1 year of production. Had just 1.5 sacks and 3.5 tackles for loss in 2009.

Da'Quan Bowers LDE - Great size, similar to a Michael Strahan type player, is solid at point of attack and demonstrated great penetration skills in 2010. Not a speed rusher, probably won't run faster than a 4.7 at combine, gets by using his strength and hands. No character red flags I've heard. 4 sacks combined previous 2 years. Probably a 40-50tackle 6sack player at next level,... doesn't necessarily project to be a great pass rusher, doesn't have the moves, gets by on overpowering weaker competition at college level will have to show he has the kind of strength that a Strahan has and continued development of his hands. Fits Denver needs well in that he would probably compliment Dumervil well and provide a strong run presence.


Marcel Dareus DT/3-4DE - Generally considered a perfect 3-4 DE. May not project to 4-3 DT, but has ability to. Consistent disruptor, doesn't have great 'stats' his impact is more unseen and really allows players around him to thrive. Good motor and two years of solid play and tape to evaluate.

They are all good prospects and worthy of being considered in the top 5. They are not equal though. Peterson and Fairley have the highest impact/upside potential, Fairley has the most downside, Bowers probably fits our true needs best and we have strong connections to Alabama and will know Dareus inside and out. Peterson has the lowest bust potential, but isn't a position typically selected so highly. My view: In a passing league, where we just saw in the Super Bowl the great importance of DBs (Big Bens rating with CW in the game... 31 something and 118 something w/o, and Steelers had pressure all game long, but nobody to cover.)

The draft is not deep at really any position other than DL and OL... there is not likely to be a DB available later that is better than a DL prospect available and the MLB grouping is abysmal.

Some darkhorse candidates that deserve some consideration.

Von Miller - he's been inching up boards, most don't feel he should be taken top 5 (because again, there is this misconception of what or who you should take top 5... I say take the best player) and Miller is a stud... 6'2 237lb (shouldn't have any issue reaching 240-245lbs) and I haven't seen anything in his game that suggest to me, he can't be a MLB. Gets through traffic very well, great instincts, sideline to sideline and a pass rusher, good range in coverage... pretty much could play any 4-3 LB spot (similar to the way Urlacher was viewed coming out as a true 4-3 SLB, they put him at the more important position of MLB.) Could also be a fantastic 3-4 OLB

Ryan Kerrigan - He is the best pure pass rusher in the draft. Also absolutely tremendous at forcing fumbles. Just a beast, projects to be a LDE (fits denver's need with Doom on the right side.) Just like with guys like Dwight Freeney, Demarcus Ware .... people will look back and wonder how they lasted as long as they did.

AJ Green - awesome player, but we are so deep and he isn't a significantly better prospect than Fairley or Peterson and WR has the worst 1st rd bust rate, not really any good reason to take him.

bcbronc
02-09-2011, 04:46 AM
[QUOTE]granted, the sheer depth of the group does insure that there will be some guys left that normally wouldn't be-- you'll get somebody--, but it' not like there will be first-round quality talent just lying around in the third because no one wanted them. . .

no one's suggesting waiting longer than 36. someone's going to be available at our 2nd pick who will be a nice addition.



when you wait to see who falls, by necessity you don't get your pick. . . and while we as fans may think one guy is as good as another, it doesn't mean the team sees them all that way. . . when you want guys that fit a specific scheme and do certain things, there are only going to be so many of them available. . . why wait and let other teams dictate to us the one year we don't HAVE to?


this is where the risk comes in. All depends on how the FO rates each guy. If they've got a large group that are rated pretty close, it makes some sense to go a different way at #2. But yeah, if they have even 3-4 guys rated significantly higher, take one of them.


this has been a dire problem for so long, why in the world wouldn't we want to dedicate our BEST available resources to fix the damn thing and do it right? the steelers and patriots go to super bowls all the frickin' time with average corners-- but never with shitty D-lines. . . we've gone soooo many years just totally ignoring the position-- it's far from over-compensation to saturate it one year, and i don't believe that potentially ignoring the back seven for a season can be any more lethal to the development of a defense than potentially not fixing the DL again. . .

in the same vein dog--and I do agree with you that it all starts in the trenches--but PIT's defense is no where near as effective when Troy P is out. Same with Balt and Ed Reed. Look at how much better NE was with Harrison.

imo it's all about balance. a good secondary can help out an okay DL (and take advantage when the DL forces mistakes). Sure a good DL does more, but I'm a big believer that you have to have at least one true playmaker at each level (line, backer, secondary) if you want to have a legit defense.


seriously, as far as i'm concerned getting just one DL in the top 50-60 picks is pretty much just saying we really don't care about fixing it all that much. . . given the position's bust rate, relying on one guy to "fix" the problem is a laughable attempt at best. . .

agreed. I need to see at least two DL taken in our first 3 picks. i'm just less concerned about which order we get them in.



besides which, we do have some tradable assets depending on the CBA situation-- orton obviously, and a possible trade back from #2, plus some other misc. stuff like DJ. . . if we could generate an extra second/third or so, no reason we can't grab a DB or 'backer or two. . .


I'd rather just stay at #2 and get the top guy on our board, whether Bowers, Petersen, whoever. sure, if BUF wants to give us something to guarantee they get Petersen, fine. But I'm not interested in moving back to >5 (unless the FO has 3-4 guys all with about the same grade).

Like you said, let's get the pick of the litter--whether DL or not.


but can we settle for the second- and third-tier developmental guys at those positions for once, and actually get a couple premium DLs the one time they're legitimately in our reach without having to sell the farm to get them? instead of watching everybody else grab the biggest, nastiest and most explosive guys and hoping we get lucky?

I don't see why 36 has to be a "second and third tier developmental guy" when this draft is supposed to be so deep on DL. sure guys fall for a reason, but every year guys that fall end up being better than guys that don't.

Look at it this way, whoever falls out of the 1st round will likely have a chip on their shoulder.


screw that. . . even in a deep class, the guys that drop still drop for some reason or other, which inevitably translates into some form of teams not thinking he was as good as the other guys. . . given the scarcity of DLs, most years we realistically have no choice but to take what falls-- i sure as hell don't want to willingly sacrifice our choice when we do have it. . .

if there was a sure-fire top DL, then I'd agree. but it seems there's 2-3 that are somewhat separated from a larger group that's pretty close behind. you know more about prospects than I do (I know more about beer though), but I don't get the impression that the guys at the top of the DL chart are heads and tails above guys that will still be on the board at 36. the way these things work, it's just as likely the guy who slips to the 4th will end up being the best of the lot.

on the other hand, I do get the impression that Petersen is significantly better than any other CB or S likely to be still available at our second pick.


disclaimer: not that i expect the franchise to take the path i advocate, at all. . . quite the contrary-- i expect we'll dedicate a pick or possibly two to it, and very possibly not our premium picks. . . after all, we're the denver broncos-- it's what we do. . . i know elway has made some comments about the problem, but i'm a cynic. . . i do expect the "patch it with whatever's available" philosophy to continue until i see otherwise. . .

I hope not. I REALLY do want to see a genuine commitment to building the trenches through the draft. A 1st on Ayers two years ago, followed by two more picks in the top 50 this year would go a long way towards STARTING that. But I want to see it continue EVERY year, not just this year. Get another DL in our first two picks next year, and the year after, and the year after, etc.

Nomad
02-09-2011, 07:16 AM
JDL, your last two/three posts I agree with but I believe dogfish nailed what many BRONCO fans are thinking. But I will have to except whatever the BRONCOS do!!

Nomad
02-09-2011, 07:21 AM
ME I'd rather have a stud DT in the first and grab another 2 DL types in round two.. CB is worthless as a teat on a boar if there is no pressure.

Great DL makes good DB's great great DB's elite.


Lets try doing it the right way for once..


as a general rule DL players take a couple of years to become good to great players

Which means that the playoffs most likely are a few years away..

IF we build via the draft.. and not sign or trade for older players.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Solid post as well JR!!

gobroncsnv
02-09-2011, 08:07 AM
are you kidding, meng? you even gotta ask that question?

you abso****ingLUTELY want the pick of the litter! come on, i know you've watched this team with a legendary corner and leftover DLs. . . just because this year's leftovers will be warmer doesn't make 'em not leftovers-- make no mistake at all, the best prospects will be THOROUGHLY picked over before we get back on the board even the second time. . .

yea, there will be some guys there, and yes, some of them should no doubt turn out to be good players. . . but just because this class is DL-heavy doesn't mean good prospects will slip much further than they normally would, at all. . . DL is at an all-time premium in this passing league, everyfreakinbody needs them-- they're going to get snapped up. . .

.


right on, right on, right on... Not so sure about the cynic part, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt. BUT IF THEY HOSE THIS UP, I'm right there with you. The ineffectiveness of our front line has be LEGENDARY the past 12+ years. We can't stand pat with Elvis, and hope the players with the quality of Tim Crowder, Jarvis Moss, or who ever else we could trade down to take later... IMMENSE disappointment if we go that route again. We don't have a coaching nor a scheme problem. It's lack of TALENT!!!
Also, (to other posters) cornerback??? REALLY??? It's been said before in this thread, but bears repeating... Champ Bailey with no pass rush... how's that working out for you? No DB who ever played can cover for 5 minutes on a pass play.
We have to spend our best capital at the point of our greatest weakness. Chances like this don't come around often, but c'mon, let's get some return for the pain we've been through the past few years! Does anyone else absolutely agonize when our current D is on the field? No pass rush = no Lombardi's. Very simple equation. Dog tired of trying to build this team otherwise.

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 02:48 PM
Ok here is my take. Everything depends on the CBA and Free agency. If they get the CBA done and Free Agency is done before the draft and we can fill a couple of positions of need then Denver can take the best available player. Also with a CBA in place and if we fill needs in FA we could trade out of the #2 pick with a rookie pay scale I can see teams tripping over themselves trying to get in the top 5. Teams that need a QB will be reaching.

If there is no CBA in place and we have to draft and we don't trade out which I think we have no chance to, if there isn't a CBA. I don't think drafting a DE is the right thing to do. I don't think Da'Quan Bowers is any better than Ayers at the DE position. Yes I said it. I think at the DE position Robert Ayers will be a nice player for the Broncos. The kid IS NOT an OLB he's also big enough he can be moved to DT in Dime packages for pass rush. Can't judge him as an OLB and say he sucks, yes he wasn't that good at OLB. What if he's a stud at DE and we wasted the #2 pick on a DE? I would rather see the Broncos grab a DE in FA (Mathias Kiwanuka) then pick one with the 2nd pick. Remember Hunter and Mario Haggan can also play a DE in pass situations. But I really think we are ok at DE grab a FA don't waste the #2 pick on a DE.

Now for the guy I would pick Its a no brainer either of these two guys in order Nick Fairley & Marcell Dareus. Me being a Gators fan I hated Marcell Dareus he was nasty and tough to block Cody got all the hype last year but this guy is 10x better. Trust me the guys I hated that the gators played against always turn out to be studs in the NFL. to name a few. Al Wilson, Leonard Little, Berry, Shaun Ellis, Albert Haynesworth, Anthony McFarland, LaRon Landry, Glenn Dorsey, Thomas Davis, Richard Seymour, Marcus Stroud, Patrick Willis ok ok sorry got carried away But I hated these guys so add
Marcell Dareus to the list with Mcclain. Fairly hasn't played the gators the last couple of years. But yes those are my 2 guys I think its a no brainer to take either of these guys.

three other guys I love later in the draft is LB Kelvin Sheppard LSU, and I like both Safties from Florida Will Hill & Ahmad Black.

Let me add i like Kelvin Sheppard more than I liked Mcclain or Spikes last year. Im not sure where Kelvin Sheppard is projected (im sure I can look it up real fast)....but I like him

Traveler
02-09-2011, 03:47 PM
Let me add i like Kelvin Sheppard more than I liked Mcclain or Spikes last year. Im not sure where Kelvin Sheppard is projected (im sure I can look it up real fast)....but I like him

Last I checked, he's slated to go in rounds 3 or 4. That might change after the Combine.

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 04:23 PM
Last I checked, he's slated to go in rounds 3 or 4. That might change after the Combine.

Ive seen 2nd & 3rd...I like him a lot very athletic and very explosive reminds me of Mayo.

rcsodak
02-09-2011, 04:44 PM
do you watch football??? he is a cornerback.

:laugh:

rcsodak
02-09-2011, 04:45 PM
And an LSU product!!:woot:

Like Jamarcus?

Juriga72
02-09-2011, 04:59 PM
:laugh:

Almost as funny as posting the wrong career record for John Fox huh....:laugh::laugh::laugh:

rcsodak
02-09-2011, 05:09 PM
so when they let champ walk and Cox goes to prison you're still suggesting passing on the best corner prospect ever when you can get quality D-line in the second round.

How many current TOP Defensive teams have been built by non-1st rd Dlinemen?

Pitt/Bal/NE perennially draft Dlinemen early. Chi just added Peppers (#2pick) to Tommie Harris(14th)....instantly better.
Oak improved once they gave up a 1st rd for Richard Seymour (6th) and adding Wimbley (13th) this year....instantly better.

Denver has tried the 'let's build the D with later picks', and you can see where it's got them.

But, imo, you CAN get late rounders to fill in in the secondary, as long as the QB is getting some semblance of pressure.

rcsodak
02-09-2011, 05:10 PM
He is not the best CB prospect ever. Not close.

Infact, there is rumors that he will be moved to saftey.



He excells at run coverage, press coverage, and zone coverage. He is good at man to man but not great.



Prince amakumara is much better at man coverage than he is and he was TOASTED last year.

Finished that last sentence for ya, 29. ;)

rcsodak
02-09-2011, 05:15 PM
Dude DEN fans are beyond meltdowns.
You been around the last couple years?
I dont think fans will be second guessing Elway.
But what if D.Thomas has some serious lingering issues with his foot,
that we as fans just dont know about?
What if Elway realizes he needs a true superstar for Tebow to throw to and that he cant count on DThomas?
Who knows!
Also the $$$$$$$$ being spent on the 2nd pick in the draft is insane. Unless of course theres some kind of agreement in the near future.
Money is part of the BPA formula. The money spent better be well spent, and not on a bust. DEN cant afford to waste the money anymore.
I know thats alot of "what ifs" but thats where were at right now.
Just sayin.

WR will NOT be their 1st pick......


.....unless you believe that Xanders is Matt Millen in disguise.

Who was the last team to win a SB by building their franchise around a WR? Because spending a #2 on one, would earn that moniker, believe you me.

As hated as McD is around here, even HE wouldn't be that stupid. :lol:

hamrob
02-09-2011, 05:50 PM
same Hamrob from the Mane?

I have found I agree with you on pretty much everythingYep, one and the same. Thanks for the kudos.

Krugan
02-09-2011, 06:01 PM
anyone know when the kid out of NC(quinn?) is slated to go.

He was a beast before he got the silly suspension.

And the other kid from there, man i need coffee.

That DLine was solid in North Caro. Just a couple options for possible later picks, at work no coffee.

hotcarl
02-09-2011, 06:07 PM
attn: mods

please make me a mod tia

underrated29
02-09-2011, 06:10 PM
anyone know when the kid out of NC(quinn?) is slated to go.

He was a beast before he got the silly suspension.

And the other kid from there, man i need coffee.

That DLine was solid in North Caro. Just a couple options for possible later picks, at work no coffee.



Havent looked into him much yet. I have heard, 1st round talent, but because he threw down it might make him fall too 2. Maybe still 1st round though, it would be interesting to see though. He is a playmaker fo sho!

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 06:16 PM
Shaun Rogers just got cut from Cleveland...I'd rather have him at DT in a 4-3 than J. Williams.

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 06:17 PM
anyone know when the kid out of NC(quinn?) is slated to go.

He was a beast before he got the silly suspension.

And the other kid from there, man i need coffee.

That DLine was solid in North Caro. Just a couple options for possible later picks, at work no coffee.

He should be a first round pick...But why would we take a DE? Sell me on a DE plz.

Krugan
02-09-2011, 06:25 PM
He should be a first round pick...But why would we take a DE? Sell me on a DE plz.

Ayers, will he or wont he.

And yes, the center of our Dline is the biggest need.

I was just asking, running thru a wish list here and for the life of me couldnt place the kid. Was here and though I would ask! :)

Denver Native (Carol)
02-09-2011, 06:28 PM
posted today

[QUOTE]2 CB Patrick Peterson

LSU
Analysis: The Broncos could be getting the next Champ Bailey in Peterson, as he has terrific ball skills and can also be a return man on special teams./QUOTE]

http://profootball.scout.com/2/1046856.html

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 06:49 PM
Ayers, will he or wont he.

And yes, the center of our Dline is the biggest need.

I was just asking, running thru a wish list here and for the life of me couldnt place the kid. Was here and though I would ask! :)

I get ya...I think Ayers is best for DE...can't be judged by his 2 yrs at OLB bc he's not one...like i said b4 I wouldn't wanna waste the #2 overall pick on a DE when Ayers could be a player for us at DE...Even if not I wouldn't mind signing Kiwanuka instead of using the #2 pick on a DE that in my eyes has question marks.

BroncoStud
02-09-2011, 06:52 PM
I'm all for Peterson, hell if we re-sign Champ and have Peterson opposite of him, then get Dooms back this year, our defense will be MUCH better right there.

Juriga72
02-09-2011, 07:21 PM
posted today

[QUOTE]2 CB Patrick Peterson

LSU
Analysis: The Broncos could be getting the next Champ Bailey in Peterson, as he has terrific ball skills and can also be a return man on special teams./QUOTE]

http://profootball.scout.com/2/1046856.html

Or we could get the next Pacman Jones....... IMHO we need to get our run d back to where it was...

2001-06 top 10 run d/ top 10 scoring d

2007-30th
2008-27th
2009-26th
2010-32nd

Denver Native (Carol)
02-09-2011, 08:02 PM
anyone know when the kid out of NC(quinn?) is slated to go.

He was a beast before he got the silly suspension.

And the other kid from there, man i need coffee.

That DLine was solid in North Caro. Just a couple options for possible later picks, at work no coffee.

This site has Quinn - 1st round - #8 pick - Tennessee - no other NC player in 1st round.

http://profootball.scout.com/2/1046856.html

WOW - just noticed this site has two Colorado kids in the 1st round:


13 CB Jimmy Smith Colorado

Analysis: The Lions can't cover anybody in the secondary, and although it would be a steal to get Amukamara here, Smith isn't a bad consolation prize.

