PFW: The way we hear it.

[TXBRONC]

I didn't see this anywhere and I also checked Deans thread about the injury status of John Lynch. So here is some information I hope you will find helpful. One thing I didn't realize is that Abdullah has been out with a hip injury that's why Cox was playing Lynch's position.

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/AFC/AFC+West/Denver/WWHI/2007/wwhi092607.htm

Cutler 'fine,' but concerns linger over Lynch's status for Indy

Sept. 26, 2007

A weight was lifted off the Broncos’ shoulders Monday, as QB Jay Cutler’s ankle sprain was deemed not to be serious and, according to Cutler, shouldn’t keep him out of practice this week. “Everything is fine,” Cutler said. “I’ll probably be a little sore on Wednesday, but it should be fine. … I should be able to get a full week in.” The bigger concern, according to sources, is the groin injury suffered by S John Lynch, who left in the second quarter and did not return. Knowing his reputation as being a tough competitor, Lynch’s teammates and head coach Mike Shanahan were said to be worried when he was unable to leave the sideline in the second half of the close loss to Jacksonville. Lynch’s MRI on Monday showed no muscle tears, and Lynch was said to be feeling better than expected early in the week, but it could take a few weeks to heal completely. With backup Hamza Abdullah out at least another week or two with a hip injury, the Broncos looked to Curome Cox in place of Lynch Sunday, but they will likely have No. 3 CB Domonique Foxworth back in the mix against Indianapolis. Foxworth has been sidelined by an ankle injury, but his smarts, toughness and versatility in being able to play all four spots in the secondary would help vs. the explosive Colts.

[Skinny]

Thank for the post TX.
. . .the Broncos looked to Curome Cox in place of Lynch Sunday, but they will likely have No. 3 CB Domonique Foxworth back in the mix against Indianapolis. . .Sure hope so. Gettin kinda thin back there.

[TXBRONC]

We hopefully Lynch's injury isn't very serious and he can man his position this week.

[BroncoWave]

We're in trouble against Indy as it is but if Lynch doesn't play, we're in serious trouble.

[TXBRONC]

We're in trouble against Indy as it is but if Lynch doesn't play, we're in serious trouble.

I hear what you're saying BTB, but if Foxworth is back that will help tremendously. Even if we didn't have the issue that we do right now on defense I would still be concerned.

[Lonestar]

We're in trouble against Indy as it is but if Lynch doesn't play, we're in serious trouble.


I hear what you're saying BTB, but if Foxworth is back that will help tremendously. Even if we didn't have the issue that we do right now on defense I would still be concerned.

Without John, Yes webe in big dodo.

I do not see what everyone is so hot on foxworth for.

He'll be lit up like roman candle AGAIN this week again by Manning.

[TXBRONC]

Without John, Yes webe in big dodo.

I do not see what everyone is so hot on foxworth for.

He'll be lit up like roman candle AGAIN this week again by Manning.

That's were you be wrong. Foxworth is very good in coverage.

[broncosinindy]

I like john lynch but i just dont feel he is quick enough to cover payton. i think fox is a little on the green side. but i think fox has more range.

[TXBRONC]

I like john lynch but i just dont feel he is quick enough to cover payton. i think fox is a little on the green side. but i think fox has more range.

I might very well be misunderstanding you but I think Foxworth will be the nickeback.

[BigBroncLove]

I might very well be misunderstanding you but I think Foxworth will be the nickeback.

Naw. They are saying they will fit him into the safety position like they did last year when Ferguson and Brandon were injured and we were empty on the safety depth. IMO Foxworth did a pretty good job. He is obviously pretty new to the safety position, but desptie it he uses his excelletn coverage skills to do well ver the top of WR's. He jsut has to work on his angles and shift to the in or out positions with more ease IMO. He offers a lot mroe then Lynch IMO as far as coverage goes. On the other hand he is be far a less then comforting safety as far as tacklign and breaking up passes with muscle rather then finesse.

Overall though, if Lynch and Abdullah remain injured (which it soudns liek they are, and personally if Lynch is not 100% I wouldn;t want to see him in there. He may be one tough SOB, but if injured he will be a weak link IMO, like any player) I think fitting Foxworth into the FS positon is the Broncos best option.

I am not a fan of Cox overall. I think he gives up some big plays. Foxworth is as good a tackler as Cox IMO, and unlike other CB's (liek Shoate) Foxworth knows how to tackle low and not get bowled over trying to tackle up high. MEanwhile Paymah provides a better otpion at CB then Cox does at safety IMO....

Its the lesser of two evils IMO.... I would much prefer to have a healthy Lynch, or Hamza for that matter, but given the circumstances, you gotta try and put your best personel on the field, and Cox doesn;t fit into that equation IMO.

[TXBRONC]

Naw. They are saying they will fit him into the safety position like they did last year when Ferguson and Brandon were injured and we were empty on the safety depth. IMO Foxworth did a pretty good job. He is obviously pretty new to the safety position, but desptie it he uses his excelletn coverage skills to do well ver the top of WR's. He jsut has to work on his angles and shift to the in or out positions with more ease IMO. He offers a lot mroe then Lynch IMO as far as coverage goes. On the other hand he is be far a less then comforting safety as far as tacklign and breaking up passes with muscle rather then finesse.

