PDA

View Full Version : FOX: Another RB is our no. 1 priority



WARHORSE
07-09-2011, 03:30 PM
"We were 13th on offense last year. I certainly want more balance. We've got to run the ball more and better, and (another) running back is our No. 1 priority (in free agency)," he said.

Fox made an unusual promise for an unassuming man. "We will have the most sophisticated running team in the league," he said.

http://www.denverpost.com/paige/ci_18434431


So, with that being said, WHO, do you see us going after in free agency at the RB position and why?



Vote on your TOP TWO choices!

T.K.O.
07-09-2011, 03:47 PM
i did'nt know i could vote for 2 and now it's too late:mad:
i voted D williams ,not because he would be my first choice but because of his history with fox.
i think the team will pursue him 1st and most vigorously.
my 2nd choice would be Bush....i really wanted us to draft him when we had the chance...he could be a powerful workhorse if he can stay healthy.:salute:
mostly i'm just glad to hear someone admit there is a huge need at the position.
Knowshon may still become a solid runner,but i'm absolutely sick and tired of the RB carousel we've been on for years.
want a solid featured consistant bruising RB that teams have to fear and prepare for to open up the passing game.....and WIN !!!!!:salute:

silkamilkamonico
07-09-2011, 04:52 PM
so who do yall think we will overpay for?

Shananahan
07-09-2011, 05:06 PM
so who do yall think we will overpay for?
This is the best way to put it.

The thought of a big contract going out to Williams or anybody else with legitimate mileage on them makes me much angrier than I normally get about this stuff. Honestly when I read the Fox quote I felt the need to blink several times to make sure he'd said 'running back' instead of 'defensive tackle'. Ideally this is all some sort of inside joke.

Canmore
07-09-2011, 05:09 PM
so who do yall think we will overpay for?

My thoughts exactly. I hope like heck that we don't overpay anyone in free agency.

Maybe bringing in a free agent runningback will light a fire under Knowshon though.

WARHORSE
07-09-2011, 05:50 PM
Im pretty sure anything signed this offseason is going to be viewed as overpaid, the new CBA will dictate some higher salaries, and having to wait after all this time, not to mention its all post draft.


When free agency is in march, teams know they have the draft to address some needs too.

I think theres going to be a freeforall once this all gets kickstarted.


I think its wise to bring in another RB, but I dont think there is anyone out there Denver will overpay for. What constitutes overpaying? We dont know yet because of the new parameters.


But RB is a fairly easy position to have a plug in guy at, and DT will definitely dictate more money, and who wants to take a chance on that?

Id rather pay low end money for Derrick Ward to come in here than big money for a DeAngelo.

I think we'll look at him, but the guy is 5'9" and coming off injury. His small body is more wartorn than most.

We'll see though.

dogfish
07-09-2011, 06:12 PM
of course. . . it's not like we need any defensive tackles or anything-- we already have kevin vickerson and a couple of other camp fodder stiffs. . . while we should be prostrating ourselves before the agents of the one or two worthwhile free agent tackles, we'll be chasing down an aging rental back for the next year or two. . .

who we'll naturally sign for four or five years, guaranteeing we eat at least two of them on the back end of the deal. . .

if the FO's feeling particularly frisky, maybe we can even reach badly for a couple DLs in next year's depleted class, jarvis moss style. . .

:lol:


somebody wake me back up when the lockout's over. . .

TXBRONC
07-09-2011, 07:11 PM
I hope their not going to ignore defensive tackle.

underrated29
07-09-2011, 08:22 PM
I still see us getting our the via udfa.....but who knows. Imp smartest moves would throw big money at dt ans sign the un drafted college rbs. There is a whole sexy lot of them

Benetto
07-09-2011, 08:33 PM
Just sign somebody who will play hard and earn that paycheck....It bothers me so much when these clowns get the big contract, then settle down their game....

D-williams
M Bush
Or Addai
are my options. I picked Williams and Bush.