19 OT Nate Solder Colorado

Analysis: The first of a talented bunch of tackles to come off the board, Solder can help strengthen a line that has taken a beating since Super Bowl XLII.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Shaun Rogers just got cut from Cleveland...I'd rather have him at DT in a 4-3 than J. Williams.

Say no to spending. Build via the draft.

Side note...Quinn could/should go top 5. But not to Denver. No smallish DEs. I dont want an Indianapolis D which can get to the QB, but gets run all over.

Marvin Austin, DT, UNC could crack the first round, but is not a lock.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-09-2011, 08:59 PM
[QUOTE=Denver Native (Carol);1209010]posted today



Or we could get the next Pacman Jones....... IMHO we need to get our run d back to where it was...

2001-06 top 10 run d/ top 10 scoring d

2007-30th
2008-27th
2009-26th
2010-32nd


There has literally been nothing in Patrick Peterson's life that would make you think he would be a Pacman Jones. That was a stupid remark.

Juriga72
02-09-2011, 09:16 PM
[QUOTE=Juriga72;1209040]


There has literally been nothing in Patrick Peterson's life that would make you think he would be a Pacman Jones. That was a stupid remark.

Seriously..... TELL me he's a future Hall of Fame Cornerback then?

Otherwise you are just crapping yourself........ Pacman Jones if you are too slow witted to remember was the LAST "Can't miss cornerback"

:coffee: try agian....
I see you ingored the whole run defense issue huh...... WOW.. Bright lights MBB!!!!!!!

Montana Battlin Bear
02-09-2011, 09:30 PM
I'm not saying he is going to be a Hall of Famer Cornerback I do think he will be a Pro Bowl Cornerback.

PacMan Jones was a hell of a football player the thing that got him kicked out of football was his off the field incidents. As a player he was a can't miss. He did very good for his first two years in the league. And there were the off the field question marks before the draft took place.

Once again, (Like i've said before) D-Line is one of our biggest if not THE biggest need this offseason.

With that said, taking Peterson with the #2 DOES NOT mean that we are once again forgetting to address our need for front seven! All it says is that the FO feels that Peterson is going to be a stud at the NFL level. This draft is deep with D-lineman.

Not a single person on this board is arguing with you that we need to fix our run D and pass rush. There has been several scouts claim that Peterson is a once a decade type of player. All they've been saying about Bowers and Fairley is that it could be very possible that they both could be busts. They have both been "one year wonders". I would be okay with both of them.

TXBRONC
02-09-2011, 09:45 PM
I'm not saying he is going to be a Hall of Famer Cornerback I do think he will be a Pro Bowl Cornerback.

PacMan Jones was a hell of a football player the thing that got him kicked out of football was his off the field incidents. As a player he was a can't miss. He did very good for his first two years in the league. And there were the off the field question marks before the draft took place.

Once again, (Like i've said before) D-Line is one of our biggest if not THE biggest need this offseason.

With that said, taking Peterson with the #2 DOES NOT mean that we are once again forgetting to address our need for front seven! All it says is that the FO feels that Peterson is going to be a stud at the NFL level. This draft is deep with D-lineman.

Not a single person on this board is arguing with you that we need to fix our run D and pass rush. There has been several scouts claim that Peterson is a once a decade type of player. All they've been saying about Bowers and Fairley is that it could be very possible that they both could be busts. They have both been "one year wonders". I would be okay with both of them.

I don't see our secondary being as immediate of problem as the front seven. Yes Fairley and Bowers could be busts but no more so than Peterson. Fact is it's easier to find good secondary help later in the draft than it is defensive linemen.

cuzz4169
02-09-2011, 09:47 PM
Say no to spending. Build via the draft.

need to spend something a lot of holes to fill cant get them all in draft in one year. Not saying Rogers is the guy I was just tossing a name out there.
Nothing wrong with building in draft but Denver has to show fans they can do that first...to many misses in the past. Man.....look at GB almost every starter was drafted by them or signed as a undrafted FA. I could only wish Denver could do that.

I Eat Staples
02-09-2011, 09:54 PM
Newton's a 100X better prospect than Vince Young, who went in the 1st round. He's a damn good player but he is going to have to take a paycut in the NFL, no way they can match what Auburn paid him this season.

I don't agree with your assessment of Newton but that last line was funny. :laugh:

Vince Young was a better prospect than Newton IMO and I wouldn't have picked him in the first. If a QB wouldn't be successful in college without running, he's not draftable as a QB IMO.


Say no to spending. Build via the draft.

Side note...Quinn could/should go top 5. But not to Denver. No smallish DEs. I dont want an Indianapolis D which can get to the QB, but gets run all over.

Marvin Austin, DT, UNC could crack the first round, but is not a lock.

I completely agree, but sadly that's where we're heading by paying Doom way more than he's worth and having (ugh) Robert Ayers on the other side.

Lonestar
02-09-2011, 10:05 PM
Very few top 5 DL ever reach the projected status people place on them.

Very few 1st CBs selected fail.. and one of the few who did (Antrel Rolle) became a pro bowl safety.

A great many extremely good DL in the NFL, in fact some of the very best front 7 players, were taken 2nd rd on. This is a very VERY deep DL draft and a lot of quality players will be had... the best pass rusher isn't even going to go in the top 5... people take those DL top 5 they think can be great at both Run/Pass... well, none of the projected top 5 have been consistently great pass rushers, if that's what you want... the best run stuffing DL is Clayborn and best pass rusher is Kerrigan. It's not like there is a Julius Peppers class of prospect in this draft, people, that's always been known. A lot of 1 year wonders who turned it on their last season and Dareus... I'll be happy with any of them, but I don't get this aversion (particularly after everyone SAW the importance of DBs in the Super Bowl clear as day) to selecting a DB, particularly when he is a class individual, high character, work ethic, experienced, defensive playmaker who is routinely rated as the top prospect... the only other guy that ever edges him out is Fairley, but he has as much risk as upside due to character and laziness questions.

on the cb comment but look where they have been drafted.

2009
Rd Sel # Player Position School Team
1 14 Malcolm Jenkins DB Ohio State New Orleans Saints
1 25 Vontae Davis DB Illinois Miami Dolphins
2 33 Louis Delmas DB Western Michigan Detroit Lions
2 34 Pat Chung DB Oregon New England Patriots
2 37 Alphonso Smith DB Wake Forest Denver Broncos
2 41 Darius Butler DB Connecticut New England Patriots
2 42 Jairus Byrd DB Oregon Buffalo Bills
2 47 Mike Mitchell DB Ohio U. Oakland Raiders
2 48 Darcel McBath DB Texas Tech Denver Broncos
2 55 William Moore DB Missouri Atlanta Falcons
2 59 Sherrod Martin DB Troy Carolina Panthers
2 61 Sean Smith DB Utah Miami Dolphins

2008
1 11 Leodis McKelvin CB Troy Buffalo Bills
1 16 Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie CB Tennessee State Arizona Cardinals
1 20 Aqib Talib CB Kansas Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 25 Mike Jenkins CB South Florida Dallas Cowboys
1 27 Antoine Cason CB Arizona San Diego Chargers
2 35 Brandon Flowers CB Virginia Tech Kansas City Chiefs
2 40 Tracy Porter CB Indiana New Orleans Saints
2 60 Pat Lee CB Auburn Green Bay Packers
2 62 Terrence Wheatley CB Colorado New England Patriots
2 63 Terrell Thomas CB USC New York Giants

2007
1 14 Darrelle Revis CB Pittsburgh New York Jets
1 18 Leon Hall CB Michigan Cincinnati Bengals
1 20 Aaron Ross CB Texas New York Giants
1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB Miami (Fla.) New England Patriots
2 41 Chris Houston CB Arkansas Atlanta Falcons
2 53 Eric Wright CB Nevada-Las Vegas Cleveland Browns
2 55 Josh Wilson CB Maryland Seattle Seahawks

2006
1 15 Tye Hill CB Clemson St. Louis Rams
1 16 Jason Allen DB Tennessee Miami Dolphins
1 19 Antonio Cromartie CB Florida State San Diego Chargers
1 24 Johnathan Joseph CB South Carolina Cincinnati Bengals
1 31 Kelly Jennings CB Miami (Fla.) Seattle Seahawks
2 37 Jimmy Williams CB Virginia Tech Atlanta Falcons
2 48 Cedric Griffin CB Texas Minnesota Vikings
2 54 Bernard Pollard DB Purdue Kansas City Chiefs
2 57 Devin Hester DB Miami (Fla.) Chicago Bears
2 58 Richard Marshall CB Fresno State Carolina Panthers
2 62 Tim Jennings CB Georgia Indianapolis Colts

2005
1 6 Pacman Jones CB West Virginia Tennessee Titans
1 8 Antrel Rolle DB Miami (Fla.) Arizona Cardinals
1 9 Carlos Rogers DB Auburn Washington Redskins
1 14 Thomas Davis DB Georgia Carolina Panthers
1 23 Fabian Washington CB Nebraska Oakland Raiders
1 29 Marlin Jackson DB Michigan Indianapolis Colts
2 34 Brodney Pool DB Oklahoma Cleveland Browns
2 38 Stanford Routt DB Houston Oakland Raiders
2 43 Corey Webster DB Louisiana State New York Giants
2 50 Ronald Bartell CB Howard St. Louis Rams
2 56 Darrent Williams CB Oklahoma State Denver Broncos
2 57 Justin Miller CB Clemson New York Jets
2 60 Kelvin Hayden DB Illinois Indianapolis Colts
2 62 Bryant McFadden DB Florida State Pittsburgh Steelers

there are a few slugs in there not many but then look at the drafting position. the lowest is 6 but the average is 20.5.

I'm not going to set precedent in taking ANY CB at #2. I do not care if he is the second coming of Bailey/revis rolled into one. with a dash of deign mixed in.

without a pass rush elite CB are a waste ..

give me and elite pass rush and some good corners any day. and the corners will just look like Bailey.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
02-09-2011, 10:08 PM
Well I must say you won me over with the 'teat on a boar' example........but.........I still think taking Peterson would be beneficial.

Im not looking at him playing corner, Im looking at him playing safety.
Polumalu and Reed are great examples of what a great playmaking safety can do for a football team.

Doom will be back. Ayers can rush off the line. Draft Cameron Jordan or someone like that, as well as a DT in round two, and we have a nucleus that can grow together.

Petersons instincts, size and ability will make him invaluable. His versatility will allow us to really mix it up on defense. Same with Champ. Ultimately, I think Champ and Peterson switch places. Champ at safety and Peterson at corner.

I agree though.

A good corner is about as useful as a nipple on broom handle without the pass rush.


Spluuuuuuuurt! Ting!

as for safety Troy was not effective at all in the super bowl. they forced him out of his comfort zone and about as effective as a chicken with lips...
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Montana Battlin Bear
02-09-2011, 10:21 PM
on the cb comment but look where they have been drafted.

2009
Rd Sel # Player Position School Team
1 14 Malcolm Jenkins DB Ohio State New Orleans Saints
1 25 Vontae Davis DB Illinois Miami Dolphins
2 33 Louis Delmas DB Western Michigan Detroit Lions
2 34 Pat Chung DB Oregon New England Patriots
2 37 Alphonso Smith DB Wake Forest Denver Broncos
2 41 Darius Butler DB Connecticut New England Patriots
2 42 Jairus Byrd DB Oregon Buffalo Bills
2 47 Mike Mitchell DB Ohio U. Oakland Raiders
2 48 Darcel McBath DB Texas Tech Denver Broncos
2 55 William Moore DB Missouri Atlanta Falcons
2 59 Sherrod Martin DB Troy Carolina Panthers
2 61 Sean Smith DB Utah Miami Dolphins

2008
1 11 Leodis McKelvin CB Troy Buffalo Bills
1 16 Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie CB Tennessee State Arizona Cardinals
1 20 Aqib Talib CB Kansas Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 25 Mike Jenkins CB South Florida Dallas Cowboys
1 27 Antoine Cason CB Arizona San Diego Chargers
2 35 Brandon Flowers CB Virginia Tech Kansas City Chiefs
2 40 Tracy Porter CB Indiana New Orleans Saints
2 60 Pat Lee CB Auburn Green Bay Packers
2 62 Terrence Wheatley CB Colorado New England Patriots
2 63 Terrell Thomas CB USC New York Giants

2007
1 14 Darrelle Revis CB Pittsburgh New York Jets
1 18 Leon Hall CB Michigan Cincinnati Bengals
1 20 Aaron Ross CB Texas New York Giants
1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB Miami (Fla.) New England Patriots
2 41 Chris Houston CB Arkansas Atlanta Falcons
2 53 Eric Wright CB Nevada-Las Vegas Cleveland Browns
2 55 Josh Wilson CB Maryland Seattle Seahawks

2006
1 15 Tye Hill CB Clemson St. Louis Rams
1 16 Jason Allen DB Tennessee Miami Dolphins
1 19 Antonio Cromartie CB Florida State San Diego Chargers
1 24 Johnathan Joseph CB South Carolina Cincinnati Bengals
1 31 Kelly Jennings CB Miami (Fla.) Seattle Seahawks
2 37 Jimmy Williams CB Virginia Tech Atlanta Falcons
2 48 Cedric Griffin CB Texas Minnesota Vikings
2 54 Bernard Pollard DB Purdue Kansas City Chiefs
2 57 Devin Hester DB Miami (Fla.) Chicago Bears
2 58 Richard Marshall CB Fresno State Carolina Panthers
2 62 Tim Jennings CB Georgia Indianapolis Colts

2005
1 6 Pacman Jones CB West Virginia Tennessee Titans
1 8 Antrel Rolle DB Miami (Fla.) Arizona Cardinals
1 9 Carlos Rogers DB Auburn Washington Redskins
1 14 Thomas Davis DB Georgia Carolina Panthers
1 23 Fabian Washington CB Nebraska Oakland Raiders
1 29 Marlin Jackson DB Michigan Indianapolis Colts
2 34 Brodney Pool DB Oklahoma Cleveland Browns
2 38 Stanford Routt DB Houston Oakland Raiders
2 43 Corey Webster DB Louisiana State New York Giants
2 50 Ronald Bartell CB Howard St. Louis Rams
2 56 Darrent Williams CB Oklahoma State Denver Broncos
2 57 Justin Miller CB Clemson New York Jets
2 60 Kelvin Hayden DB Illinois Indianapolis Colts
2 62 Bryant McFadden DB Florida State Pittsburgh Steelers

there are a few slugs in there not many but then look at the drafting position. the lowest is 6 but the average is 20.5.

I'm not going to set precedent in taking ANY CB at #2. I do not care if he is the second coming of Bailey/revis rolled into one. with a dash of deign mixed in.

without a pass rush elite CB are a waste ..

give me and elite pass rush and some good corners any day. and the corners will just look like Bailey.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I think if you're looking at D-Line taken in the first than you would need to include Safeties being taken in the first.

And Polamalu didn't have much effect in the Super Bowl but the guy was DPOY. I believe the reason he was not as effective in the super bowl was because of his nagging injury. That guy IS the main reason the Steeler D is so good.

Bullgator
02-09-2011, 10:39 PM
on the cb comment but look where they have been drafted.

2009
Rd Sel # Player Position School Team
1 14 Malcolm Jenkins DB Ohio State New Orleans Saints
1 25 Vontae Davis DB Illinois Miami Dolphins
2 33 Louis Delmas DB Western Michigan Detroit Lions
2 34 Pat Chung DB Oregon New England Patriots
2 37 Alphonso Smith DB Wake Forest Denver Broncos
2 41 Darius Butler DB Connecticut New England Patriots
2 42 Jairus Byrd DB Oregon Buffalo Bills
2 47 Mike Mitchell DB Ohio U. Oakland Raiders
2 48 Darcel McBath DB Texas Tech Denver Broncos
2 55 William Moore DB Missouri Atlanta Falcons
2 59 Sherrod Martin DB Troy Carolina Panthers
2 61 Sean Smith DB Utah Miami Dolphins

2008
1 11 Leodis McKelvin CB Troy Buffalo Bills
1 16 Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie CB Tennessee State Arizona Cardinals
1 20 Aqib Talib CB Kansas Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 25 Mike Jenkins CB South Florida Dallas Cowboys
1 27 Antoine Cason CB Arizona San Diego Chargers
2 35 Brandon Flowers CB Virginia Tech Kansas City Chiefs
2 40 Tracy Porter CB Indiana New Orleans Saints
2 60 Pat Lee CB Auburn Green Bay Packers
2 62 Terrence Wheatley CB Colorado New England Patriots
2 63 Terrell Thomas CB USC New York Giants

2007
1 14 Darrelle Revis CB Pittsburgh New York Jets
1 18 Leon Hall CB Michigan Cincinnati Bengals
1 20 Aaron Ross CB Texas New York Giants
1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB Miami (Fla.) New England Patriots
2 41 Chris Houston CB Arkansas Atlanta Falcons
2 53 Eric Wright CB Nevada-Las Vegas Cleveland Browns
2 55 Josh Wilson CB Maryland Seattle Seahawks

2006
1 15 Tye Hill CB Clemson St. Louis Rams
1 16 Jason Allen DB Tennessee Miami Dolphins
1 19 Antonio Cromartie CB Florida State San Diego Chargers
1 24 Johnathan Joseph CB South Carolina Cincinnati Bengals
1 31 Kelly Jennings CB Miami (Fla.) Seattle Seahawks
2 37 Jimmy Williams CB Virginia Tech Atlanta Falcons
2 48 Cedric Griffin CB Texas Minnesota Vikings
2 54 Bernard Pollard DB Purdue Kansas City Chiefs
2 57 Devin Hester DB Miami (Fla.) Chicago Bears
2 58 Richard Marshall CB Fresno State Carolina Panthers
2 62 Tim Jennings CB Georgia Indianapolis Colts

2005
1 6 Pacman Jones CB West Virginia Tennessee Titans
1 8 Antrel Rolle DB Miami (Fla.) Arizona Cardinals
1 9 Carlos Rogers DB Auburn Washington Redskins
1 14 Thomas Davis DB Georgia Carolina Panthers
1 23 Fabian Washington CB Nebraska Oakland Raiders
1 29 Marlin Jackson DB Michigan Indianapolis Colts
2 34 Brodney Pool DB Oklahoma Cleveland Browns
2 38 Stanford Routt DB Houston Oakland Raiders
2 43 Corey Webster DB Louisiana State New York Giants
2 50 Ronald Bartell CB Howard St. Louis Rams
2 56 Darrent Williams CB Oklahoma State Denver Broncos
2 57 Justin Miller CB Clemson New York Jets
2 60 Kelvin Hayden DB Illinois Indianapolis Colts
2 62 Bryant McFadden DB Florida State Pittsburgh Steelers

there are a few slugs in there not many but then look at the drafting position. the lowest is 6 but the average is 20.5.