Overall though, if Lynch and Abdullah remain injured (which it soudns liek they are, and personally if Lynch is not 100% I wouldn;t want to see him in there. He may be one tough SOB, but if injured he will be a weak link IMO, like any player) I think fitting Foxworth into the FS positon is the Broncos best option.

I am not a fan of Cox overall. I think he gives up some big plays. Foxworth is as good a tackler as Cox IMO, and unlike other CB's (liek Shoate) Foxworth knows how to tackle low and not get bowled over trying to tackle up high. MEanwhile Paymah provides a better otpion at CB then Cox does at safety IMO....

Its the lesser of two evils IMO.... I would much prefer to have a healthy Lynch, or Hamza for that matter, but given the circumstances, you gotta try and put your best personel on the field, and Cox doesn;t fit into that equation IMO.


By "they" I'm assuming you've read some kind of comment from the coaching staff?

I think Foxworth did very good job last year as a Safety.

If Foxworth is going to be playing safety then whose going to man the nickleback position? Cox? I like Cox but I think Foxworth is the corner.

[BigBroncLove]

By "they" I'm assuming you've read some kind of comment from the coaching staff?

I think Foxworth did very good job last year as a Safety.

If Foxworth is going to be playing safety then whose going to man the nickleback position? Cox? I like Cox but I think Foxworth is the corner.

HEre's a small blurb from an article, and I think the PFW whispers you posted also eludes to Foxworth starting at safety with the comment on his ability to play all four positions in the secondary...

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/2007-09-27-2753990206_x.htm


They have yielded 166 yards rushing per game to the likes of Buffalo, Oakland and Jacksonville, a task that could become more complicated if safety John Lynch (groin) cannot play. If Lynch is out, Foxworth would likely Lynch's spot.

And Cox wouldn't start at the CB position, but rather Paymah who should be healthy again. Like I said before, I think it's about getting your best personel on the field, and putting Foxworth and Paymah IMO is better then Cox/Foxworth anyday.....

Only time will tell, and I could be wrong, but I expect to see Foxworth take the majority of snaps i nthe safety position, with Cox spelling him from time to time, or replacing him if Paymah plays poorly and foxowrth is called upon for coverage over Gonzo (Gonzales).

EDIT: Also this from rotoworld which yanked it from a Denver Post article.....

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=3303&line=99442&spln=1


After sitting out the past two games with an ankle injury, Domonique Foxworth is expected to play in Week 4.
Foxworth could see extended action at safety if John Lynch is sidelined by a groin injury. "We'll see with John. He said he feels better than he thought he would, so that's a good sign," Foxworth said. "But I know I'm on the list."

[dogfish]

HEre's a small blurb from an article, and I think the PFW whispers you posted also eludes to Foxworth starting at safety with the comment on his ability to play all four positions in the secondary...

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/2007-09-27-2753990206_x.htm



And Cox wouldn't start at the CB position, but rather Paymah who should be healthy again. Like I said before, I think it's about getting your best personel on the field, and putting Foxworth and Paymah IMO is better then Cox/Foxworth anyday.....

Only time will tell, and I could be wrong, but I expect to see Foxworth take the majority of snaps i nthe safety position, with Cox spelling him from time to time, or replacing him if Paymah plays poorly and foxowrth is called upon for coverage over Gonzo (Gonzales).

EDIT: Also this from rotoworld which yanked it from a Denver Post article.....

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=3303&line=99442&spln=1



interesting. . . although we'll miss lynch's tackling if he's not out there, it might not be so bad to have fox at safety in this particular game-- you have to have safety help over the top against those receivers, and fox obviously has far more range than lynch. . . he's probably also our best matchup against clarke in the slot. . .

[dogfish]

just for laughs, i thought i'd add the sept. 21 "way we hear it"-- this was a topic that was pretty hotly discussed at one point on Bmania, and i almost hesitate to post it just for fear of digging up old arguments, but i thought it would be nice for some people to see the definitive answer "straight from the horse's mouth," so to speak. . .




Cutler considered a better student of the game than Plummer


Head coach Mike Shanahan suggested, in a recent conversation with the Denver Post, that Jake Plummer, with whom he had a successful but sometimes heated relationship during Plummer’s four years with the club, was not the student of the game that second-year QB Jay Cutler is. We’re told that was a big reason for the move to Cutler in 2006 for the final five starts of his rookie season. “He played well, he had success,” Shanahan told the Post of Plummer. “But Jake loves the game on Sunday. I don’t think he really likes football Monday through Friday.” Cutler, meanwhile, has been like a sponge, working hard to absorb whatever he can from the coaching staff and working to develop a rapport with his teammates. The results, thus far, have been positive. Mistakes are apparent, but so is the progress and the belief his teammates have in him. “He has a lot of confidence when he’s out there and as the leader of this offense, for such a young guy,” TE Daniel Graham told PFW after a narrow Week Two win over Oakland. “The guy kept us poised all day. That’s a good sign in this league, when you never really get frustrated.”



link (http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/AFC/AFC+West/Denver/WWHI/default.htm)

[Astrass]

Ugh....Lynch will be needed against the run. Foxworth is better at coverage but the run is where we need support. If Lynch does play with a groin injury will he be slowed down even more then usual? Tough call here.

[omac]

Ugh....Lynch will be needed against the run. Foxworth is better at coverage but the run is where we need support. If Lynch does play with a groin injury will he be slowed down even more then usual? Tough call here.

Yeah, we do need Lynch against the run. I'm not that impressed with Foxworth's tackles against bigger guys.