Rather have Bush if Moreno is in Foxway's plans. Speed and power over Speed and Speed.

dogfish
07-09-2011, 09:17 PM
I still see us getting our the via udfa.....but who knows. Imp smartest moves would throw big money at dt ans sign the un drafted college rbs. There is a whole sexy lot of them

derricke locke FTW. . .


seriously, RB's such a fungible position. . . i hate spending any kind of significant money there if you don't think you have a good chance of competing for a super bowl in the next couple of years. . .

moreno's a third year back-- he damn well better be able to block by now, and if he doesn't know they better teach him pronto. . .

i agree, sign a couple of UDFAs, and if they ever HAVE camp :rolleyes:, throw 'em in the mix with the stiffs we already have and roll with the best of the lot for a year-- unless we can find somebody better through camp cuts. . .

i was so damn pissed when dumbass mcdaniels traded a 4th for maroney (and a 6th :rolleyes:). . . i knew the bum would never be more than a rental. . . such a waste of value-- you gotta keep your johnson in your pants, and wait to the next draft so you can select your own running back. . . if you get a decent one (not tough at that position), then you can actually get three-four years out of them, health permitting. . . or even six or seven with a second contract. . . the return on your investment is so much greater. . .

for a rebuilding team, i can't help but think we'd be better served spending that money on a veteran OT to compete with franklin and kick beadles inside permanently-- our line was a lot better at run blocking when he was at guard. . . let the loser of the vet OT/franklin battle be the swing OL for a year or two. . . or sign an under-30 CB and wash our hands of perrish cox. . . or even sign a solid vet QB to mentor and back up tebones after we trade norton. . . you know, not to mention the possibility of prioritizing a DT like brandon mebane that you can actually build around up front since we're so insistent on having a small defensive front. . . :rolleyes:

but no, we'll sign a vet RB who will probably be completely broken down in a couple of years (come on, how much can ricky williams possibly have left?), leaving another hole that needs filled. . . if you sign the guy to a two-year deal, at least it's not so bad because you free up some money that can be used to help fill the hole. . . but no one ever wants to sign a deal that short, so you end up offering three or four if you want them to sign, and inevitably end up with some of it as dead money against your cap. . . all reminiscent of shenanigans era roster mismanagement, down to the whole using retreads on the DL thing. . . .

*shrugs*

to me, it just smacks of "OMG, we gotta do whatever it takes to win 2-3 more games this year so we can keep our jobs! forget planning what's best for the team 3-4 years down the road, when somebody else will be the coach and/or GM if we don't make some cosmetic improvement quick!"

enh. . . why am i complaining about a sport that isn't even happening right now?

okay, i'm over it. . .

BroncoStud
07-09-2011, 11:51 PM
This is a no-brainer, if you can get DeAngelo, you get him. He's a badass. His injury concerns are diminished if we rotate him with Moreno. Having 2 solid players is never a bad thing at such an important position.

Shananahan
07-10-2011, 01:10 AM
This is a no-brainer, if you can get DeAngelo, you get him. He's a badass. His injury concerns are diminished if we rotate him with Moreno.
Yeah, he's never had the safety and luxury of splitting carries before.

Joel
07-10-2011, 08:27 AM
I hope their not going to ignore defensive tackle.
The FO seems as dedicated to that proposition as ever, and unless it's just an attempt to send Moreno a message through the media this comment only underscores that. Frankly, my expectations have never been lower. Anytime a player doesn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year (sometimes even then) the head coach leads the charge to replace him with an expensive but questionable free agent. If we DO get lucky enough to find an immediate star we're told we can't keep him because his attitude, pricetag or ability doesn't fit the system (if your "system" has no room for a bona fide Pro Bowler maybe the system's the problem, not the players). I'm not even thinking of Marshall or Cutler here; Doom was NFL sack leader two years ago but his future with the team remains uncertain, as it always has (if the FO thinks any new CBA will allow them to make a player like that a situational benchwarmer we're in big trouble, particularly since he's already under a $60 million contract). I always think SEC and Notre Dame players overrated, so Ryan Harris has been a pleasant surprise when healthy--but apparently he's too good for us to afford. There IS a school of thought that says maybe if we stopped rolling the dice on overpriced underperforming free agents we could afford to keep good players when we finally manage to draft them. Any instant star must be replaced because he's "useless", has a bad attitude or we simply think Pro Bowlers cost too much; anyone else must be expensively replaced by someone another team cut for those same reasons.

Meanwhile, the Denver Broncos anchor at DT remains absent with leave as he has been for nearly a decade now. I'm hopeful but not optimistic; this seems like another case of a new coach looking for players to produce highlight reels to keep them both employed rather than fixing the fundamental and glaring problems with the team. It would certainly explain our top draft pick, which really only makes sense if we're stay with a 3-4 or start shopping Doom for future picks. As far as the running back position itself, it's hard to say with certainty that Knowshon isn't the guy given how patchwork our offensive line his sophomore season (when his average actually went UP half a yard). Unless you name a guy who'd have had a thousand yard season with that line, he can't fix that problem. If we're gonna sign a guy anyway, I'd take Addai; of the listed players I think he'd give us the most bang for the least buck, and couldn't have survived in Indy without the ability to block, catch and convert third and short.