I'm not going to set precedent in taking ANY CB at #2. I do not care if he is the second coming of Bailey/revis rolled into one. with a dash of deign mixed in.

without a pass rush elite CB are a waste ..

give me and elite pass rush and some good corners any day. and the corners will just look like Bailey.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

You missed the best 1!!! JOE HADEN to Browns, round 1,pick 7, from.... Florida :D

gobroncsnv
02-09-2011, 11:49 PM
cool, let's get the top cornerback, and I bet we could improve to like 12 coverage sacks a season... boy, that'll show'em.

Once again, how did the Giants beat the PATS in the SB a few years back.. league's best corners? No... with what had to have been the coolest thing ever, putting Dr Teeth on his but darn near everytime he dropped back.

Pressure, great line play, run stopping wins games. Roeth also took his lumps in this past week's game as well. THe Packers' corners are not the greatest, but play SO much better because the passer has no time to go through EVERY read they drew up for their entire playbook. THe wins are much more likely when you are solid up front, both sides of the ball. Been a while since we've seen that here... perhaps it's worth a try?

bcbronc
02-10-2011, 01:06 AM
cool, let's get the top cornerback, and I bet we could improve to like 12 coverage sacks a season... boy, that'll show'em.

Once again, how did the Giants beat the PATS in the SB a few years back.. league's best corners? No... with what had to have been the coolest thing ever, putting Dr Teeth on his but darn near everytime he dropped back.

Pressure, great line play, run stopping wins games. Roeth also took his lumps in this past week's game as well. THe Packers' corners are not the greatest, but play SO much better because the passer has no time to go through EVERY read they drew up for their entire playbook. THe wins are much more likely when you are solid up front, both sides of the ball. Been a while since we've seen that here... perhaps it's worth a try?

didn't Woodson win DPotY not too long ago? I guess he might not be the greatest but he is great [/reverse stephen colbert]. and from my perspective, PIT got a lot better offensively once Woodson left the game.

Hey, do you guys remember in 2000 when CLE took Courtney Brown #1 and then in 2001 they took Gerrard Warren #3? Power. House.

since that time, PIT has taken exactly THREE DL in the top 3 ROUNDS:

2009 - Ziggy Hood @ #32
2001 - Casey Hampton @ #19.
2000 - Kendrick Clancy @#72

It's actually kind of shocking how little PIT actually drafts DL.

on the other hand, in the same time span they've taken SIX DBs in the top 3 rounds. Granted, none were at #2, but goes to show you.

I know we're no where near PIT in developing DL (hopefully we can close the gap somewhat). But we've taken two 1st round DL in the past three drafts (Ayers, Moss - plus we gave up extra picks for Moss :elefant: ). Add Crowder in 2007 and we've taken as many DL in the first two rounds over the past 3 drafts as PIT has in the top 3 rounds over the past 10 drafts. Pretty cool stat, eh? :shocked:

the point being, there's more than one way to build a defense. We need to get a playmaker at #2. in a perfect world, that playmaker starts with his hand in the dirt. But I don't want to be the next CLE.

JDL
02-10-2011, 05:17 AM
cool, let's get the top cornerback, and I bet we could improve to like 12 coverage sacks a season... boy, that'll show'em.

Once again, how did the Giants beat the PATS in the SB a few years back.. league's best corners? No... with what had to have been the coolest thing ever, putting Dr Teeth on his but darn near everytime he dropped back.

Pressure, great line play, run stopping wins games. Roeth also took his lumps in this past week's game as well. THe Packers' corners are not the greatest, but play SO much better because the passer has no time to go through EVERY read they drew up for their entire playbook. THe wins are much more likely when you are solid up front, both sides of the ball. Been a while since we've seen that here... perhaps it's worth a try?

Justin Tuck - Pick 74
Michael Strahan - Pick 40
Osi Umenyiora - Pick 56
Barry Cofield - Pick 124
Fred Robbins - Pick 55

Ummmm... perhaps want to try again?

BTW, Packers CBs? REALLY DAMN GOOD.

JDL
02-10-2011, 05:25 AM
there are a few slugs in there not many but then look at the drafting position. the lowest is 6 but the average is 20.5.

I'm not going to set precedent in taking ANY CB at #2. I do not care if he is the second coming of Bailey/revis rolled into one. with a dash of deign mixed in.

without a pass rush elite CB are a waste ..

give me and elite pass rush and some good corners any day. and the corners will just look like Bailey.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

So you'd rather take a worse prospect with higher risk of busting than someone who could actually help because it hasn't been common for CBs to go so high?

Do you think the Arizona Cardinals right now are giddy that they took Andre Wadsworth over Charles Woodson?

That is kind of the issue with that mentality, it is the exact reason so many teams fail to build a good defense... if you are selecting at #2, you take the BPA because missing on those picks can be fatal and set you back years.

And right about now... I would say Pittsburgh is wishing they had a good CB.


If Peterson wasn't or isn't the best prospect available (really on D) we shouldn't take him, but there really isn't a good reason to NOT take him if he is... it is just a bit much to suggest you don't need good CBs in a league that is absolutely all about passing and even more that the way to build a great pass rush is spending top 5 picks on DL, when it is so abundantly clear how few ever turn into dominant pass rushers or difference makers.

The D needs a defensive leader really, a playmaker, at any position ... you take what the draft offers and you be happy because VERY VERY few of the players drafted this April, even in the 1st rd will have much of an impact on the NFL... most turn into average players at the very best. You don't ever pass on special players because those guys are rare and one other really good example? An awful lot of teams foolishly passed on Ed Reed a huge playmaking safety with great collegiate career... didn't think it was important... would we really rather have an average DL over a guy like Ed Reed? Highly rated CBs don't really turn into major busts all that often... I am not going to be one bit upset if that's the route we go... like I said, if we legitimately determine one of the DL to be better... so be it... It just seems a bit much to go off the deepend like some already are over selecting a DB as if it is going to ruin the D. Just a bit overdramatic for my taste. :)

Northman
02-10-2011, 05:27 AM
And right about now... Pittsburgh is wishing they had a good CB.

Are they?

Or was Rodgers just that good?

I'll take the latter. Pitt beat a Jets team that had one of the best DB's in the game. If it was based off just having a great DB than Denver would win the SB every year.

gobroncsnv
02-10-2011, 07:57 AM
Justin Tuck - Pick 74
Michael Strahan - Pick 40
Osi Umenyiora - Pick 56
Barry Cofield - Pick 124
Fred Robbins - Pick 55

Ummmm... perhaps want to try again?

BTW, Packers CBs? REALLY DAMN GOOD.

Man, you're right... I need to look at this differently... We have a great dline now, and should stand pat and just go for skill players so we have the best looking team on Madden. We should have kept Crowder, Moss, and all the other ineffectives we've been picking. Nah, you don't REALLY think what we've been doing is working, do you???
So was the pick 6 in the SB a result of "really damn good" corner play, or do you at all attribute the pick to line pressure? Wow, I'm speechless if you think otherwise.
Ok, Peterson, I'll bite... who's team won the national championship? Peterson's, or Fairley's? (Wait, Peterson's team didn't get a sniff of the Nat'l Champ game... unfair, I know)
How could Pitt have possibly gotten past the Jets with Revis back there? I will go the step of providing the answer for you... Their front line kept getting blocked, and Roeth had time to throw when it counted, and the Steelers ground game was working. But imagine the Jets feel great about it because they have Revis...
Ok, you win...
But the truth of it is, without a great line, it doesn't matter who you have as DB's, as we've been seeing for like 6-7 years now. You can't build a winning season on the occasional coverage sack.

Juriga72
02-10-2011, 08:32 AM
Justin Tuck - Pick 74
Michael Strahan - Pick 40
Osi Umenyiora - Pick 56
Barry Cofield - Pick 124
Fred Robbins - Pick 55

Ummmm... perhaps want to try again?

BTW, Packers CBs? REALLY DAMN GOOD.
2005-
Seattle-#1 sacks
Pittsburgh #3

2006-
Chicago-#8 sacks
Colts-#30

2007-
NY Giants #1-sacks
New England #2 sacks

2008-
Pittsburgh #2 sacks
Arizona-#14 sacks

2009-
New Orleans-#13 sacks
Indy-#16

2010-
Pittsburgh-#1-sacks
Green Bay-#2 sacks

I'd say its pretty easy to cover a guy when the QB is laying on the ground with a large angry man sitting on his head.....

3/4 out of the last 12 Super Bowl participants have had a top 10 sack total's


"Draft a CB!!!!!"

Montana Battlin Bear
02-10-2011, 10:38 AM
2005-
Seattle-#1 sacks
Pittsburgh #3

2006-
Chicago-#8 sacks
Colts-#30

2007-
NY Giants #1-sacks
New England #2 sacks

2008-
Pittsburgh #2 sacks
Arizona-#14 sacks

2009-
New Orleans-#13 sacks
Indy-#16

2010-
Pittsburgh-#1-sacks
Green Bay-#2 sacks

I'd say its pretty easy to cover a guy when the QB is laying on the ground with a large angry man sitting on his head.....

3/4 out of the last 12 Super Bowl participants have had a top 10 sack total's


"Draft a CB!!!!!"

You must seriously believe that there is only one move that we can make this offseason.

It won't matter to you what we do, but as long as we draft that bust D-lineman with the #2 you will be happy.

atwater27
02-10-2011, 11:15 AM
Guys, we have had the top corner in the NFL for years now. How many playoff games have we won, how many championships? In that same stretch, we have had one of the worst D-lines in the NFL for years now. I'll let you draw the obvious conclusions.

Ravage!!!
02-10-2011, 12:27 PM
You need both, a good DL and a good safety. Good safeties make a HUGE difference to a defense, just as a good DE does. If we are looking to move to the 43, the DE is much more important than the DTs are. Hell, give me a great MLB over a 43 DT.

But as mentioned above, you can get good DTs (just as you can DBs) later in the draft. But when picking at #2 overall, you cant' jut pick a position of need. You have to pick the absolute BEST player on the board. We need every position anyway. So being sure that #2 overall pick is a stud, no matter what the position, is the best thing for this team.

Its going to be a series of building blocks to get this team up and running again. Lets be sure that expensive block is a good one, no matter where on the chess board we place him. Thats how you build a good team. Picking wisely instead of just picking for need.

Ravage!!!
02-10-2011, 12:31 PM
Guys, we have had the top corner in the NFL for years now. How many playoff games have we won, how many championships? In that same stretch, we have had one of the worst D-lines in the NFL for years now. I'll let you draw the obvious conclusions.

But I haven't seen a DT in the draft that makes me go "gotta have." Just not there. NO single DL (to me) is just leaps and bounds above everyone else that I feel we NEED to take him at #2. Just because we need DL doesn't mean we have to take that position with the 1st of our picks.

Everyone here has good points. We NEED a DL, absolutely. But that #2 pick ISN'T going to build that DL anyway. Imo, we just need to get the best player in the draft since only 1 other player is taken before us. We are WEAK alllllllll over the field.

underrated29
02-10-2011, 12:55 PM
Peterson, is going to be a saftey in the league, just like eric berry. In fact that is who he reminds me of....Big, strong, super fast, run supports, ball skills.



But Id rather take black, or sands in the 2nd/3rd range and use #2 on a DT, who wont be there at our 2nd rdr.

Lonestar
02-10-2011, 02:30 PM
If Champ isn't coming back we damn sure need a CB. We're not even sure that Parrish Cox isn't going to prison yet and he may face NFL sanctions. I have no problem taking Peterson, he is going to be a difference-maker and those players are never bad to have.

Safety is a MAJOR need for us and has been since Atwater and Braxton retired. If we re-sign Champ I think it might be smart to draft Peterson and move him to Safety anyway, he is built for it.

Moving Champ to safety right away is not going to happen.

Not at the money he will cost and for that matter he is a abut down cornerand probably will be for a few more years.

I'm sure that there will be a provision in the contract reducing his cap number when he moves ro safety.

But until everyone is ready for that to happen a CB he wil be.

Champ at 80% is better than most other CB.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
02-10-2011, 02:57 PM
So you'd rather take a worse prospect with higher risk of busting than someone who could actually help because it hasn't been common for CBs to go so high?
That is kind of the issue with that mentality, it is the exact reason so many teams fail to build a good defense... if you are selecting at #2, you take the BPA because missing on those picks is fatal.
Just a bit overdramatic for my taste. :)

Not sure Where I said take an inferior player.

I suspect unless the take someone that is killed in a car wreck in today's NFL there are fewer busts than in the past on good to better programs.


Now mikey and Ted were having to make a pick on D this year I would have concerns.

But our scouts now seem to have an eye we have a real DL coach unlike before and a real HC that knows defense cam make a difference.

I has been proven here in den that having great CBs means crap if they have to cover their man for 5+ seconds.

I'll take a real DL type anyway over DBs as they can male every e behind them better wist run stoping and pass rush.


The packers Did not need to blitz because for the most part they got heat with their DL.
And one OLB.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bullgator
02-10-2011, 03:02 PM
Peterson, is going to be a saftey in the league, just like eric berry. In fact that is who he reminds me of....Big, strong, super fast, run supports, ball skills.



But Id rather take black, or sands in the 2nd/3rd range and use #2 on a DT, who wont be there at our 2nd rdr.

Couldnt have said it better myself excellent post... the only thing is i would rather have a run stuffer next to dumervil rather than bowers opposite him

Lonestar
02-10-2011, 03:15 PM
Justin Tuck - Pick 74
Michael Strahan - Pick 40
Osi Umenyiora - Pick 56
Barry Cofield - Pick 124
Fred Robbins - Pick 55
Ummmm... perhaps want to try again?
BTW, Packers CBs? REALLY DAMN GOOD.

Got to admit NYG have a good eye for talent and then they have a damned fine coaching staff also.

Just maybe we maybe able to do this also.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
02-10-2011, 03:27 PM
You must seriously believe that there is only one move that we can make this offseason.

It won't matter to you what we do, but as long as we draft that bust D-lineman with the #2 you will be happy.

Just curious why you seem to think that a CB has less bust factor.

For that matter if the have less groin pulls or hamstring issues.

If a cb blows a knee he is done. I guess that any pick has a good enough chance of a car crash or their wife becoming a punching bag.

In case you have not heard it before the draft is a crap shoot. With some coaches less so than others but still a chance you take.

I think I'll trust the coaching staff along witty scouts and FO to make those decisions. .
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
02-10-2011, 03:52 PM
Not sure Where I said take an inferior player.

I suspect unless the take someone that is killed in a car wreck in today's NFL there are fewer busts than in the past on good to better programs.


Now mikey and Ted were having to make a pick on D this year I would have concerns.

But our scouts now seem to have an eye we have a real DL coach unlike before and a real HC that knows defense cam make a difference.

I has been proven here in den that having great CBs means crap if they have to cover their man for 5+ seconds.

I'll take a real DL type anyway over DBs as they can male every e behind them better wist run stoping and pass rush.


The packers Did not need to blitz because for the most part they got heat with their DL.
And one OLB.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

The Packers were known throughout the season to blitz more than most teams, and ironically enough, they would blitz with their corners more than anyone else.

dogfish
02-10-2011, 04:06 PM
green bay probably has the best group of corners in the league-- top three at the very worst. . .

however, if you're looking at them as a model, it is worth pointing out that they haven't invested a lot of resources on the secondary since they hired DC dom capers. . . charles woodson was already there, and sam shields and tramon williams are both undrafted free agents. . .

since capers has been there they've spent a top-ten pick on a nosetackle, traded back into the first round for a pass-rushing DE/OLB hybrid, and drafted a defensive tackle in the second round. . . the only high pick spent on the secondary during that period is a third spent on a safety. . .

give their coaching staff a ton of credit for developing williams and shields, but it's pretty obvious where capers and ted thompson decided to start building that defense, and it's not from the back forward. . .

Ravage!!!
02-10-2011, 04:25 PM
We can't just look at the Super Bowl as examples.

Everyone tries to point out that "Defenses win Super Bowls." Not last year they didn't. Indy nor NO was a defensive power. People want to say that you have to have a pass rush to win the Super Bowl. Green Bay has top corners and blitzes their corners, and gets MOST of their pass rush from the OLB.

Meanwhile, Pittsburgh has the better DL and better LBs and lost the Super Bowl.

People say it doesn't do any good to have top corners if you can't put pressure on the QB. But, I think Rodgers was hit 16 out of the first 36 passes. What did that pass rush do without good CBs?? The Pittsburgh corners were eaten alive, and were the MAIN REASON that most people picked against Pittsburgh, was because of their lack of CBs to cover the Packer WRs.

People want to say that that it doesn't do any good to have a great safety, since Polamalu was negated during the Super Bowl against the Packers. YEt, its pretty well documented that their defense isn't NEARLY as good without Polamalu in the lineup and, again,Pittsburghs pass rush didn't win them the game despite putting unbelievable pressure on the QB all game long.

I don't think anyone is saying that we don't need to improve the DL or the pass rush. I think some are saying that in order to maximize the the value of the #2 pick, that getting the DL isn't the best option.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-10-2011, 04:28 PM
Just curious why you seem to think that a CB has less bust factor.

For that matter if the have less groin pulls or hamstring issues.

If a cb blows a knee he is done. I guess that any pick has a good enough chance of a car crash or their wife becoming a punching bag.

In case you have not heard it before the draft is a crap shoot. With some coaches less so than others but still a chance you take.

I think I'll trust the coaching staff along witty scouts and FO to make those decisions. .
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


I feel that Secondary players have a less bust factor because I did a little research about a month ago that had the top half of the first round and then compared every single D-lineman to every single secondary player.