Lonestar
07-10-2011, 09:25 AM
"Anytime a player doesn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year (sometimes even then) the head coach leads the charge to replace him with an expensive but questionable free agent. If we DO get lucky enough to find an immediate star we're told we can't keep him because his attitude, pricetag or ability doesn't fit the system (if your "system" has no room for a bona fide Pro Bowler maybe the system's the problem, not the players)."

Yet if a player does have an attitude, is going to be to expensive to keep (depleting already insufficient cap money) or in the trio you mentioned but did not allude to.
Some time you have to make an overall decision on who you can afford and who causes the least locker room and on and OFF the field drama.

Nice to have 5 super studs on each side of LOS but can you afford to. Keep them. Tough decisions have to be made.

As for Harris. Good player not a Great one, but only when healthy. In his case IIRC he is only played in 54% of the games he has been eligible for while a bronco. And I'll venture to guess that many of those games he was not at 90%.

So why would anyone want to gamble big bucks that he will get any better down the road. That is commonly called "throwing good money after bad."

Now if he will take a lot less to stay with the team as a backup. Maybe that is what we need to do plan of using him as hog in very short yardage and a backup that might be all he is healthy and can handle. But We all know that some team will offer him a staring job and throw big bucks at him. So John did the right thing I'm drafting his replacement.

Ps Joel your posts are good but smaller paragraphs would make them much easier to read. I

Shananahan
07-10-2011, 10:51 AM
I like the post in principle, but:


I'm not even thinking of Marshall or Cutler here; Doom was NFL sack leader two years ago but his future with the team remains uncertain, as it always has (if the FO thinks any new CBA will allow them to make a player like that a situational benchwarmer we're in big trouble, particularly since he's already under a $60 million contract).
I don't understand this comment. How is his future with the team uncertain? He'll be playing DE in a 4-3 similar to prior the 3-4. And what does the CBA have to do with it? He's financially unreleasable.


I always think SEC and Notre Dame players overrated, so Ryan Harris has been a pleasant surprise when healthy--but apparently he's too good for us to afford. There IS a school of thought that says maybe if we stopped rolling the dice on overpriced underperforming free agents we could afford to keep good players when we finally manage to draft them. Any instant star must be replaced because he's "useless", has a bad attitude or we simply think Pro Bowlers cost too much; anyone else must be expensively replaced by someone another team cut for those same reasons.
This isn't serious, is it? Harris is not out of Denver's price range, he's just too injury-prone and the new front office apparently decided he wouldn't be a priority anymore. The rest of this just sounds like you're sarcastically bitter about Cutler, Marshall, Scheffler and Hillis.


Meanwhile, the Denver Broncos anchor at DT remains absent with leave as he has been for nearly a decade now. I'm hopeful but not optimistic; this seems like another case of a new coach looking for players to produce highlight reels to keep them both employed rather than fixing the fundamental and glaring problems with the team. It would certainly explain our top draft pick, which really only makes sense if we're stay with a 3-4 or start shopping Doom for future picks.
Why would you think Denver is staying with a 3-4 or considering shopping Dumervil? They've talked extensively about the decision to draft Miller, and I'm sure that the hope of highlight reels being produced is there, I don't think that is solely for the purpose of keeping Fox and Elway employed.



As far as the running back position itself, it's hard to say with certainty that Knowshon isn't the guy given how patchwork our offensive line his sophomore season (when his average actually went UP half a yard). Unless you name a guy who'd have had a thousand yard season with that line, he can't fix that problem. If we're gonna sign a guy anyway, I'd take Addai; of the listed players I think he'd give us the most bang for the least buck, and couldn't have survived in Indy without the ability to block, catch and convert third and short.
I like this take a lot and agree with it. Spending big money to acquire a free agent RB almost never rewards the purchasing team with its money's worth. I agree that the line should, in time, improve and Moreno will be the beneficiary of that. I haven't followed Addai much recently, but he'd be a really good candidate in my opinion as well. Wouldn't be too expensive, I don't think.

Lonestar
07-10-2011, 11:45 AM
Good post Mikey. Great rebuttal.

Joel
07-10-2011, 03:00 PM
"Anytime a player doesn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year (sometimes even then) the head coach leads the charge to replace him with an expensive but questionable free agent. If we DO get lucky enough to find an immediate star we're told we can't keep him because his attitude, pricetag or ability doesn't fit the system (if your "system" has no room for a bona fide Pro Bowler maybe the system's the problem, not the players)."

Yet if a player does have an attitude, is going to be to expensive to keep (depleting already insufficient cap money) or in the trio you mentioned but did not allude to.
Some time you have to make an overall decision on who you can afford and who causes the least locker room and on and OFF the field drama.

Nice to have 5 super studs on each side of LOS but can you afford to. Keep them. Tough decisions have to be made.
I'm struggling to remember the last time we had that much surplus proven talent; MAYBE '05, but given Pitts road to the title it's easy to say that whole season was a fluke. The last couple years it's been guys only a plane ticket from greatness; when a coach tells me player after player's a great talent he can't control or utilize he's telling me he's a bad coach. When I keep hearing it through multiple coaching regimes it suggests the problem is the rosters creator rather than its members.

As for Harris. Good player not a Great one, but only when healthy. In his case IIRC he is only played in 54% of the games he has been eligible for while a bronco. And I'll venture to guess that many of those games he was not at 90%.

So why would anyone want to gamble big bucks that he will get any better down the road. That is commonly called "throwing good money after bad."

Now if he will take a lot less to stay with the team as a backup. Maybe that is what we need to do plan of using him as hog in very short yardage and a backup that might be all he is healthy and can handle. But We all know that some team will offer him a staring job and throw big bucks at him. So John did the right thing I'm drafting his replacement.
Fair enough; I admit I'm going on months old posts I saw in passing here. He IS hurt a lot, so dumping him isn't unreasonable. Yet given how many players we were told didn't have the heart, character or talent of stars became just that as soon as we dumped them, I'm more skeptical when we're told a guy's barely a benchwarmer despite teams waiting in line to pay through the nose for him.

Ps Joel your posts are good but smaller paragraphs would make them much easier to read. I
Thanks/sorry; I try to be as concise as I can (which isn't very) and avoid spam.

I like the post in principle, but:


I'm not even thinking of Marshall or Cutler here; Doom was NFL sack leader two years ago but his future with the team remains uncertain, as it always has (if the FO thinks any new CBA will allow them to make a player like that a situational benchwarmer we're in big trouble, particularly since he's already under a $60 million contract).
I don't understand this comment. How is his future with the team uncertain? He'll be playing DE in a 4-3 similar to prior the 3-4. And what does the CBA have to do with it? He's financially unreleasable.
Again, I'm surely behind the times, but last I heard the talk was of relegating Doom to his former role as a 4-3 DE who only plays on third down blitzes, and that paying a guy $60 million to ride pine 80% of the game would be nuts. I can't dispute the last part; if we keep him in that role for that price how do we get a first and second down run stopper? He's not releasable, but very tradable, and trading great talent (for peanuts) to someone with the wit we lack to use him is becoming an unfortunate tradition for us.


I always think SEC and Notre Dame players overrated, so Ryan Harris has been a pleasant surprise when healthy--but apparently he's too good for us to afford. There IS a school of thought that says maybe if we stopped rolling the dice on overpriced underperforming free agents we could afford to keep good players when we finally manage to draft them. Any instant star must be replaced because he's "useless", has a bad attitude or we simply think Pro Bowlers cost too much; anyone else must be expensively replaced by someone another team cut for those same reasons.
This isn't serious, is it? Harris is not out of Denver's price range, he's just too injury-prone and the new front office apparently decided he wouldn't be a priority anymore. The rest of this just sounds like you're sarcastically bitter about Cutler, Marshall, Scheffler and Hillis.
Actually, I'd forgotten about Schefler and Hillis until you mentioned them, but it's hard to keep track of all the players who had to wait for a trade to become solid quality starters. Remember the comment is in the context of speculation we'll trade Doom because we're paying him a lot but probably won't use him much; the discussion of Harris sounded much the same to me. He's not out of our price range--but he can easily get far more than we're willing to pay, so it's a foregone conclusion he's gone. That consistent with the disappointing pattern of releasing guys we don't use to teams who use them well, or outright trading those we can't simply release.