What I found was that in the past 15 years D-lineman taken in the top half of the first round have a 34% chance of making the probowl and becoming a high quality player. For the secondary, it was a 71% of making the probowl and being a high quality player.

dogfish
02-10-2011, 04:37 PM
Meanwhile, Pittsburgh has the better DL and better LBs and lost the Super Bowl.




huh? green bay's line is vicious-- they're far more athletic and disruptive than pitt's DL, and just as stout. . . hell, their nosetackle returned an interception for a TD to pretty much seal their NFC championship game win. . . not saying pitt's line isn't very good in their own right, but they're not better than green bay's-- maybe better at stopping the run, but definitely not a better unit overall. . .

Ravage!!!
02-10-2011, 05:13 PM
huh? green bay's line is vicious-- they're far more athletic and disruptive than pitt's DL, and just as stout. . . hell, their nosetackle returned an interception for a TD to pretty much seal their NFC championship game win. . . not saying pitt's line isn't very good in their own right, but they're not better than green bay's-- maybe better at stopping the run, but definitely not a better unit overall. . .

If you say so. I saw Roth have TONS of time during that Super Bowl..he was CAMPING back there.. and had three starting OL out. One right before the game (starting Center) and another out during the early part of the game. So if they are that great, they sure didn't show it most of the time against a make-shift OL.

But either way. I'm not quite sure that changes anything about the points made. Rodgers was getting tons of pressure, took hits on nearly 1/2 of ever pass attempt, and still had an amazing game going against the Pittsburghs weak CBs.

THe point being, you need both. You need to have a solid combination of DL and DBs. I also think that a stud offense that can score helps out your DL a TREMENDOUS amount by forcing opposing teams to be one dimensional. But then, if you are going to go by the one game being the Super Bowl, being one dimensional is no problem.

I just don't think that using the #2 pick in this years draft is an absolute MUST considering the talent available. No doubt we need that position to improve, but I'm not sold that it HAS to be done with the #2 pick.

Juriga72
02-10-2011, 05:34 PM
huh? green bay's line is vicious-- they're far more athletic and disruptive than pitt's DL, and just as stout. . . hell, their nosetackle returned an interception for a TD to pretty much seal their NFC championship game win. . . not saying pitt's line isn't very good in their own right, but they're not better than green bay's-- maybe better at stopping the run, but definitely not a better unit overall. . .

They also had 2 out of 3 starters on IR this year.......

Northman
02-10-2011, 05:41 PM
All i know is on Roth's first INT the dLine guy was right in his grill and whacked his arm forcing the bad throw. From there it was easy picken's for the secondary.

gobroncsnv
02-10-2011, 10:15 PM
Let's just go over a basic principle, one more time... we have tried getting by with lesser mortals on dline for quite some time now. Many of those years everybody bragged about how great Denver's secondary was... Oh, well, I guess we could keep trying the bad dline way. (cue the definition of insanity, just one more time...) Don't know why we go around about this anyway, it's the FO that needs to figure this out. I guess I surrender.

gobroncsnv
02-11-2011, 12:05 AM
Well, I'm not thinking that DT is of very much lesser important than end at all. If you get good pressure off the edges, and the QB just has to take a step forward to get away from it, and thereby improve the OT's blocking angle, that means no sack. If you get strong pressure up the middle as well, you give him far fewer places regarding where to turn. I also think strong DT's are the most important linemen to prevent a running game from rolling you. But again, the FO is the only thought on this that matters. (man, I just KNOW John would agree with me...)

lgenf
02-11-2011, 10:01 AM
Even with the news that broke yesterday (D Thomas is made of china, not glass, at least you use your glass, your china just sits in the cabinet to be looked at) which is what we have in him

I still think we are sticking with either of the big D Linemen left after CAR picks.

what is that dude out of UNC named? the kid that was kicked off the team this year but was all american as a Jr.

Ravage!!!
02-11-2011, 12:02 PM
All i know is on Roth's first INT the dLine guy was right in his grill and whacked his arm forcing the bad throw. From there it was easy picken's for the secondary.


Let's just go over a basic principle, one more time... we have tried getting by with lesser mortals on dline for quite some time now. Many of those years everybody bragged about how great Denver's secondary was... Oh, well, I guess we could keep trying the bad dline way. (cue the definition of insanity, just one more time...) Don't know why we go around about this anyway, it's the FO that needs to figure this out. I guess I surrender.

Well again. I'm not disagreeing that the DL absolutely needs improvement and needs to pressure the QB. I'm not saying that DBs are the "most important position" on defense. Because I believe the DL is the most important part of a defense (that and stud LBs).

My point is that although we absolutely, 100%, need to improve our DL... I don't necessarily believe that means we MUST take a DL with the #2 overall pick (although at the very same time, I'm not going to be mad/angry or upset if we do use that pick on a DL).

If it was a lower pick, maybe I can see where its an absolute must. But at #2 I think you have to take the absolute best player on the board since we need players at nearly EVERY position on the field.

Its not like we don't have other picks in the draft, and this is a year that has been talked about as being one of the very deepest when it comes to DL talent. So even if we take a safety (or whatever) at #2, doesn't mean we can't still improve our DL, and do it without "neglecting" that position.

Montana Battlin Bear
02-11-2011, 01:28 PM
Well again. I'm not disagreeing that the DL absolutely needs improvement and needs to pressure the QB. I'm not saying that DBs are the "most important position" on defense. Because I believe the DL is the most important part of a defense (that and stud LBs).

My point is that although we absolutely, 100%, need to improve our DL... I don't necessarily believe that means we MUST take a DL with the #2 overall pick (although at the very same time, I'm not going to be mad/angry or upset if we do use that pick on a DL).

If it was a lower pick, maybe I can see where its an absolute must. But at #2 I think you have to take the absolute best player on the board since we need players at nearly EVERY position on the field.

Its not like we don't have other picks in the draft, and this is a year that has been talked about as being one of the very deepest when it comes to DL talent. So even if we take a safety (or whatever) at #2, doesn't mean we can't still improve our DL, and do it without "neglecting" that position.

Perfect.

This is not a 1 selection Draft. If the FO feels that Peterson will help them more than Bowers or Fairley than they won't hesitate to pull the trigger

underrated29
02-11-2011, 01:36 PM
well we can be that with one of our 2nd rounders or our third we will be taking an OT- Specifically ORT- to replace Ryan Harris.




(which IMO is stupid to let him go- he is really good, was built for the ZBS, but he does miss some game time due to injury.) Still he imo is better than anyone we will get in FA and Id rather draft to improve the team, then just tread water by replacing a guy we already had.

GEM
02-11-2011, 01:49 PM
well we can be that with one of our 2nd rounders or our third we will be taking an OT- Specifically ORT- to replace Ryan Harris.




(which IMO is stupid to let him go- he is really good, was built for the ZBS, but he does miss some game time due to injury.) Still he imo is better than anyone we will get in FA and Id rather draft to improve the team, then just tread water by replacing a guy we already had.

I am hoping that they come to their senses on Harris. He was a bad fit for the power system that Josh ran. He was excellent in the ZBS and we were thought to have one of the top bookends in the league at that time. I hope that since we are moving away from the power system they give him another look. Let's not replace decent talent. Stick to the essentials, and the essential right now is not right tackle.

Ravage!!!
02-11-2011, 01:56 PM
I am hoping that they come to their senses on Harris. He was a bad fit for the power system that Josh ran. He was excellent in the ZBS and we were thought to have one of the top bookends in the league at that time. I hope that since we are moving away from the power system they give him another look. Let's not replace decent talent. Stick to the essentials, and the essential right now is not right tackle.

I agree to a degree. The only thing about Harris is his injury bug. He has a bad back, and has had since his rookie year. Its hard to rely on him making it through the entire season.

Like you said, he's better for the ZBS and was fantastic in '08. But if he can't stay on the field, then its no good to us. I think it would be wise to invest in a stud RT since TT is left handed, and still have Harris around for competition and depth. Can never have too much depth at OL.

dogfish
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
yea, i'm sorry, but IMO letting harris walk is the right choice if he won't flat-out play for cheap. . . i don't want to pay huge money to a guy that only plays half the time, and dudes that big with bad backs tend to have chronic problems. . . i'm not a fan of relying on a guy that's always hurt on the unit that needs chemistry the most-- kinda setting yourself up for failure. . .

if they ever had money slated for harris, i'd about a million times rather go spend it on cullen jenkins or paul soliai, and draft a right tackle. . .

TXBRONC
02-11-2011, 04:10 PM
I am hoping that they come to their senses on Harris. He was a bad fit for the power system that Josh ran. He was excellent in the ZBS and we were thought to have one of the top bookends in the league at that time. I hope that since we are moving away from the power system they give him another look. Let's not replace decent talent. Stick to the essentials, and the essential right now is not right tackle.

Agreed and not only would we be losing a talented offensive lineman it would also means the continuity is disrupted yet again.

arapaho2
02-11-2011, 04:39 PM
Let's just go over a basic principle, one more time... we have tried getting by with lesser mortals on dline for quite some time now. Many of those years everybody bragged about how great Denver's secondary was... Oh, well, I guess we could keep trying the bad dline way. (cue the definition of insanity, just one more time...) Don't know why we go around about this anyway, it's the FO that needs to figure this out. I guess I surrender.


this is good stuff

we have tried the ...lets build a great secondary and we'll be fine, for a long while...thats why we traded a great rb for champ..because the colts would rip our secondary up...guess what they still ripped us apart

you can improve a average defense with peterson....but we have the worst defense in the league and i cant see how a safety will fix that, sure a safety is a crucial need and a ball hawk in the likes of troy is a blessing....but it doesnt fix the worst defense.... building a dline that can stuff the run while putting pressure on a qb is the first step

however if we take peterson at #2 and grab a legit guy like Corey Liuget if he is still on the board at 34 im ok with that

Northman
02-11-2011, 04:42 PM
Well again. I'm not disagreeing that the DL absolutely needs improvement and needs to pressure the QB. I'm not saying that DBs are the "most important position" on defense. Because I believe the DL is the most important part of a defense (that and stud LBs).

My point is that although we absolutely, 100%, need to improve our DL... I don't necessarily believe that means we MUST take a DL with the #2 overall pick (although at the very same time, I'm not going to be mad/angry or upset if we do use that pick on a DL).

If it was a lower pick, maybe I can see where its an absolute must. But at #2 I think you have to take the absolute best player on the board since we need players at nearly EVERY position on the field.

Its not like we don't have other picks in the draft, and this is a year that has been talked about as being one of the very deepest when it comes to DL talent. So even if we take a safety (or whatever) at #2, doesn't mean we can't still improve our DL, and do it without "neglecting" that position.

But dude, Peterson isnt the best player on the board. I cant stress that enough. :D

TXBRONC
02-11-2011, 04:55 PM
But dude, Peterson isnt the best player on the board. I cant stress that enough. :D

My feelings wont be hurt if we pass on Peterson.

dogfish
02-11-2011, 05:02 PM
My feelings wont be hurt if we pass on Peterson.

mine will be crushed if we don't pass on him. . .


:yardog:

TXBRONC
02-11-2011, 05:05 PM
mine will be crushed if we don't pass on him. . .


:yardog:

I'm here for ya man if that happens. :salute:

Northman
02-11-2011, 05:07 PM
My feelings wont be hurt if we pass on Peterson.

I do find it funny though. Some are trying to tell me that Peterson is the BPA yet the word is Carolina might take Fairley. So if Peterson was that coveted why the hell isnt Carolina drooling over that kid like some on here? :lol:

TXBRONC
02-11-2011, 05:16 PM
I do find it funny though. Some are trying to tell me that Peterson is the BPA yet the word is Carolina might take Fairley. So if Peterson was that coveted why the hell isnt Carolina drooling over that kid like some on here? :lol:

I would be comfortable with taking Bowers or Dareus.

Northman
02-11-2011, 05:25 PM
I would be comfortable with taking Bowers or Dareus.

So would i. Sure, i would love Fairley the most but i would take either of those guys over Peterson in a heartbeat.

TXBRONC
02-11-2011, 05:30 PM
So would i. Sure, i would love Fairley the most but i would take either of those guys over Peterson in a heartbeat.

And we'll have shot at both assuming the Panthers take Fairley with the first pick.

gobroncsnv
02-11-2011, 05:40 PM
Well again. I'm not disagreeing that the DL absolutely needs improvement and needs to pressure the QB. I'm not saying that DBs are the "most important position" on defense. Because I believe the DL is the most important part of a defense (that and stud LBs).

My point is that although we absolutely, 100%, need to improve our DL... I don't necessarily believe that means we MUST take a DL with the #2 overall pick (although at the very same time, I'm not going to be mad/angry or upset if we do use that pick on a DL).

If it was a lower pick, maybe I can see where its an absolute must. But at #2 I think you have to take the absolute best player on the board since we need players at nearly EVERY position on the field.

Its not like we don't have other picks in the draft, and this is a year that has been talked about as being one of the very deepest when it comes to DL talent. So even if we take a safety (or whatever) at #2, doesn't mean we can't still improve our DL, and do it without "neglecting" that position.

Well, another place I think we would agree is that having a great dline will have a better chance of making a "serviceable" corner better than having a great set of DB's will improve a pass rush... I mean, that's what we've seen for a while now.
I don't know, maybe we do trade down (perish the thought), but if that is a way to spend our best effort on getting as good a dline as there is in the NFL, i'd be ok with it. I know we can't just add one stud and be as good as I want to be there. We need to improve there 300%... All else is, um, secondary. (sorry)
Adding 2 someones like the Alabama, Auburn dudes, or Bowers (f this draft is as deep there as is being portrayed) would improve Elvis' game by quite a bit. Having only 1 real threat on the dline just doesn't work. Get enough quality up front to let it multiply...
We did do a multiple run on dlinemen in the draft several times over the last few years. It's just that everybody has seen also-rans don't cut it.
But like I said, the only ones who really need to be convinced on this is the FO. good weekend to all.

bcbronc
02-11-2011, 05:47 PM
Yup, McBath and Bruton are a Superbowl calibre safety duo if I've ever seen one.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
02-11-2011, 09:24 PM
Yup, McBath and Bruton are a Superbowl calibre safety duo if I've ever seen one.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

mcglass would probably be fine if he could ever get on the field. . .

i really do think safety is our top need behind DL (and ORT if we do let harris walk). . . luckily, safety is one of the easier plug-and-play positions-- either you have instincts or you don't-- and you don't have to spend top-ten picks to find talent there. . .

of course, we could just be smart, keep champ around and slide him over there in a couple years. . . probably won't happen, though, i'm afraid. . .

Ravage!!!
02-12-2011, 11:57 AM
But dude, Peterson isnt the best player on the board. I cant stress that enough. :D


I do find it funny though. Some are trying to tell me that Peterson is the BPA yet the word is Carolina might take Fairley. So if Peterson was that coveted why the hell isnt Carolina drooling over that kid like some on here? :lol:

Thats your opinion and thats fine. But for years we have seen teams at #1 not necessarily take the guy that is ranked as the "Best football player." Last year the Rams didn't take Suh because they have spent so much money on the DL, that taking the chance on Bradford was wiser than spending more money on the DL. Suh was rated as a MUCH better prospect than Bradford at the time. But you can justify the money spent on a QB at #1 much easier than a DT/NT.

Interestingly enough.. Eric Berry was taken by the Chiefs at #5, another guy that was rated VERY high in the draft, but the Bucs took McCoy. I can't say that McCoy is a bad DT, but Eric Berry is looking like a BEAST at Safety for the Chiefs.


You many not think Peterson is the best player on the board and you may very well be right. But the reason the Panthers won't take Peterson is because of the position he plays. Thats always a consideration with pay that goes along with top 5 picks, not to mention #1 overall. YOu don't use it on positions that don't get that kind of pay (generally with few exceptions).

Like I said before, I'm not going to be upset if we take the 2nd DL player on the board, but I personally am not sold that they are worth the #2 pick in the draft. They seem to be the favorite around here because they are ranked high at that particular position on the field. That doesn't mean, they are worth the #2 overall pick, imo.

BECAUSE its the #2 pick, we need to pick the absolute best player on the board (with a few exceptions like QB, RB, and RT ((don't ever spend top 2 money on a RT)) ). There are still plenty of picks and plenty of depth in the draft to accommodate the DL position.

I guess I'm just not that impressed enough with the DLman that will be available, to think they are worth the #2 pick in the draft. Its obvious we need to improve the DL tremendously, but I don't think we have to just take DL at #2 to accomplish that.

Ravage!!!
02-12-2011, 12:03 PM
. . luckily, safety is one of the easier plug-and-play positions-- either you have instincts or you don't-- and you don't have to spend top-ten picks to find talent there. . .

.

But you could say that about ANY position when it comes to finding top talent that wasn't taken in the top 10.

The DL that ate up the Patriots in the Super Bowl and ruined their perfect season, was not made of top 10 DL picks. Tuck was going to be one of the guys thrown in for the trade for Al Wilson had he passed his physical with them. So we could say that we could get top talent at DL without spending top 5 pick on one.

But I completely disagree that Safety is a plug-n-play position. Its why there are so few GOOD safeties in the NFL.

atwater27
02-12-2011, 12:48 PM
But you could say that about ANY position when it comes to finding top talent that wasn't taken in the top 10.

The DL that ate up the Patriots in the Super Bowl and ruined their perfect season, was not made of top 10 DL picks. Tuck was going to be one of the guys thrown in for the trade for Al Wilson had he passed his physical with them. So we could say that we could get top talent at DL without spending top 5 pick on one.

But I completely disagree that Safety is a plug-n-play position. Its why there are so few GOOD safeties in the NFL.

I feel like a true safety is a dying position in this 5 wide league. It saddens me. Teams have a ton of nickel corners and dime corners pretty much playing SS and FS spots now.

rcsodak
02-12-2011, 01:00 PM
We can't just look at the Super Bowl as examples.

Everyone tries to point out that "Defenses win Super Bowls." Not last year they didn't. Indy nor NO was a defensive power. People want to say that you have to have a pass rush to win the Super Bowl. Green Bay has top corners and blitzes their corners, and gets MOST of their pass rush from the OLB.

Meanwhile, Pittsburgh has the better DL and better LBs and lost the Super Bowl.