Meanwhile, the Denver Broncos anchor at DT remains absent with leave as he has been for nearly a decade now. I'm hopeful but not optimistic; this seems like another case of a new coach looking for players to produce highlight reels to keep them both employed rather than fixing the fundamental and glaring problems with the team. It would certainly explain our top draft pick, which really only makes sense if we're stay with a 3-4 or start shopping Doom for future picks.
Why would you think Denver is staying with a 3-4 or considering shopping Dumervil? They've talked extensively about the decision to draft Miller, and I'm sure that the hope of highlight reels being produced is there, I don't think that is solely for the purpose of keeping Fox and Elway employed.
My wording was a bit ambiguous there, sorry: Drafting Miller with the #2 pick only makes sense to me if we're trading Doom or staying with a 3-4 (which I understood we're definitely not; ironically I'd prefer we did that and would applaud the Miller draft on that basis--except then we'd need an immovable NT more than ever). Otherwise I'm at a loss to explain it as anything more than a play for job security through highlight reels. Between DJ, Haggan Ayers, Doom, Woodyard and no less than eight other LBs on the roster we ought to have as good a group of 4-3 LBs as we can expect without a proven solid MLB as captain (and I certainly hope we're not expecting a rookie to provide the experience, particularly reading offenses, THAT job requires).


As far as the running back position itself, it's hard to say with certainty that Knowshon isn't the guy given how patchwork our offensive line his sophomore season (when his average actually went UP half a yard). Unless you name a guy who'd have had a thousand yard season with that line, he can't fix that problem. If we're gonna sign a guy anyway, I'd take Addai; of the listed players I think he'd give us the most bang for the least buck, and couldn't have survived in Indy without the ability to block, catch and convert third and short.
I like this take a lot and agree with it. Spending big money to acquire a free agent RB almost never rewards the purchasing team with its money's worth. I agree that the line should, in time, improve and Moreno will be the beneficiary of that. I haven't followed Addai much recently, but he'd be a really good candidate in my opinion as well. Wouldn't be too expensive, I don't think.
I'm glad we agree on that at least, 'cos that is my logic: Addai should be fairly useful and versatile without being hideously expensive. We don't end up with another useless but cheap scrub, or a guy who has to do it all because he makes it impossible to sign anyone else (so he'll be gone in a couple years even if healthy and productive). Meanwhile the line gets more experienced and, hopefully, healthier so whoever's in our backfield performs better.

Shananahan
07-10-2011, 04:02 PM
Remember the comment is in the context of speculation we'll trade Doom because we're paying him a lot but probably won't use him much
Well that's ridiculous, then, because there's no way Denver can just unload Dumervil after the signing bonus they gave him only a year ago. He's also going to be used more than just on 3rd downs, because he has to be.


That consistent with the disappointing pattern of releasing guys we don't use to teams who use them well, or outright trading them those we can't simply release.
I'd hardly call it a pattern. We made some trades that looked iffy to good on paper and now look pretty bad in hindsight. But could you name those guys who were released? You make it sound like Denver is just getting rid of guys left and right only to see them all succeed with their next team.

Chidoze
07-10-2011, 04:40 PM
I dont know if the Broncos will sign DeAngelo Williams, but I think they should. That's my only choice.

I dont think any of the others would be worth it, just my opinion.

elsid13
07-10-2011, 04:41 PM
I much rather the invite some undrafted FA into camp then overpay for Williams.

I would get Angus Quigley (Kansas) a big back at 222 pounds and Nic Grigsby (AU) as the third down back (super quick and good hands out of the back field).

Chidoze
07-10-2011, 04:45 PM
I much rather the invite some undrafted FA into camp then overpay for Williams.

I would get Angus Quigley (Kansas) a big back at 222 pounds and Nic Grigsby (AU) as the third down back (super quick and good hands out of the back field).
Yea but that's what free agency is, overpaying for players that arent worth it.

Joel
07-10-2011, 04:45 PM
Well that's ridiculous, then, because there's no way Denver can just unload Dumervil after the signing bonus they gave him only a year ago. He's also going to be used more than just on 3rd downs, because he has to be.
Why does the signing bonus mean they can't unload him? That's an honest question; I don't know how much and how long or even if it's still counting against our cap (assuming there'll still be a cap, of course), but if it is still counting against our cap wouldn't at least part of that burden be shifted to anyone to whom we traded him? Or are you saying that the resulting burden on any potential trade partner means no one would bite? He's proven he's a scary 3-4 OLB, and that and NT are the two key positions in that D; there are enough 3-4 teams out there who need those players that I'm sure we'd find a taker unless it's just completely illegal under League rules. Since we're apparently committed to being at least a primarily 4-3 team though I hope you're right about using him more than on 3rd down even if a lot of people think he can't run stop.

I'd hardly call it a pattern. We made some trades that looked iffy to good on paper and now look pretty bad in hindsight. But could you name those guys who were released? You make it sound like Denver is just getting rid of guys left and right only to see them all succeed with their next team.
You're right, my bad; the low value we got for a lot of them made it seem almost like they were released, but every one I can think of was a trade. Last season in particular though we DID kinda get rid of guys right and left only to see them succeed with their new team (in addition to Hillis, Ryan Torain had 34 less yards than Moreno for a 'Skins team with a much worse offensive line).

Edmonton Bronco Fan
07-10-2011, 05:21 PM
Whomever compliments Knowshon's running style the best is the simple answer.

We need some thunder and lightning.

Unlike a lot of Broncos fans, I still believe that Knowshon can carry the load effectively for us, but we'll see. Make or break season.

Canmore
07-10-2011, 05:51 PM
Why does the signing bonus mean they can't unload him? That's an honest question; I don't know how much and how long or even if it's still counting against our cap (assuming there'll still be a cap, of course), but if it is still counting against our cap wouldn't at least part of that burden be shifted to anyone to whom we traded him? Or are you saying that the resulting burden on any potential trade partner means no one would bite? He's proven he's a scary 3-4 OLB, and that and NT are the two key positions in that D; there are enough 3-4 teams out there who need those players that I'm sure we'd find a taker unless it's just completely illegal under League rules. Since we're apparently committed to being at least a primarily 4-3 team though I hope you're right about using him more than on 3rd down even if a lot of people think he can't run stop...



Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand the old cap rules, signing bonus', guaranteed money were prorated over the life of the contract. Elvis signed a six year deal worth $61.5 million through 2015 that includes $43.168 million in guarantees. If a player was traded or cut that bonus was accelerated to count against this years cap or the option of next years cap if after June 30th I believe. In Elvis' case only 7.195 million in guaranteed money has already counted against the cap leaving 35.973 million counting againstthe cap. Since it's after June 30th we could just count 7.195 million against the 2011 cap leaving a whopping 28.778 million to count against the cap in 2012 if he were traded. 27.778 million is a cap hit most teams can't afford, and I'm sure we can't making Elvis for the most part untradable. How the new cap rules will be written, I don't know.

Lonestar
07-10-2011, 06:30 PM
I'm struggling to remember the last time we had that much surplus proven talent; MAYBE '05, but given Pitts road to the title it's easy to say that whole season was a fluke. The last couple years it's been guys only a plane ticket from greatness; when a coach tells me player after player's a great talent he can't control or utilize he's telling me he's a bad coach. When I keep hearing it through multiple coaching regimes it suggests the problem is the rosters creator rather than its members.

Fair enough; I admit I'm going on months old posts I saw in passing here. He IS hurt a lot, so dumping him isn't unreasonable. Yet given how many players we were told didn't have the heart, character or talent of stars became just that as soon as we dumped them, I'm more skeptical when we're told a guy's barely a benchwarmer despite teams waiting in line to pay through the nose for him.

Thanks/sorry; I try to be as concise as I can (which isn't very) and avoid spam.

Again, I'm surely behind the times, but last I heard the talk was of relegating Doom to his former role as a 4-3 DE who only plays on third down blitzes, and that paying a guy $60 million to ride pine 80% of the game would be nuts. I can't dispute the last part; if we keep him in that role for that price how do we get a first and second down run stopper? He's not releasable, but very tradable, and trading great talent (for peanuts) to someone with the wit we lack to use him is becoming an unfortunate tradition for us.

Actually, I'd forgotten about Schefler and Hillis until you mentioned them, but it's hard to keep track of all the players who had to wait for a trade to become solid quality starters. Remember the comment is in the context of speculation we'll trade Doom because we're paying him a lot but probably won't use him much; the discussion of Harris sounded much the same to me. He's not out of our price range--but he can easily get far more than we're willing to pay, so it's a foregone conclusion he's gone. That consistent with the disappointing pattern of releasing guys we don't use to teams who use them well, or outright trading those we can't simply release.