People say it doesn't do any good to have top corners if you can't put pressure on the QB. But, I think Rodgers was hit 16 out of the first 36 passes. What did that pass rush do without good CBs?? The Pittsburgh corners were eaten alive, and were the MAIN REASON that most people picked against Pittsburgh, was because of their lack of CBs to cover the Packer WRs.

People want to say that that it doesn't do any good to have a great safety, since Polamalu was negated during the Super Bowl against the Packers. YEt, its pretty well documented that their defense isn't NEARLY as good without Polamalu in the lineup and, again,Pittsburghs pass rush didn't win them the game despite putting unbelievable pressure on the QB all game long.

I don't think anyone is saying that we don't need to improve the DL or the pass rush. I think some are saying that in order to maximize the the value of the #2 pick, that getting the DL isn't the best option.
And some people claim Pitts D suffered the moment they lost their best Dlineman.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

gobroncsnv
02-12-2011, 05:49 PM
As I recall, it was the Saints' D that sealed the victory for them.

Northman
02-12-2011, 06:06 PM
Thats your opinion and thats fine. But for years we have seen teams at #1 not necessarily take the guy that is ranked as the "Best football player." Last year the Rams didn't take Suh because they have spent so much money on the DL, that taking the chance on Bradford was wiser than spending more money on the DL.

Cant disagree more mate. The Rams defense wasnt the main problem for the team when they drafted Bradford. Ironically enough, they took a guy of "need" rather than another guy on the Dline. You cant tell me that taking Peterson at #2 is any worse than taking him #1. Thats just nonsense my friend.


Interestingly enough.. Eric Berry was taken by the Chiefs at #5, another guy that was rated VERY high in the draft, but the Bucs took McCoy. I can't say that McCoy is a bad DT, but Eric Berry is looking like a BEAST at Safety for the Chiefs.Berry is looking very good, yet as you say interestingly enough Berry shows up YEARS after the chiefs begin to build their defensive line. The Chiefs built from front to back and its paying off. Imagine that?


You many not think Peterson is the best player on the board and you may very well be right. But the reason the Panthers won't take Peterson is because of the position he plays. Thats always a consideration with pay that goes along with top 5 picks, not to mention #1 overall. YOu don't use it on positions that don't get that kind of pay (generally with few exceptions).For me, i dont care if Peterson is good or not. Ive stated this many times that teams who have the luxury of taking the BPA usually do so. Those teams are usually the ones who are in the playoffs every year and can afford drafting BPA. Teams that DONT have that luxury will draft based upon need which is why you dont see playoff teams at the top of the draft.


Like I said before, I'm not going to be upset if we take the 2nd DL player on the board, but I personally am not sold that they are worth the #2 pick in the draft. They seem to be the favorite around here because they are ranked high at that particular position on the field. That doesn't mean, they are worth the #2 overall pick, imo.Absolutely disagree. A DLineman is worth far more than a DB that high in the draft.


BECAUSE its the #2 pick, we need to pick the absolute best player on the board (with a few exceptions like QB, RB, and RT ((don't ever spend top 2 money on a RT)) ). There are still plenty of picks and plenty of depth in the draft to accommodate the DL position.And there it is, i was waiting for that. See, thats the problem with the Denver Broncos. We have spent a DECADE going by the philosphy instead of actually drafting a bonafide difference maker. If Suh wasnt so special he would of fell to the 2nd round or more. There is a reason why guys like Fairley, Dareus, and Bowers are rated as high as they are. Because they are worth more than the average DL's in the rest of the draft. Sure, you can find a gem occasionally later in the draft but again, when you need difference makers you have to make a play for them when your in position to do so.


I guess I'm just not that impressed enough with the DLman that will be available, to think they are worth the #2 pick in the draft. Its obvious we need to improve the DL tremendously, but I don't think we have to just take DL at #2 to accomplish that.And maybe thats where we just disagree. You think they are not worth it and i do. Ive watched Fairley all season long and the guy is a beast. The fact that the only team in front of us is rumored to feel the same belief must say something. Again, if Peterson is the BPA than Carolina would snatch him up. But we both know that just isnt the case. Right now the top 3 positions the Panthers would be looking at are DL, QB, and WR. And ironically, all 3 are positions of need for them. I will say this, if Denver drafts Peterson we will regret it for quite a long time and we will fail again next year. We have to stop ignoring the real problem and get a playmaker at the DLine.

bcbronc
02-12-2011, 10:37 PM
[QUOTE]
Berry is looking very good, yet as you say interestingly enough Berry shows up YEARS after the chiefs begin to build their defensive line. The Chiefs built from front to back and its paying off. Imagine that?

I know "front to back" tends to be the consensus on how to build a defense, but I'm a bit different. I believe you go inside-out in priority. DT-ILB-S.

If you can't keep teams from running up the gut, you can't win. Edge rushers can't get to the QB if he's able to step up. a great S will cover a lot of CB mistakes. ILB/MLB is the QB of the defense and can't be a weak link. in a 34 you obviously need good to great OLBs, but even the best OLB is pretty ineffective if the gut of the D is soft.

what order you get the playmakers in doesn't matter to me. But championship caliber defenses aren't only strong in one area; they're strong inside-out and at all three levels.



For me, i dont care if Peterson is good or not. Ive stated this many times that teams who have the luxury of taking the BPA usually do so. Those teams are usually the ones who are in the playoffs every year and can afford drafting BPA. Teams that DONT have that luxury will draft based upon need which is why you dont see playoff teams at the top of the draft.

you're completely wrong here. the ONLY teams that have the luxury of picking by need is a team like San Diego who only have/had one glaring need.

but need/BPA aren't exclusive categories...they're more two ends of a continuum. need should factor into how you rate BPA.

and when you are picking at #2, you need talent upgrades at more than just one position. when you are picking near the top of the draft, you absolutely have to take BPA at any position of need. And for us, S/CB are definitely that.


Absolutely disagree. A DLineman is worth far more than a DB that high in the draft.

imo this line of thinking is starting to become obsolete...that only "certain positions" are worth taking at certain spots. it used to be you never saw interior linemen going in the first round, or 34 DEs going top ten, or TEs going top 10, or CBs going top 10. I just can't agree with not even looking at potential all-pros just because they're not all-pros at the "right" position.



I will say this, if Denver drafts Peterson we will regret it for quite a long time and we will fail again next year. We have to stop ignoring the real problem and get a playmaker at the DLine.

more or less regret than if we go Fairley and he busts?

We've got a playmaker on the DLine: Dumervil. We might have a second in Ayers, if the scheme switch suits his skill set better.

other than Champ, who else do we have that you'd call even a potential playmaker? Cox? Goodman? McBath?

at #2, we have to go BPA: best playmaker available.

Northman
02-13-2011, 09:52 AM
[QUOTE=Northman;1210668]


at #2, we have to go BPA: best playmaker available.

Yep. Nick Fairly, Marcel Dareus, or Bowers. I agree with you. :beer:

Nickademus
02-13-2011, 11:27 AM
Our new Defensive Coordinator was a Defensive Backs coach last year. With arguably the best Corner prospect ever coming out, you think they're gonna pass on him?

yes.

Nickademus
02-13-2011, 11:36 AM
Give me Dareus or Bowers I am not as high on Fairley as I was after watching most of his games and then watching Dareus' season and some of last years highlights I am sold that he will be the better DT in this draft. I like Peterson but corner just isnt going to be as important in Fox's D, I would rather re-sign Champ with an eye to moving him to FS. If Watt or Paea are available that is my next pick. I am not a huge fan of any of the MLB's in this draft get one in free agency then draft one next year.

ArmyOfBroncos
02-13-2011, 12:48 PM
:defense:My guess is that Dawkins and Bailey are out along with Thomas and Larsen and I think that everyone of the DT should be worried. I would like to see them use Orton to gain a key Def. player like a safety and a draft pick. My guess would be that there are enough QB hungry teams right now to get a great deal. I hope they take Patrick Peterson as the 1 round pick to help replace Bailey. If they are able to get a second first round pick I would like to see them get Mark Ingram or Julio Jones to seal the deal on the offensive side and take Marcell Dareus for a second pick to add extra beef on top of Elvis’s return. Anyways just my thought on possible top picks and trades.:defense:

PAINTERDAVE
02-13-2011, 01:33 PM
:defense:My guess is that Dawkins and Bailey are out along with Thomas and Larsen and I think that everyone of the DT should be worried. I would like to see them use Orton to gain a key Def. player like a safety and a draft pick. My guess would be that there are enough QB hungry teams right now to get a great deal. I hope they take Patrick Peterson as the 1 round pick to help replace Bailey. If they are able to get a second first round pick I would like to see them get Mark Ingram or Julio Jones to seal the deal on the offensive side and take Marcell Dareus for a second pick to add extra beef on top of Elvis’s return. Anyways just my thought on possible top picks and trades.:defense:

A lot depends on the CBA. Teams with their poop in a pile will benefit from
no OTA's, camp and pre -season. Strong teams will come back intact and ready to pick up where they left off.
Packers, Indy, Steelers... you know those teams are not sweating this CBA crap like we are.

Teams that need to rebuild, like us, we are screwed. No free agency.
No abilty to trade or franchise a guy.
No training camp for Tebow to get into game shape. This sucks.

Not so sure that Champ will be leaving ...
we may really NEED him and will just HAVE to pay him what he wants.

Worst case would be NO rebuild... no free agents to replace Champ... and then he leaves anyway.

Damn Josh McDaniels for tearing apart this team.... at the worst posible time.

Chances are pretty good we will be drafting early again in 2012....

having the #2 pick is the lone, bright shining spot of thios dismal off season.

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 02:23 PM
I guess y'all know that We do not have to have a ray Lewis as middle LB one at the second tier like Wilson was will be fine.

Not everyone can be a pro bowler.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

SmilinAssasSin27
02-13-2011, 02:27 PM
Yeah, we won 2 SBs w/ no name MLBs. But we also had the supporting cast. MLB was our worst player. NOt bad, but compared to everyone else..alfred, smith, mobley, atwater, etc.

But we don't have the cast right now and we don't have a Wilson caliber 2nd tier guy. This year's Martez Wilson looks the best in this draft to me. I also wouldn't bet against the Michigan State kid just because of his size, but he is a risk. Although I'm not a big FA guy right now, grabbing Beason after 2011 would be an exception due to the fact that we have his former coach.

bcbronc
02-13-2011, 02:50 PM
[QUOTE=bcbronc;1210742]

Yep. Nick Fairly, Marcel Dareus, or Bowers. I agree with you. :beer:

okay, but if we go that route and they either bust or top out at a DJ Williams type level, while Peterson goes on to be a perennial DPOY candidate, it's all your fault!

dogfish
02-13-2011, 03:16 PM
okay, but if we go that route and they either bust or top out at a DJ Williams type level, while Peterson goes on to be a perennial DPOY candidate, it's all your fault!

i'll share the risk with him, okay?


also, champ bailey has been a DPOY candidate once in a hall of fame career, so i won't lose sleep over the odds of any college kid doig so perennially. . . ;)

Northman
02-13-2011, 03:18 PM
[QUOTE=Northman;1210786]

okay, but if we go that route and they either bust or top out at a DJ Williams type level, while Peterson goes on to be a perennial DPOY candidate, it's all your fault!

But...if they go and be HOF players for us can i get a cookie? :D

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 03:44 PM
A lot depends on the CBA
Worst case would be NO rebuild... no free agents to replace Champ... and then he leaves anyway.
Damn Josh McDaniels for tearing apart this team.... at the worst posible time.
Chances are pretty good we will be drafting early again in 2012....having the #2 pick is the lone, bright shining spot of thios dismal off season.

If Josh did not handle the tear down then it would have been left for some on else.

This team has stunk since 05.

Smoke and mirrors have propped this team up for going on a decade.

But everyone has been so enamored with mikeys coaching they were willing to forget the palyer drain since the super bowl.

We had one decent draft since and frankly it had sonmany head cases in it they had to go.

When josh took over the team was crap. Offense between the 20s and a defense a stAte champion HS team could beat.

I have said it before you build great teams via the draft. Look at al of the super champs save perhaps NO over the past decade.
Almost all of the key players are whO they drafted.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

bcbronc
02-13-2011, 03:47 PM
[QUOTE=bcbronc;1210850]

But...if they go and be HOF players for us can i get a cookie? :D

heck, if they become multiple all-pros, you can have an entire bag of cookies. but you have to share them with dog.

spikerman
02-13-2011, 03:53 PM
When josh took over the team was crap. Offense between the 20s and a defense a stAte champion HS team could beat.

And how is the state of the team any better now that his failed tenure is over?

SmilinAssasSin27
02-13-2011, 03:58 PM
And how is the state of the team any better now that his failed tenure is over?

I'm assuming you are referring to Fox? If so, the answer is simple. While McD was allowed to "build" the team in his vision and make a push towards the future, the Panthers were clearly saving money, cutting the aging and starting over w/ a rookie QB...or 2. Carolina has never spent on Free Agency and had their run. They were pulling a Florida Marlins and starting from scratch after the big run is clearly over.

spikerman
02-13-2011, 04:02 PM
I'm assuming you are referring to Fox? If so, the answer is simple. While McD was allowed to "build" the team in his vision and make a push towards the future, the Panthers were clearly saving money, cutting the aging and starting over w/ a rookie QB...or 2. Carolina has never spent on Free Agency and had their run. They were pulling a Florida Marlins and starting from scratch after the big run is clearly over.

Actually I was referring to the McDaniels regime. Jr made a point of what dire straits the team was in when "Josh" took over, I'm just curious about how McDaniels improved the team. In my opinion the team was/is a lot worse off due to his tenure.

SmilinAssasSin27
02-13-2011, 04:12 PM
Actually I was referring to the McDaniels regime. Jr made a point of what dire straits the team was in when "Josh" took over, I'm just curious about how McDaniels improved the team. In my opinion the team was/is a lot worse off due to his tenure.

ok...then nevermind.:beer:

turftoad
02-13-2011, 04:45 PM
When josh took over the team was crap. Offense between the 20s and a defense a stAte champion HS team could beat.



I agree that building through the draft is key.

I don't agree the team was crap. We had a very, very good young corps of offensive players that were drafted by the team.
We needed a RB and thats about it. We needed tweeking in the red zone, I think a little more experience by the young playmakers and a decent RB would have helped that.

Where we needed the most help was on the defensive side of the ball. We didn't need to trade the young offensive playmakers then have to replace them through the draft when all McFired really needed to do was keep the guys he had and draft defense.

Had he done that he'd probably still be here.

JDL
02-13-2011, 04:54 PM
i'll share the risk with him, okay?


also, champ bailey has been a DPOY candidate once in a hall of fame career, so i won't lose sleep over the odds of any college kid doig so perennially. . . ;)

Well, DPOY was just a DB. Just saying. There is 1 blue chip DL prospect and 1 blue chip DB prospect in this draft, but people would seem to prefer an average DL to a pro bowl DB... just seems infinitely lacking viewpoint imo. The team needs the best players it can get and we won two super bowls with 1 Hall of Fame caliber player on D... a DB. People acting like they aren't important ... is just silly.

Northman
02-13-2011, 04:55 PM
we won two super bowls with 1 Hall of Fame caliber player on D... a DB.

Who was that?

SmilinAssasSin27
02-13-2011, 04:59 PM
@h2o

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 05:53 PM
And how is the state of the team any better now that his failed tenure is over?

Given time he would have rebuilt it, now we are starting over on defense.

Potentially we have q franchise QB, pair or trio of ERs, quality RBs , two future oline guys, atleast one ( now DE) all of which he brought in the the 18 months he was here.
Not counting dawkins, several LB and a quality NT as rentals until he could draft his own players for D.

Then theRe are the few TEAM players on the team he inherited clash who was hurt all year same for kupe, harris played hurt but then he has missed almost as many games as he has played and because of injuries for many games has not been much more than 80%.

Not many quality players that wold be long team starters on other good teams.
Probably count them on one hand.

That is what he was left with when he got here sorry sorry that most of y'all do not want to believe it but th are de facts.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
02-13-2011, 07:18 PM
Given time he would have rebuilt it, now we are starting over on defense.

Potentially we have q franchise QB, pair or trio of ERs, quality RBs , two future oline guys, atleast one ( now DE) all of which he brought in the the 18 months he was here.
Not counting dawkins, several LB and a quality NT as rentals until he could draft his own players for D.

Then theRe are the few TEAM players on the team he inherited clash who was hurt all year same for kupe, harris played hurt but then he has missed almost as many games as he has played and because of injuries for many games has not been much more than 80%.

Not many quality players that wold be long team starters on other good teams.
Probably count them on one hand.

That is what he was left with when he got here sorry sorry that most of y'all do not want to believe it but th are de facts.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

All of that sounds great, but so far none of the players he brought in has made an impact. Potential is wonderful thing, but usually in two years time there is at least one standout player. Who would that be from McDaniels' time running the franchise?

Saying "Given time he would have rebuilt it, now we are starting over on defense" is the type of thinking that won Obama the Nobel prize based on his potential. **

** Not a political rant, just used to illustrate a point.

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 07:39 PM
I agree that building through the draft is key.
I don't agree the team was crap. We had a very, very good young corps of offensive players that were drafted by the team.
We needed a RB and thats about it. We needed tweeking in the red zone, I think a little more experience by the young playmakers and a decent RB would have helped that.
Where we needed the most help was on the defensive side of the ball. We didn't need to trade the young offensive playmakers then have to replace them through the draft when all McFired really needed to do was keep the guys he had and draft defense.

Had he done that he'd probably still be here.


Good offensive team that were all UFA at the same time which means one they all at the same time and they mos likeklywould not fit under the cap with the deals that they wanted.

Beyond Those few players and clady we had nada. The D was totally screwed save doom, DJ and champ.

So if you think he was left with much more than a few HEAD case players on the team more power to you.

If you wanted to play more 500 ball for the next ten years y'all should have kept Mickey ao he could give you that we are a couple of players away speech after at best a 9-7 season.

We all know deep down that Josh kept every starter on O his first yards and many were found wanting. Only jay whined his way out of town because Pat hired the guy he did not want to play for.

Even with jay I doubt we would have done any thing better than we did. In fact I doubt we would have been better with his proclivity of turning the ball over.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
02-13-2011, 07:47 PM
Good offensive team that were all UFA at the same time which means one they all at the same time and they mos likeklywould not fit under the cap with the deals that they wanted.

Beyond Those few players and clady we had nada. The D was totally screwed save doom, DJ and champ.

So if you think he was left with much more than a few HEAD case players on the team more power to you.

If you wanted to play more 500 ball for the next ten years y'all should have kept Mickey ao he could give you that we are a couple of players away speech after at best a 9-7 season.

We all know deep down that Josh kept every starter on O his first yards and many were found wanting. Only jay whined his way out of town because Pat hired the guy he did not want to play for.

Even with jay I doubt we would have done any thing better than we did. In fact I doubt we would have been better with his proclivity of turning the ball over.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Josh McDaniels was left with more to work with than was John Fox.

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 07:55 PM
All of that sounds great, but so far none of the players he brought in has made an impact. Potential is wonderful thing, but usually in two years time there is at least one standout player. Who would that be from McDaniels' time running the franchise?

Saying "Given time he would have rebuilt it, now we are starting over on defense" is the type of thinking that won Obama the Nobel prize based on his potential. **

** Not a political rant, just used to illustrate a point.

Your entitled to your thoughts, as am I.

I choose to believe having as many injuries to lots of different players some on ir and some trying to getback to play during the season
I for one saw a stud RB in Moreno once everyone was heals up. The is little doubt in my mind that ayers and DT will be studs and while he did not draft him we had an all pro wr last year.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
02-13-2011, 10:14 PM
Josh McDaniels was left with more to work with than was John Fox.

Name them. I do not think your correct.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

bcbronc
02-14-2011, 12:54 AM
Name them. I do not think your correct.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I dunno jr, he's bang on if he's meaning more headaches, locker room cancers and quitters.

two years ago, we were in bad shape as an organization and going nowhere fast (unless you consider 8-8 and almost making the playoffs somewhere worth going).

now we've purged the trash, increased the character, and created a team-first locker room. (ya but but but orton hasn't taken Tebow under his wing and coddled him...okay, but how many tarts has he smacked around or impregnated?)

yup, had to break a few eggs to do it, but onwards and upwards, as they say.

atwater27
02-14-2011, 06:55 AM
That is what he was left with when he got here sorry sorry that most of y'all do not want to believe it but th are de facts.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Hmmmmm.... I wonder, JR, why it was that Mr. Bowlen chose not to believe your 'facts'.

spikerman
02-14-2011, 07:25 AM
I dunno jr, he's bang on if he's meaning more headaches, locker room cancers and quitters.

two years ago, we were in bad shape as an organization and going nowhere fast (unless you consider 8-8 and almost making the playoffs somewhere worth going).

now we've purged the trash, increased the character, and created a team-first locker room. (ya but but but orton hasn't taken Tebow under his wing and coddled him...okay, but how many tarts has he smacked around or impregnated?)

yup, had to break a few eggs to do it, but onwards and upwards, as they say.

Yep, he's done all of that and he got a 4 win season out of it. I guess if you're so convinced that the team was so bad when McD took over you have to admit that Shanahan is the vastly superior coach.

spikerman
02-14-2011, 07:27 AM
Name them. I do not think your correct.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

They've been discussed here on the boards at length. Whether you think they're head cases or not, they were talented and as McD found out, you have to have talent to win in the NFL.

gobroncsnv
02-14-2011, 08:04 AM
Randy Moss has talent and no rings, Jay has talent pretty much on par to match his fragile ego. Did the Fish improve with their aquisition of BMarsh? He's talented... Pretty "talented" trio right there, not a ring among them. I personally hope Moss never gets one, same for TO, and since Marshall proved to be both Baby and TO, same for him,

TXBRONC
02-14-2011, 08:09 AM
I dunno jr, he's bang on if he's meaning more headaches, locker room cancers and quitters.

two years ago, we were in bad shape as an organization and going nowhere fast (unless you consider 8-8 and almost making the playoffs somewhere worth going).

now we've purged the trash, increased the character, and created a team-first locker room. (ya but but but orton hasn't taken Tebow under his wing and coddled him...okay, but how many tarts has he smacked around or impregnated?)

yup, had to break a few eggs to do it, but onwards and upwards, as they say.

McDaniels left us in such great shape that under him we had four losing streaks of four or more games, we haven't won back to back games in over year we're in better shape? I guess that's why Bowlen fired him aside from lack of integrity.

There is difference between breaking a few eggs and crushing the entire carton and if we're on the way up why do we keep hearing we have one the least talented teams in the League.

Are you really sure you want to go that route about players smacking around women because it's not like we don't player on the team right now that been charged with sexual assault right?

bcbronc
02-14-2011, 09:12 PM
Yep, he's done all of that and he got a 4 win season out of it. I guess if you're so convinced that the team was so bad when McD took over you have to admit that Shanahan is the vastly superior coach.

wow, lots of fail in this post.

Shanny is a B2B Superbowl coach and a first ballot HOFer. McDaniels is a one-time failed HC whose done some creative stuff as an OC. who DOESN'T think Shanny is the vastly superior coach?

I don't really get your point anyways, though. are you saying Shanahan shouldn't have been let go? If so, I disagree. the regime had gone stale.

or are you saying because Shanny's last season was 8-8 and McDaniel's first season was 8-8, that somehow = Shanny is better? if so, that's a pretty silly argument, imo.




McDaniels left us in such great shape that under him we had four losing streaks of four or more games, we haven't won back to back games in over year we're in better shape? I guess that's why Bowlen fired him aside from lack of integrity.

There is difference between breaking a few eggs and crushing the entire carton and if we're on the way up why do we keep hearing we have one the least talented teams in the League.


sorry, TX, we'll just have to disagree. I don't see us as far away as you do. imo we're a couple playmakers on D away from being competitive.

get Doom back, keep the OL healthy through the offseason and TC, add a playmaker to the DL and a playmaker to replace Dawkins, and we're competing for the division.

you see a team with no talent, no upside, no potential. I see a team that just needs a couple more pieces and some seasoning.

spikerman
02-14-2011, 09:26 PM
Shanny is a B2B Superbowl coach and a first ballot HOFer. McDaniels is a one-time failed HC whose done some creative stuff as an OC. who DOESN'T think Shanny is the vastly superior coach? Oh, my mistake. Your posts led me to think that you believe McDaniels knew what he was doing.


I don't really get your point anyways, though. are you saying Shanahan shouldn't have been let go? If so, I disagree. the regime had gone stale. It is very possible that he had grown stale, but I'd take his "stale" teams over the travesty of McDaniels' teams any day.


or are you saying because Shanny's last season was 8-8 and McDaniel's first season was 8-8, that somehow = Shanny is better? if so, that's a pretty silly argument, imo. No, what I was saying is that according to you that this team was terrible when McD inherited it. That was the same team that Shanahan took to 8-8. Once McDaniels had a couple of years to tinker with it he gave Broncos fans a 4 win season. I don't think it's a silly argument at all. If Shanahan's team was worse than McDaniels and he still posted a better record, Shanahan is obviously the better coach - which you admitted to earlier in your post.

bcbronc
02-14-2011, 09:43 PM
[QUOTE=spikerman;1211418]Oh, my mistake. Your posts led me to think that you believe McDaniels knew what he was doing.

so Shanny is the floor for coaching now? If you're not as good a coach as Shanahan, you just don't know what you're doing?

lol, okay, we'll just have to agree to disagree. imo there are a lot of really good coaches that aren't near the coach Shanny is.


It is very possible that he had grown stale, but I'd take his "stale" teams over the travesty of McDaniels' teams any day.

yup, bring back teh 8-8.



No, what I was saying is that according to you that this team was terrible when McD inherited it. That was the same team that Shanahan took to 8-8. Once McDaniels had a couple of years to tinker with it he gave Broncos fans a 4 win season. I don't think it's a silly argument at all. If Shanahan's team was worse than McDaniels and he still posted a better record, Shanahan is obviously the better coach - which you admitted to earlier in your post.

really? I had no idea the concept of a rebuild was such a hard one to grasp.

spikerman
02-14-2011, 09:49 PM
so Shanny is the floor for coaching now? If you're not as good a coach as Shanahan, you just don't know what you're doing?

lol, okay, we'll just have to agree to disagree. imo there are a lot of really good coaches that aren't near the coach Shanny is. Quite the contrary. I believe that Shanahan is a HoF coach. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I believed any differently. My point was only that if the team Shanahan left McDaniels was so bad it should have been easy for McDaniels to improve upon it. He couldn't. I agree though that we'll have to agree to disagree.



yup, bring back teh 8-8. I'll take it over 4-12.





really? I had no idea the concept of a rebuild was such a hard one to grasp. Except that the Broncos and McDaniels himself said they were not rebuilding. Besides, there is no evidence that the team was getting better over this period.

atwater27
02-14-2011, 09:53 PM
[QUOTE]

really? I had no idea the concept of a rebuild was such a hard one to grasp.

Dude. We would all be high fiving about how awesome the Broncos are right now if wonderboy didn't piss off/dump or otherwise **** up a perfectly good offense and focus on the defense like every football fan over the age of 5 knew he was hired to do.

bcbronc
02-15-2011, 04:55 AM
[QUOTE=spikerman;1211424]Quite the contrary. I believe that Shanahan is a HoF coach. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I believed any differently. My point was only that if the team Shanahan left McDaniels was so bad it should have been easy for McDaniels to improve upon it. He couldn't. I agree though that we'll have to agree to disagree.

why should it be easy to rebuild a team overnight? Especially one like this squad that was so desperately in need of a complete cultural overhaul.


I'll take it over 4-12.

lol. give me one year at 4-12 over a decade of 8-8 anytime.




Except that the Broncos and McDaniels himself said they were not rebuilding. Besides, there is no evidence that the team was getting better over this period.

lol, you're too much. McDaniels said we weren't rebuilding. imagine that. well, I guess we weren't then.

I disagree that there's no evidence we weren't getting better though.

Go look at Moreno's rushing yards when he and his OL were healthy late in the season. Go look at Tebow's redzone proficiency. Go look at how we had one of the top passing games in the league through much of the season, without any running game and with a mish-mash oline, a pretty average QB and a slew of journeymen WRs.

as a team, we're on the upswing.




Dude. We would all be high fiving about how awesome the Broncos are right now if wonderboy didn't piss off/dump or otherwise **** up a perfectly good offense and focus on the defense like every football fan over the age of 5 knew he was hired to do.

I disagree. an offense led by Cutler and Marshall were never going to get us anywhere. and if you believe Bowlen hired a 32 year old OC to rebuild the defense, well, I don't know what to tell you. you don't actually think that, do you?? :laugh:

Northman
02-15-2011, 05:08 AM
[QUOTE]

why should it be easy to rebuild a team overnight? Especially one like this squad that was so desperately in need of a complete cultural overhaul.

Thats your problem, it didnt need to be completely overhauled and McDummy rebuilt the wrong part of the team. Your insane.




lol. give me one year at 4-12 over a decade of 8-8 anytime.

Shanny had one 6-10 year while here, even he wasnt as bad as McD in just a short 2 year span.




Go look at Moreno's rushing yards when he and his OL were healthy late in the season. Go look at Tebow's redzone proficiency. Go look at how we had one of the top passing games in the league through much of the season, without any running game and with a mish-mash oline, a pretty average QB and a slew of journeymen WRs.

as a team, we're on the upswing.

This is hilarious, yea Moreno had a couple of great games rushing and then our passing game fell to pieces. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:




I disagree. an offense led by Cutler and Marshall were never going to get us anywhere.

I guess Chicago doesnt agree with your theory as they were hosting the NFC Championship game this year. And yes, i would take that over a 4-12 season anyday.

atwater27
02-15-2011, 09:29 AM
[QUOTE]
I disagree. an offense led by Cutler and Marshall were never going to get us anywhere. and if you believe Bowlen hired a 32 year old OC to rebuild the defense, well, I don't know what to tell you. you don't actually think that, do you?? :laugh:

Cutler, Marshall, Hillis, Torain. You are absolutely kidding yourself if you truly think we are better off without them..

Adn WTH are you talking about with why Bowlen hired a 32 year old OC to build the defense? He fired Shanny because he couldn't do defense right. Bowlen knew the offense was just fine, and he hired MCD to keep the current O firing on all cylinders and trusted him to fix the D and hire the right D Coord, (which he actually DID before pissing him off so much he bolted).

Proof of my opinion? Bowlen FIRED his ass for shipping out the franchise and absolutely FAILING in the draft. Oh yeah, and NOT improving the defense.
You don't actually think he was fired for any other reason, do you?:lol:

TXBRONC
02-15-2011, 11:18 AM
I guess Chicago doesnt agree with your theory as they were hosting the NFC Championship game this year. And yes, i would take that over a 4-12 season anyday.

But, Cutler lost to the 6th seeded team in the NFC playoffs. You know the same team that beat the Steelers to win the Super Bowl. :lol:

TXBRONC
02-15-2011, 12:02 PM
why should it be easy to rebuild a team overnight? Especially one like this squad that was so desperately in need of a complete cultural overhaul.



lol. give me one year at 4-12 over a decade of 8-8 anytime.





lol, you're too much. McDaniels said we weren't rebuilding. imagine that. well, I guess we weren't then.

I disagree that there's no evidence we weren't getting better though.

Go look at Moreno's rushing yards when he and his OL were healthy late in the season. Go look at Tebow's redzone proficiency. Go look at how we had one of the top passing games in the league through much of the season, without any running game and with a mish-mash oline, a pretty average QB and a slew of journeymen WRs.

as a team, we're on the upswing.



I disagree. an offense led by Cutler and Marshall were never going to get us anywhere. and if you believe Bowlen hired a 32 year old OC to rebuild the defense, well, I don't know what to tell you. you don't actually think that, do you?? :laugh:

You really think that Bowlen hired McDaniels for the purpose of getting rid of Cutler, Marshall, Scheffler, and Hillis? I don't think so.
If we are a team on the upswing why did Bowlen fire McDaniels? That would be beyond stupid to fire a coach when a team is on the upswing.

Ravage!!!
02-15-2011, 12:09 PM
as a team we're on the upswing??? :shocked:

Well... I guess just like any rock falling. Eventually you'll hit bottom and HAVE to bounce back up (as long as we don't hit mud and stick).

TXBRONC
02-15-2011, 12:27 PM
as a team we're on the upswing??? :shocked:

Well... I guess just like any rock falling. Eventually you'll hit bottom and HAVE to bounce back up (as long as we don't hit mud and stick).

If we were on the upswing McDaniels would still be the head coach.

That said, the optimist in me wants to believe that Fox and Friends will be able to do so.

bcbronc
02-15-2011, 08:20 PM
[QUOTE=Northman;1211560]

Thats your problem, it didnt need to be completely overhauled and McDummy rebuilt the wrong part of the team. Your insane.

It did need to be completely overhauled, whether you're mancrush can see it or not. Cutler is a flake, Marshall is a suspension in waiting. our OL needed an overhaul, we hadn't been able to finish in the redzone for years. etc.

but yeah, I'm insane because I don't think all those issues were just magically going to resolve themselves. :rolleyes:


Shanny had one 6-10 year while here, even he wasnt as bad as McD in just a short 2 year span.


and this is relevant to what again? Did Shanny inherit a team that had been band-aided together for a decade just to keep from having a losing season? Did Shanny inherit a team that had lost it's vision and repeatedly gone to the "character issues but talented" well in hopes of something working out?

heck, did Shanny even need to come in and implement a new system, or had he actually had some influence on developing the system he inherited in the first place?

Yah, Shanny is(was) a great coach, and I have nothing but love for the guy. But the NFL is cyclical and this one happened to be at the low end of said cycle when McDaniel's took the helm.

again, it's really not that difficult a concept that the team was completely switching schemes and mindsets, and had a severe lack of talent and leadership.




This is hilarious, yea Moreno had a couple of great games rushing and then our passing game fell to pieces. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

okay. point being? Tebow was getting his first starts. let's try to keep expectations realistic, m'kay?


I guess Chicago doesnt agree with your theory as they were hosting the NFC Championship game this year. And yes, i would take that over a 4-12 season anyday.


jimminy crickets man, you make the weakest "arguments" I've come across in a while.

CHI rode Rex Grossman to the Superbowl. So you think Grossman is better than Cutler? okay, maybe. But you really think CHI expected Grossman Part Deux when they gave up two 1sts for him?

Cutler also "led" the 32nd ranked offense in the league the final half of the season, and "led" by far the worse offense to make the playoffs. Orton could have accomplished that.

to put it into comparison, Orton's last two season with CHI they went 16-16. Cutler's first two they've gone 18-14. big whup. Good thing that 32 ranked offense over the last half of the season was able to get it going so they could beat the only sub .500 playoff team in history.


[QUOTE=atwater27;1211576]

Cutler, Marshall, Hillis, Torain. You are absolutely kidding yourself if you truly think we are better off without them..

lol @ Torain. wasn't he out of the league for an entire season before Shanny picked him up off the scrap heap (in typical Shanny fashion).

But yes, I do think we're better off without Cutler and Marshall. it's okay, I'm not sold on Tebow either, but I take him over Cutler any day. Marshall, great possession receiver, but there's a reason he's had three regimes (out of three) ready to give up on him.

this ain't Madden, son. personalities do matter.


Adn WTH are you talking about with why Bowlen hired a 32 year old OC to build the defense? He fired Shanny because he couldn't do defense right. Bowlen knew the offense was just fine, and he hired MCD to keep the current O firing on all cylinders and trusted him to fix the D and hire the right D Coord, (which he actually DID before pissing him off so much he bolted).

I know right. If only there had been some quality DCs available for consideration. Because everyone knows, when you bring in an OC that has had all his success as an OC running a completely different system, that he's just going to stick with the previous regimes system.

seems completely logical, I'm going to hire you but I don't actually want you to do what you're good at, I want you to do something completely different. you really think it's just coincidence Pat signed off on moving Cutler so quickly after hiring McDaniels?

oh, so naive. :welcome:


Proof of my opinion? Bowlen FIRED his ass for shipping out the franchise and absolutely FAILING in the draft. Oh yeah, and NOT improving the defense.
You don't actually think he was fired for any other reason, do you?:lol:

fired for any "other" reason? you just gave three.