My wording was a bit ambiguous there, sorry: Drafting Miller with the #2 pick only makes sense to me if we're trading Doom or staying with a 3-4 (which I understood we're definitely not; ironically I'd prefer we did that and would applaud the Miller draft on that basis--except then we'd need an immovable NT more than ever). Otherwise I'm at a loss to explain it as anything more than a play for job security through highlight reels. Between DJ, Haggan Ayers, Doom, Woodyard and no less than eight other LBs on the roster we ought to have as good a group of 4-3 LBs as we can expect without a proven solid MLB as captain (and I certainly hope we're not expecting a rookie to provide the experience, particularly reading offenses, THAT job requires).

I'm glad we agree on that at least, 'cos that is my logic: Addai should be fairly useful and versatile without being hideously expensive. We don't end up with another useless but cheap scrub, or a guy who has to do it all because he makes it impossible to sign anyone else (so he'll be gone in a couple years even if healthy and productive). Meanwhile the line gets more experienced and, hopefully, healthier so whoever's in our backfield performs better.

do you or anyone doubt for a minute that BM is a head case?

how many fubars did this knuckle head have on the field as well as at practice.

add to that how many police calls to his house and how many public displays of being a moron..

and some of our members thought we should keep him and pay him mega BUCKS..

with the next bitch slap getting him a half a year off.

I'm told he knows the NFL offices so well he conducts tours :laugh::laugh:
GOodel gave him a anytime visitors pass to say on parpework in the offices



as for harris

2010 Denver Broncos 11 10
2009 Denver Broncos 8 8
2008 Denver Broncos 16 16
2007 Denver Broncos 11 0
TOTAL 46 34


he has only started 34 games does not say how many he played the full game. 34 starts out of 64 games he has been in DEN for.. not good.

If he is not a starter then he is of no use to us

missed
5 games in 10
8 games in 09
5 games in 07

played one full season in 08

if it was not his back then it was a toe issue..

I see no future unless he is paid as a backup .

Lonestar
07-10-2011, 06:33 PM
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand the old cap rules, signing bonus', guaranteed money were prorated over the life of the contract. Elvis signed a six year deal worth $61.5 million through 2015 that includes $43.168 million in guarantees. If a player was traded or cut that bonus was accelerated to count against this years cap or the option of next years cap if after June 30th I believe. In Elvis' case only 7.195 million in guaranteed money has already counted against the cap leaving 35.973 million counting againstthe cap. Since it's after June 30th we could just count 7.195 million against the 2011 cap leaving a whopping 28.778 million to count against the cap in 2012 if he were traded. 27.778 million is a cap hit most teams can't afford, and I'm sure we can't making Elvis for the most part untradable. How the new cap rules will be written, I don't know.

your just about dead on except for it was jun 1st.

but they also made a little known rule that you could designate one player you were going to cut after Jun 1 to get rid of them early so they could get a job elsewhere easier, and still get the after Jun1 proration...

Canmore
07-10-2011, 06:40 PM
your just about dead on except for it was jun 1st.

but they also made a little known rule that you could designate one player you were going to cut after Jun 1 to get rid of them early so they could get a job elsewhere easier, and still get the after Jun1 proration...

Your right, it was June 1st. I did know about that little rule but forgot about it. :D :defense:

BroncoStud
07-10-2011, 07:22 PM
Yeah, he's never had the safety and luxury of splitting carries before.

And he still made a large impact. When healthy he's one of the best in the NFL, assuming he's cheap enough (which he may or may not be, I don't know) then you know you're getting a good player who can take over games.

Moreno is a decent player, not a game-changer because he lacks the speed and quickness.

WARHORSE
07-11-2011, 01:15 AM
Knowshon should do better this year, simply because more will be devoted to the run game with Fox here.

On thing Im so grateful for with McD gone is that we wont be seeing anymore of those shotgun handoffs to the RB for negative yardage or one yard.


Nothin P.O.ed me more than that play in all my years of watching the Broncos play.

Hopefully our new RT will bring some anger to the rungame.

Canmore
07-11-2011, 01:19 AM
Knowshon should do better this year, simply because more will be devoted to the run game with Fox here.

On thing Im so grateful for with McD gone is that we wont be seeing anymore of those shotgun handoffs to the RB for negative yardage or one yard.


Nothin P.O.ed me more than that play in all my years of watching the Broncos play.

Hopefully our new RT will bring some anger to the rungame.

Nothing (barring some stud defensive tackle) would make me happier than Franklin bringing an edge to the offensive line. We need anger on the offensive line.

SOCALORADO.
07-11-2011, 08:46 AM
Knowshon should do better this year, simply because more will be devoted to the run game with Fox here.