You don't actually think he would have been fired "for shipping out the franchise" if we had gone 8-8 this season, do you? shit, of course you do! too funny!

there's lots of reasons McDaniels got fired: Pat panicked, fair weather fans that would rather stay on 8-8 than actually get competitive whined really loudly, personality issues, spygate, recognizing they put too much on the plate of a 32 YO 1st time HC, etc.

but you're fooling yourself if you think it has anything to do with Cutler going bye-byes. remember, Bowlen signed off on that whole thing at the time. but hey, if it helps you sleep better, I'm okay with you continuing to tell yourself these little nursery rhymes.


[QUOTE=bcbronc;1211559]

You really think that Bowlen hired McDaniels for the purpose of getting rid of Cutler, Marshall, Scheffler, and Hillis? I don't think so.
If we are a team on the upswing why did Bowlen fire McDaniels? That would be beyond stupid to fire a coach when a team is on the upswing.

see above, TX.

I'm not sure it's stupid though, if Bowlen felt he wanted to go another way. a bit knee jerk, sure, but it could turn out.

have some faith TX. we've got a solid offensive nucleus (best we've had in years) and a coach with a good defensive track record. As long as Bowlen doesn't panic again the first time the fair-weather faithful complain about the new regime (and they always do) we should be in good shape in 1, 2 years max. :beer:


as a team we're on the upswing??? :shocked:

Well... I guess just like any rock falling. Eventually you'll hit bottom and HAVE to bounce back up (as long as we don't hit mud and stick).

you don't see it? I know you don't like Tebow and are still in love with big arm, no heart in CHI, but time to move on.

we've got 4/5 of what should be a very good OL. We've got a good, versatile RB, a QB who can (if nothing else) finish in the red zone and a deep WR core. still have a couple needs of course, but a RT, change of pace back and pass catching TE aren't the most difficult things to find.

On defence, we're getting back a double-digit sack machine, and moving Ayers and Thomas to positions they fit better. We're also likely adding a DL at #2. certainly need a few more pieces on D--have for what seems like forever though. But add a couple playmakers to a coaching staff that has a track record for putting together solid defenses, and we might actually see progress in that regard.

so yup, on the upswing. got to play a ton of youth last year, got them their lumps while getting a good draft slot. you haters can hate all you want, but I'm feeling good about the direction of this team! :salute:

dogfish
02-15-2011, 08:31 PM
okay, ya know what?

you're all reasonably smart fellas, i shouldn't have to do a tutorial on how the quote function works. . .


:huh:

atwater27
02-16-2011, 12:38 AM
[QUOTE]

there's lots of reasons McDaniels got fired: Pat panicked, fair weather fans that would rather stay on 8-8 than actually get competitive whined really loudly, :

LMMFAO. You're a real card.

Lonestar
02-16-2011, 01:45 AM
[QUOTE]

It did need to be completely overhauled, whether you're mancrush can see it or not. Cutler is a flake, Marshall is a suspension in waiting. our OL needed an overhaul, we hadn't been able to finish in the redzone for years. etc.

but yeah, I'm insane because I don't think all those issues were just magically going to resolve themselves. :rolleyes:



and this is relevant to what again? Did Shanny inherit a team that had been band-aided together for a decade just to keep from having a losing season? Did Shanny inherit a team that had lost it's vision and repeatedly gone to the "character issues but talented" well in hopes of something working out?

heck, did Shanny even need to come in and implement a new system, or had he actually had some influence on developing the system he inherited in the first place?

Yah, Shanny is(was) a great coach, and I have nothing but love for the guy. But the NFL is cyclical and this one happened to be at the low end of said cycle when McDaniel's took the helm.

again, it's really not that difficult a concept that the team was completely switching schemes and mindsets, and had a severe lack of talent and leadership.




okay. point being? Tebow was getting his first starts. let's try to keep expectations realistic, m'kay?



jimminy crickets man, you make the weakest "arguments" I've come across in a while.

CHI rode Rex Grossman to the Superbowl. So you think Grossman is better than Cutler? okay, maybe. But you really think CHI expected Grossman Part Deux when they gave up two 1sts for him?

Cutler also "led" the 32nd ranked offense in the league the final half of the season, and "led" by far the worse offense to make the playoffs. Orton could have accomplished that.

to put it into comparison, Orton's last two season with CHI they went 16-16. Cutler's first two they've gone 18-14. big whup. Good thing that 32 ranked offense over the last half of the season was able to get it going so they could beat the only sub .500 playoff team in history.

[QUOTE]

lol @ Torain. wasn't he out of the league for an entire season before Shanny picked him up off the scrap heap (in typical Shanny fashion).

But yes, I do think we're better off without Cutler and Marshall. it's okay, I'm not sold on Tebow either, but I take him over Cutler any day. Marshall, great possession receiver, but there's a reason he's had three regimes (out of three) ready to give up on him.

this ain't Madden, son. personalities do matter.



I know right. If only there had been some quality DCs available for consideration. Because everyone knows, when you bring in an OC that has had all his success as an OC running a completely different system, that he's just going to stick with the previous regimes system.

seems completely logical, I'm going to hire you but I don't actually want you to do what you're good at, I want you to do something completely different. you really think it's just coincidence Pat signed off on moving Cutler so quickly after hiring McDaniels?

oh, so naive. :welcome:



fired for any "other" reason? you just gave three.

You don't actually think he would have been fired "for shipping out the franchise" if we had gone 8-8 this season, do you? shit, of course you do! too funny!

there's lots of reasons McDaniels got fired: Pat panicked, fair weather fans that would rather stay on 8-8 than actually get competitive whined really loudly, personality issues, spygate, recognizing they put too much on the plate of a 32 YO 1st time HC, etc.

but you're fooling yourself if you think it has anything to do with Cutler going bye-byes. remember, Bowlen signed off on that whole thing at the time. but hey, if it helps you sleep better, I'm okay with you continuing to tell yourself these little nursery rhymes.

[QUOTE=TXBRONC;1211628]

see above, TX.

I'm not sure it's stupid though, if Bowlen felt he wanted to go another way. a bit knee jerk, sure, but it could turn out.

have some faith TX. we've got a solid offensive nucleus (best we've had in years) and a coach with a good defensive track record. As long as Bowlen doesn't panic again the first time the fair-weather faithful complain about the new regime (and they always do) we should be in good shape in 1, 2 years max. :beer:



you don't see it? I know you don't like Tebow and are still in love with big arm, no heart in CHI, but time to move on.

we've got 4/5 of what should be a very good OL. We've got a good, versatile RB, a QB who can (if nothing else) finish in the red zone and a deep WR core. still have a couple needs of course, but a RT, change of pace back and pass catching TE aren't the most difficult things to find.

On defence, we're getting back a double-digit sack machine, and moving Ayers and Thomas to positions they fit better. We're also likely adding a DL at #2. certainly need a few more pieces on D--have for what seems like forever though. But add a couple playmakers to a coaching staff that has a track record for putting together solid defenses, and we might actually see progress in that regard.

so yup, on the upswing. got to play a ton of youth last year, got them their lumps while getting a good draft slot. you haters can hate all you want, but I'm feeling good about the direction of this team! :salute:

outstanding post, but it will fall on deaf ears that have nothing but love for mikey and jay.

Ravage!!!
02-16-2011, 02:33 AM
:lol: and only stated by someone that has nothing but love for the munchin McDoofus.

atwater27
02-16-2011, 07:29 AM
The indisputable bottom line is that Bowlen came to his senses and fired Josh McDaniels. But not before he destroyed the franchise. Anyone who wants to be an apologist for Josh, do it at your own risk of having absolutely zero credibility in any future serious football conversation.

Northman
02-16-2011, 08:46 AM
It did need to be completely overhauled, whether you're mancrush can see it or not. Cutler is a flake, Marshall is a suspension in waiting. our OL needed an overhaul, we hadn't been able to finish in the redzone for years. etc.

but yeah, I'm insane because I don't think all those issues were just magically going to resolve themselves. :rolleyes:No mancrush, just being realistic. Ironically, the OLine overhaul did nothing to improve in the redzone and the 3rd down conversion rate GOT WORSE. Try harder.


and this is relevant to what again? Did Shanny inherit a team that had been band-aided together for a decade just to keep from having a losing season? Did Shanny inherit a team that had lost it's vision and repeatedly gone to the "character issues but talented" well in hopes of something working out?Band aided? Dude, the Broncos had already began rebuilding the offense or did you just happen to miss the memo? lmao


Yah, Shanny is(was) a great coach, and I have nothing but love for the guy. But the NFL is cyclical and this one happened to be at the low end of said cycle when McDaniel's took the helm.Incorrect again. Had Shanny's tenure become stale? Yes. Had it become a shipwreck like it was when Mcd was done with it? No. As you said, keep it in perspective.


okay. point being? Tebow was getting his first starts. let's try to keep expectations realistic, m'kay?Tebow? What the hell you talking about? When Moreno started breaking out it was against KC and Arizona and it was ORTON and the passing game that tanked before Studs took over.


CHI rode Rex Grossman to the Superbowl. So you think Grossman is better than Cutler? okay, maybe. But you really think CHI expected Grossman Part Deux when they gave up two 1sts for him?

Cutler also "led" the 32nd ranked offense in the league the final half of the season, and "led" by far the worse offense to make the playoffs. Orton could have accomplished that.Not likely, Orton doesnt have the same escapability that Jay does. But to correct you some more (getting pretty tiresome) Grossman didnt have the 32nd ranked Oline in football in 06' and his defense and offensive talent was better all around then. As i said, your going to have to try harder because your coming up empty with your arguements.

TXBRONC
02-16-2011, 10:53 AM
see above, TX.

I'm not sure it's stupid though, if Bowlen felt he wanted to go another way. a bit knee jerk, sure, but it could turn out.

have some faith TX. we've got a solid offensive nucleus (best we've had in years) and a coach with a good defensive track record. As long as Bowlen doesn't panic again the first time the fair-weather faithful complain about the new regime (and they always do) we should be in good shape in 1, 2 years max. :beer:

I'm sorry there is way to much information out there that indicates this was light years away from being a knee jerk reaction. A person would have to be completely dismissive of what's been reported to believe that this decision was made with little to no thought.

Please don't try and tell me that I need to have a little faith because what I've said has nothing to do with having faith that Fox could possibly turn things around quickly. It has do where the team is right and what they done. There nothing you point to in the record or the stats that will convince me that we are close to turning things around within two years. It is possible under Fox because he has had success as head coach. Also he's a level headed adult compared to the childish antics of McDaniels.

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 01:22 PM
The indisputable bottom line is that Bowlen came to his senses and fired Josh McDaniels. But not before he destroyed the franchise. Anyone who wants to be an apologist for Josh, do it at your own risk of having absolutely zero credibility in any future serious football conversation.

I'm not being an apologist for Josh, just pointing out that A. We have a good offensive nuclues and B. Ditching Cutler had nothing to do with McDaniel's firing.

You'll come around soon enough, once the wins start. And when you do, I'll be sure to remind you how you had no hope for this current group of Broncos.

And TX, love how you covered your bases. All McDaniel's additions are the sux, but if they work out it will be because of Fox's coaching. Brave call!
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
02-16-2011, 01:37 PM
you don't see it? I know you don't like Tebow and are still in love with big arm, no heart in CHI, but time to move on.
Ridiculous statement that isn't even true.


we've got 4/5 of what should be a very good OL. We've got a good, versatile RB, a QB who can (if nothing else) finish in the red zone and a deep WR core.
Compared to what? When Shanahan left our OL was considered one of the very best in the NFL that gave up VERY few sacks.

The QB that you keep complaining about was 36TDs to 4INTs in the redzone as a Bronco (not counting ones he rushed in for).

We had Marshall, Royal, AND Lloyd on the team. You think our WR corp is better now than it was when Shanahan left? Why because of a broken WR and Gaffney?



On defence, we're getting back a double-digit sack machine, and moving Ayers and Thomas to positions they fit better.
Dumervil and Thomas (two of the three players you mentioned) were drafted and on the team from Shanahan. So far, Ayers has shown diddly squat. Its pure speculation that moving him is going to improve him, and if he doesn't improve, he'll be cut by next year.



so yup, on the upswing. got to play a ton of youth last year, got them their lumps while getting a good draft slot. you haters can hate all you want, but I'm feeling good about the direction of this team! :salute:

So what you are saying, is we are on the up-swing from the bottom HOLE that McDaniels shoved us into, and we are trying to build BACK what was already here??? Thats upswing? I call that bouncing from the free-fall. That's hitting bottom with nowhere else to go BUT up.

TXBRONC
02-16-2011, 01:45 PM
I'm not being an apologist for Josh, just pointing out that A. We have a good offensive nuclues and B. Ditching Cutler had nothing to do with McDaniel's firing.

You'll come around soon enough, once the wins start. And when you do, I'll be sure to remind you how you had no hope for this current group of Broncos.

And TX, love how you covered your bases. All McDaniel's additions are the sux, but if they work out it will be because of Fox's coaching. Brave call!
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but this sure looks like you're being sarcastic. If you are then I can live without it. If you want to have an adult conversation then lets have one, otherwise it might be better talk about something else.

I defy you to find any posts in this thread or any other thread where I have said all of McDaniels picks suck. The only ones I've been critical of are Smith and Richard Quinn. The rest I've said the jury is still out on them.

Maybe you haven't seen this before but I have and history proven it on may occassion that one coach may draft several players that turn to be good even great but he's not the one who molds them into a winner. :hat:

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 01:50 PM
No mancrush, just being realistic. Ironically, the OLine overhaul did nothing to improve in the redzone and the 3rd down conversion rate GOT WORSE. Try harder.

Come on. Clady missed the entire offseason. Kuper wa hurt. Harris missed time. Walton was a rookie. Beadles was a rookie and played multiple spots. Moreno, Bucky, Larson and White all missed time. Think that played into the early struggles at all?




Band aided? Dude, the Broncos had already began rebuilding the offense or did you just happen to miss the memo? lma

Yup, missed the memo. We had a bunch of selfish prima donnas and maybe the least talented defense in history. All McDaniel's fault, no doubt.




Incorrect again. Had Shanny's tenure become stale? Yes. Had it become a shipwreck like it was when Mcd was done with it? No. As you said, keep it in perspective.

Again, sometimes its better to have a shitty season that allows for a proper rebuild. Look how many key injuries we had in our running game and on defence, then consider how much youth got valuable playing time last season. Ya, a four win season sucks. But big picture, its actually better than UFAing your way to 8-8.


Tebow? What the hell you talking about? When Moreno started breaking out it was against KC and Arizona and it was ORTON and the passing game that tanked before Studs took over.

So now its also McDaniel's fault Orton can't stay healthy a full season? Got it. Must have been Josh's fault when Orton was in CHI or Purdue too.

Do you blame McDaniel's for the state of the economy too? How a out 9/11?


Not likely, Orton doesnt have the same escapability that Jay does. But to correct you some more (getting pretty tiresome) Grossman didnt have the 32nd ranked Oline in football in 06' and his defense and offensive talent was better all around then. As i said, your going to have to try harder because your coming up empty with your arguements.

Oh, so because Orton is less mobile he couldn't have "led" the league's worst offence for the last half of the season? How do you get worse than dead last?

I love the exuses for Cutler though. His top 5 defence wasn't as good as Grossman's top 5 defence. Did Grossman have a back as versatile as Forte? How aboiut a stud TE? And CHI's WR corp, while not great, is still better than what it was then.

I understand some of you will never get over the loss of Cutler and that's too bad. I'm sure when his career fizzles out we'll still be hearing how McDaniel's derailed a sure-fire HOF career.

Me, I'm glad I don't have to cheer for Cutler or Marshall anymore. I'm excited about our offensive core going forward. North, I'll save you a spot on the bandwagon for when this core starts winning us games. :beers:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
02-16-2011, 02:09 PM
I think its ridiculous to try and say that anything done by McDaniels was a "proper" rebuild. How is it "proper?" What did he do, that made it "proper?" Getting less talent?? Throwing away draft picks??? He showed NOTHING to bring this belief that he was rebuilding "properly"... whatsoever. The only thing he did "properly".. was to show every NFL fan how quickly you can completely dismantle an upswinging franchise and turn it completely upside down.

dogfish
02-16-2011, 02:13 PM
who is this mcdaniels person?


sounds like a real ****tard. . .

TXBRONC
02-16-2011, 02:22 PM
who is this mcdaniels person?


sounds like a real ****tard. . .

He's a movie star. His best movies are The Tardinator 1,2,3, and 4. :heh:

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 02:29 PM
I think its ridiculous to try and say that anything done by McDaniels was a "proper" rebuild. How is it "proper?" What did he do, that made it "proper?" Getting less talent?? Throwing away draft picks??? He showed NOTHING to bring this belief that he was rebuilding "properly"... whatsoever. The only thing he did "properly".. was to show every NFL fan how quickly you can completely dismantle an upswinging franchise and turn it completely upside down.

Good point. A decade at 8-8 is a much bette way to rebuild.


Basically, you, North, at, and TX believe Cutler and Marshall were going to take us to the promise land so McDaniel's "ruined" this franchise when he ditched those guys.

I saw a franchise in desperate need of a character rebuild and don't think Cutler or Marshall are the right types to make franchise cornerstones out of.

We'll see who is right. :shrugs:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
02-16-2011, 02:36 PM
We'll see who is right. :shrugs:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

actually, you never will. . . measuring what cutler or marshall accomplishes on their own (you know, along with 52 other guys) will never be an accurate measure of what they could have accomplished all together here with hillis scheffler, clady and royal etc. . . people can (and probably will :doh: ) debate it endlessly over the years, but there's no honest way to predict what would have happened if we'd hired spagnuolo and spent all our resources on defense. . . it shall forever remain a mystery, along the lines of such topics as "why do men have nipples?" and "how have they kept al davis alive all these years with no blood to the brain?". . .

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 03:38 PM
Dog, I inderstand what you're saying BUT my nipples factor heavily into my sex life. If you haven't had a girl (or boy for those that roll that way) include your nipples in foreplay, you are missing out big time!
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 06:21 PM
[QUOTE=Ravage!!!;1212129]
Ridiculous statement that isn't even true.

if you say so.

:coffee:



Compared to what? When Shanahan left our OL was considered one of the very best in the NFL that gave up VERY few sacks.

disagree. Hamilton and Weigmann got old and became limited as players. Guys like Polumbus and Myers never developed into replacements (plus a handful other forgetables). We hadn't been able to handle guys like Jamal Williams for years and couldn't get the push to finish drives.

We weren't giving up many sacks, but we weren't running when it mattered, either. I know, we weren't running early this year either. But we still were able to create an effective play action, and the running game looked good once guys got healthy and settled into their position.

I'm surprised that there's any controversy in saying our OL is better today than it was in the offseason two years ago.


The QB that you keep complaining about was 36TDs to 4INTs in the redzone as a Bronco (not counting ones he rushed in for).

yeah, remember that one TD he created vs SD? right after he coughed the ball up without being touched?

I love Cutler's physical ability. he should be a much better QB than he is as a 5 year pro.


We had Marshall, Royal, AND Lloyd on the team. You think our WR corp is better now than it was when Shanahan left? Why because of a broken WR and Gaffney?

yup, how DT heals up is a big part of our WR depth.

Marshall is a huge talent. people will disparage him because he makes most of his catches under 10yds, but having a guy that's just about uncoverable under 7 yards is huge.

problem is, according to reports that have been posted many times, Shanny wasn't exactly looking to sign Marshall to a life-time contract. There's no guarantee Marshall is a Bronco today, no matter who the HC was: Shanny, McDaniels, or Other. And reports are he's already having run-ins with coaches in Miami.

at this point, we don't even know what we received for Marshall. But we're not suffering in the WR dept without him. we need this years 2nd round pick much more than we need Marshall added to our WR corp.



Dumervil and Thomas (two of the three players you mentioned) were drafted and on the team from Shanahan.

cool. why does that matter again? I'm looking forward, quit looking back.


So far, Ayers has shown diddly squat. Its pure speculation that moving him is going to improve him, and if he doesn't improve, he'll be cut by next year.

disagree. imo Ayers showed flashes. He was considered a project when he was drafted, and that was without moving to OLB. But before his first injury this year, he made some plays, and I felt his play was improving at the end of the season.

He wasn't super athletic as an OLB, but as a DE he is. He's big, strong and fast, and just maturing as a player and surrounded by good coaches. of course it's just speculation that moving him is going to improve him, but it's also just speculation that it won't.



So what you are saying, is we are on the up-swing from the bottom HOLE that McDaniels shoved us into, and we are trying to build BACK what was already here??? Thats upswing? I call that bouncing from the free-fall. That's hitting bottom with nowhere else to go BUT up.

come on man. it was ONE freakin year with less wins than losses. But it was just another in a much too long string of 16 game seasons. you can't just keep using shit to plaster over a broken building. this franchise has been doing that for too long, and needed a purge.

I love Shanny, but the culture of this dressing room needed a purging. McDaniels came in and burned the stank out. he's moved along now, whatever. He did what needed to be done, and yes, for all the asshat shit he did, he left us in better shape than when he got here.

I'm fully on board with Fox. I don't want McDaniels back. I love physical, punch mouth, football on both sides of the ball. But I still feel the foundation of players Fox inherits is much better than the one McDaniel's stepped into.

that, and having Elway in here and a bit of a division of power (we'll see), means Fox is entering on much better terms. It's not McDaniels fault that the guys that hired him and gave him full license had their heads up their behinds.


[QUOTE=TXBRONC;1212138]Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but this sure looks like you're being sarcastic. If you are then I can live without it. If you want to have an adult conversation then lets have one, otherwise it might be better talk about something else.

sorry TX, sarcastic is how I am. my wife hates it too. no offense intended, but it probably won't go away. :beer:


I defy you to find any posts in this thread or any other thread where I have said all of McDaniels picks suck. The only ones I've been critical of are Smith and Richard Quinn. The rest I've said the jury is still out on them.

Maybe you haven't seen this before but I have and history proven it on may occassion that one coach may draft several players that turn to be good even great but he's not the one who molds them into a winner. :hat:

yup, the jury is still out, that's why I'm surprised there's so little optimism about some of these guys. a lot of young prospects have been written off already, and I don't really get why. :confused:

bcbronc
02-16-2011, 06:26 PM
actually, you never will. . . measuring what cutler or marshall accomplishes on their own (you know, along with 52 other guys) will never be an accurate measure of what they could have accomplished all together here with hillis scheffler, clady and royal etc. . . people can (and probably will :doh: ) debate it endlessly over the years, but there's no honest way to predict what would have happened if we'd hired spagnuolo and spent all our resources on defense. . . it shall forever remain a mystery, along the lines of such topics as "why do men have nipples?" and "how have they kept al davis alive all these years with no blood to the brain?". . .

it will be a mystery, but if Tebow/Moreno/DT go on to be Denver Triplets, and Cutler and Marshall are already as good as it gets, we can probably speculate a little bit, no?

atwater27
02-16-2011, 07:00 PM
Ditching Cutler had nothing to do with McDaniel's firing.


Bowlen disagrees.:salute:

Ravage!!!
02-16-2011, 07:07 PM
it will be a mystery, but if Tebow/Moreno/DT go on to be Denver Triplets, and Cutler and Marshall are already as good as it gets, we can probably speculate a little bit, no?

dog is right.

No matter what happens there is no way to tell. If we have a better season next year, couldn't I speculate that its not as good had we kept the same team we had and built the positions we didn't have? We'll never know. As dog pointed out, we'll argue, but nothing more than speculative nothings.

For some reason you think this was a "proper" rebuild when nearly everyone else has seen it for the disaster it was. Doesn't mean a plant can't grow from the ashes, but why do you feel we had to burn down the city in order to erect new buildings?

The positive things you mentioned as upswings.. are things we already had.

Northman
02-16-2011, 07:28 PM
I love the exuses for Cutler though. His top 5 defence wasn't as good as Grossman's top 5 defence.

Uh....Chicago wasnt a top 5 defense this year genius.



North, I'll save you a spot on the bandwagon for when this core starts winning us games. :beers:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Love it, when one can no longer back up their arguements the fandom card comes out. Totally thought you were beyond that. Guess not. :lol:

horsepig
02-16-2011, 08:52 PM
dog is right.

No matter what happens there is no way to tell. If we have a better season next year, couldn't I speculate that its not as good had we kept the same team we had and built the positions we didn't have? We'll never know. As dog pointed out, we'll argue, but nothing more than speculative nothings.

For some reason you think this was a "proper" rebuild when nearly everyone else has seen it for the disaster it was. Doesn't mean a plant can't grow from the ashes, but why do you feel we had to burn down the city in order to erect new buildings?

The positive things you mentioned as upswings.. are things we already had.

I respectfully disagree, Rav. That town needed bornt down, baby. There was just nothing there on defense. Shanny just completely let the defensive side go to Hell. He did win enough games to keep some interested, I was not one. I always with JR, Lord save me, but Shanny was turning us into the 70's Sparklers; 45 points/game and you still lost. I don't care for that brand of football.

dogfish
02-16-2011, 09:54 PM
it will be a mystery, but if Tebow/Moreno/DT go on to be Denver Triplets, and Cutler and Marshall are already as good as it gets, we can probably speculate a little bit, no?

okay, sure. . . :lol:

moreno and thomas have about as much chance of ever being compared to emmitt smith and michael irvin as you and i do, so i'm not too concerned. . .

bcbronc
02-17-2011, 03:21 AM
Bowlen disagrees.:salute:

link?


Uh....Chicago wasnt a top 5 defense this year genius.

2006 15.9 points per game. rank: 3
2010 17.9 points per game. rank: 4

:rolleyes:


Love it, when one can no longer back up their arguements the fandom card comes out. Totally thought you were beyond that. Guess not. :lol:


didn't realize you were such a delicate little flower. sorry if i hurt your widdle feelings.

HORSEPOWER 56
02-17-2011, 09:26 AM
it will be a mystery, but if Tebow/Moreno/DT go on to be Denver Triplets, and Cutler and Marshall are already as good as it gets, we can probably speculate a little bit, no?

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...

I have a lot of hope for Tebow and I'm a believer. I also like Knowshon a lot and supported the DT pick last year. I'm really hoping they pan out, but if they do - IT WON'T BE BECAUSE OF MCDANIELS! It will be because our current coaching staff could actually coach the guys to play well. Something McDaniels couldn't do with the guys he picked.

TXBRONC
02-17-2011, 09:49 AM
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...

I have a lot of hope for Tebow and I'm a believer. I also like Knowshon a lot and supported the DT pick last year. I'm really hoping they pan out, but if they do - IT WON'T BE BECAUSE OF MCDANIELS! It will be because our current coaching staff could actually coach the guys to play well. Something McDaniels couldn't do with the guys he picked.

Exactly, this wouldn't be the first time one coach picked several players that ended up developing into good players under a different coach.

atwater27
02-17-2011, 07:12 PM
link?
Link?! Pat fired him. And if you think it was for the weak ass spygate thing, I got a high speed rail system to sell you.



didn't realize you were such a delicate little flower. sorry if i hurt your widdle feelings. Could we set up an age minimum to post here, someone?

:tsk:

bcbronc
02-17-2011, 07:34 PM
If not an age minimum, at least a minimum level of logic competency.

Pat fired Josh two years later for something Pat himself signed off on, and publicly supported during the whole ideal. Yup, probably. Lol.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Ravage!!!
02-17-2011, 08:00 PM
I respectfully disagree, Rav. That town needed bornt down, baby. There was just nothing there on defense. Shanny just completely let the defensive side go to Hell. He did win enough games to keep some interested, I was not one. I always with JR, Lord save me, but Shanny was turning us into the 70's Sparklers; 45 points/game and you still lost. I don't care for that brand of football.

THe offense was one of the youngest and up-n-coming offenses in the NFL. Including the top positions not only YOUNG (within their 1-3rd years in the NFL) but pro-bowl caliber. That absolutely did NOT have to be dismantled, destroyed, and burned down. Thats NOT what I would call a "proper" rebuilding.

Im not arguing whether Shanahan should have been fired or not.

Lonestar
02-17-2011, 10:13 PM
Uh....Chicago wasn't a top 5 defense this year genius.




Love it, when one can no longer back up their arguments the fandom card comes out. Totally thought you were beyond that. Guess not. :lol:

yeah being #9 and being 5 yards per game more than #5 is a whole lot of difference..

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=OPP&offensiveStatisticCategory=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&season=2010&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

OBTW they were indeed #4 in fewest points allowed.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?offensiveStatisticCategory=null&archive=false&seasonType=REG&defensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&d-447263-o=1&conference=null&d-447263-s=TOTAL_POINTS_SCORED&d-447263-n=1&season=2010&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=2&role=OPP&d-447263-p=1

Try again..

Lonestar
02-17-2011, 10:18 PM
I respectfully disagree, Rav. That town needed bornt down, baby. There was just nothing there on defense. Shanny just completely let the defensive side go to Hell. He did win enough games to keep some interested, I was not one. I always with JR, Lord save me, but Shanny was turning us into the 70's Sparklers; 45 points/game and you still lost. I don't care for that brand of football.

Hey I would have loved to score 45 points a game as long as our defense was just allowing 18..

Great post ..

I Eat Staples
02-17-2011, 10:37 PM
But I still feel the foundation of players Fox inherits is much better than the one McDaniel's stepped into.

This is nothing short of delusional.

atwater27
02-17-2011, 11:54 PM
for something Pat himself signed off on, Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

link? 2 can play this game guy.

bcbronc
02-18-2011, 02:41 AM
link? 2 can play this game guy.

umm, okay? :confused:



Pat Bowlen is fed up.

And as Broncoland has come to understand during this tumultuous offseason, when Pat Bowlen has had it, people pay with their jobs. The most important of people.

Jay Cutler, the Broncos' star quarterback, is all but gone. Frustrated at what he perceives as Cutler's unwillingness to communicate, Bowlen announced Tuesday that he has given his front office permission to begin the process of working on trading Cutler.

"Numerous attempts to contact Jay Cutler in the last 10 days, both by head coach Josh McDaniels and myself, have been unsuccessful," Bowlen said in a statement. "A conversation with his agent earlier today clearly communicated and confirmed to us that Jay no longer has any desire to play for the


Read more: Bowlen: Cutler's good as gone - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/ci_12040620#ixzz1EIHjVU8X
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse


It's okay. we'll get through this together.

Northman
02-18-2011, 05:32 AM
actually, you never will. . . measuring what cutler or marshall accomplishes on their own (you know, along with 52 other guys) will never be an accurate measure of what they could have accomplished all together here with hillis scheffler, clady and royal etc. . . people can (and probably will :doh: ) debate it endlessly over the years, but there's no honest way to predict what would have happened if we'd hired spagnuolo and spent all our resources on defense. . . it shall forever remain a mystery, along the lines of such topics as "why do men have nipples?" and "how have they kept al davis alive all these years with no blood to the brain?". . .

Exactamondo.

Northman
02-18-2011, 05:35 AM
yeah being #9 and being 5 yards per game more than #5 is a whole lot of difference..



Hmmm, last i checked #9 is not top 5. You need to improve your math skillz.

atwater27
02-18-2011, 09:43 AM
umm, okay? :confused:




Read more: Bowlen: Cutler's good as gone - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/ci_12040620#ixzz1EIHjVU8X
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse


It's okay. we'll get through this together.

Really? I thought you could do better than that. No sir, I mean give me the link where Bowlen signed off on McD coming right in and trying to bring in Matt Cassell right off the bat. Show me the link where Bowlen OK'd the young coach to immediately piss in everyone's cornflakes and threatening jobs before they were even done shaking hands.

I got a link for ya... Looks like your boy is already pissing off his next franchise QB. Hasn't even met him yet. LMAO!!! I see a pattern forming here.

Sam Bradford already frustrated with McDaniels
February 13th, 2011 4 Comments
Posted by Uncle Rico 11:30 AM ET

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford had a stellar rookie season running the west coast offense. Despite Bradford’s success in the west coast system, the Rams hired Josh McDaniels to replace Pat Shurmur and the team’s franchise quarterback has mixed feelings about learning a new offense under McDaniels.

“Part of me is a little bit frustrated,” Bradford said Wednesday to Jenni Carlson of The Oklahoman. “I was really looking forward to spending more time in the west coast [offense] and really getting into detail this offseason.”

As ProFootballTalk.com’s Gregg Rosenthall points out, it’s rather surprising that McDaniels hasn’t taken the time to meet Bradford yet. Perhaps it’s an indication that the former Denver Broncos head coach is still as arrogant as the day he was escorted out of Dove Valley. In San Francisco, Jim Harbaugh and Alex Smith are old pals (and Smith isn’t even signed for 2011), and last offseason Mike Martz traveled to Nashville to meet Jay Cutler before the Chicago Bears hired Martz to run Chicago’s offense.

There could be another reason for McDaniels failing to show interest in Bradford. Rumor has it that after McDaniels learned of UCONN quarterback Johnny McEntee this week in a YouTube video, he began lobbying the Rams to trade Bradford and the team’s entire draft to Carolina for the Panthers first round draft pick. Surely, McEntee, a redshirt junior who hasn’t started a game in college, would leave school early and enter the NFL draft with the prospect of going first overall!

http://www.joshmcdanielssucks.com/2011/02/13/sam-bradford-already-frustrated-with-mcdaniels/

TXBRONC
02-18-2011, 10:03 AM
Really? I thought you could do better than that. No sir, I mean give me the link where Bowlen signed off on McD coming right in and trying to bring in Matt Cassell right off the bat. Show me the link where Bowlen OK'd the young coach to immediately piss in everyone's cornflakes and threatening jobs before they were even done shaking hands.

I got a link for ya... Looks like your boy is already pissing off his next franchise QB. Hasn't even met him yet. LMAO!!! I see a pattern forming here.

Sam Bradford already frustrated with McDaniels
February 13th, 2011 4 Comments
Posted by Uncle Rico 11:30 AM ET

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford had a stellar rookie season running the west coast offense. Despite Bradford’s success in the west coast system, the Rams hired Josh McDaniels to replace Pat Shurmur and the team’s franchise quarterback has mixed feelings about learning a new offense under McDaniels.

“Part of me is a little bit frustrated,” Bradford said Wednesday to Jenni Carlson of The Oklahoman. “I was really looking forward to spending more time in the west coast [offense] and really getting into detail this offseason.”

As ProFootballTalk.com’s Gregg Rosenthall points out, it’s rather surprising that McDaniels hasn’t taken the time to meet Bradford yet. Perhaps it’s an indication that the former Denver Broncos head coach is still as arrogant as the day he was escorted out of Dove Valley. In San Francisco, Jim Harbaugh and Alex Smith are old pals (and Smith isn’t even signed for 2011), and last offseason Mike Martz traveled to Nashville to meet Jay Cutler before the Chicago Bears hired Martz to run Chicago’s offense.

There could be another reason for McDaniels failing to show interest in Bradford. Rumor has it that after McDaniels learned of UCONN quarterback Johnny McEntee this week in a YouTube video, he began lobbying the Rams to trade Bradford and the team’s entire draft to Carolina for the Panthers first round draft pick. Surely, McEntee, a redshirt junior who hasn’t started a game in college, would leave school early and enter the NFL draft with the prospect of going first overall!

http://www.joshmcdanielssucks.com/2011/02/13/sam-bradford-already-frustrated-with-mcdaniels/

If this true McDaniels wont last long in St. Louis. It seems unreal that McDaniels would think he could convince Spagunolo that they need to get rid of Bradford then he really is a mcdumbass. There is no way in hell that the Rams would trade last year's number one overall and OROY for some junior quarterback that hasn't started a game in college.

As a precaution it is just a rumor that McDaniels is lobbying to get rid of Bradford but a guy who obviously doesn't like him.

BroncoJoe
02-18-2011, 10:17 AM
To anyone that believes what that site and it's owner publish:

I have some ocean front property in New Mexico I'd like to sell.

TXBRONC
02-18-2011, 10:32 AM
To anyone that believes what that site and it's owner publish:

I have some ocean front property in New Mexico I'd like to sell.

The article out of the Oklahoman newspaper would concern me if I were Spagnuolo.

Ravage!!!
02-18-2011, 11:59 AM
McDaniels doesn't think he should make any effort, but the player should make all the effort to come to HIM. McDaniel's has that lack of confidence, that he must try and PUSH his dominance by forcing people to call him, come to him, and submit to him before he lays out any effort. Afterall, he's on his high mountain looking down, and if you don't come to him and look up in awe, then you shall be shunned.

He showed that from day-1 in Denver. He's not going to change.