On thing Im so grateful for with McD gone is that we wont be seeing anymore of those shotgun handoffs to the RB for negative yardage or one yard.


Nothin P.O.ed me more than that play in all my years of watching the Broncos play.

Hopefully our new RT will bring some anger to the rungame.

Apparently EFX doesnt see it that way.
The problem with Knowshow is 3 fold.
Hes slow. He was slow in college, and hes slow now.
He has poor vision. Even after he gets through to open space ( which was rare) he is horrible in the open field and never makes anyone miss, nor ever seems to get any kind of extra yardage. I have yet to see him break a takle at the 2nd level.
He always gets injured. Wait, he just injured himself rolling over in bed.

DWill will be a Denver Bronco. Get used to it. Or Bush. I could care less.
I also would not be the least bit suprised if Knowshow was traded immediately once the new deal is done for player or pick.
Some of you have an exteremely overhyped view of Knowshow.

Speed kills in the NFL, and DEN has very little of it. They have no dynamic players on offense, and very little skill players. DWill makes opposing teams have to put a player on him at all times no matter what, and allows TT a whole lot more options as a QB.
And for all of you hoping that DEN doesnt overpay in FA, newsflash!
DEN is going to overpay, and overpay big! Thats what happens in FA. Teams overpay. So what? Who cares? This team has set itself back 5 years with the last bungle of a HC, and the only way they will offset that mistake and remain competitive is if they overpay for some top notch players and shore up the mess. Plus they need to draft smart, which they seem to have done.

NightTerror218
07-11-2011, 01:38 PM
I would love to see Williams or Bradshaw. But I think Giants will get Bradshaw asap. I think we should pursue Bush if we can not get Williams, not to mentioned taking away from the Raiders running game

underrated29
07-11-2011, 01:42 PM
What about Derrick Ward? Isnt he a UFA?

We came super close to signing him before but he didnt like our deal and signed with tampa for more money.

I still say we need speed. But you guys know what I think because I have posted it enough. So i wont do it again.

Traveler
07-11-2011, 02:13 PM
My question is what does EFX know about our current DL -specifically DT- that gives them comfort this position isn't priority number one? What are we missing?

Canmore
07-11-2011, 02:19 PM
My question is what does EFX know about our current DL -specifically DT- that gives them comfort this position isn't priority number one? What are we missing?

Too me, this is a question I keep asking myself. Hopefully EFX has a plan to address the defensive tackle position. And what about middle linebacker? Is Irving going to be the answer? I see such a gigantic hole in the middle. :rolleyes:

Traveler
07-11-2011, 02:30 PM
Too me, this is a question I keep asking myself. Hopefully EFX has a plan to address the defensive tackle position. And what about middle linebacker? Is Irving going to be the answer? I see such a gigantic hole in the middle. :rolleyes:

Evidently, they must have a plan in place. Who knows?

As for the MLB position, we'll be okay. I think they have enough players available that'll allow them to focus on bigger needs.

I just have to keep reminding myself that we are rebuilding the foundation of this team. We won't be able to address all our deficiencies in one season.

Canmore
07-11-2011, 02:33 PM
Evidently, they must have a plan in place. Who knows?

As for the MLB position, we'll be okay. I think they have enough players available that'll allow them to focus on bigger needs.

I just have to keep reminding myself that we are rebuilding the foundation of this team. We won't be able to address all our deficiencies in one season.

Yes. we need another draft, and the picks this year and next year have to pan out if we have hopes of being competitive any time soon. :defense:

Traveler
07-11-2011, 02:43 PM
Yes. we need another draft, and the picks this year and next year have to pan out if we have hopes of being competitive any time soon. :defense:

PREACH!:salute:

Truth be told, I think it'll take at least three more drafts before we become competitive again.

OT- Don't know why, but for whatever reason, I think this guy will be a Bronco this year. I know he stunk up the joint in AZ. But if the team really plans on spending big bucks on a RB, they'll have to sign some second tier players along the DL IMO.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/video/nfl-draft/2007-NFL-Draft-Alan-Branch-2213

Traveler
07-11-2011, 02:50 PM
What about Derrick Ward? Isnt he a UFA?

We came super close to signing him before but he didnt like our deal and signed with tampa for more money.

I still say we need speed. But you guys know what I think because I have posted it enough. So i wont do it again.

Since FB regains prominence in our offense, I like for the team to try and bring in CFA Henry Hynoski from Pitt. He's a 6-1. 255 lb old school type back who craves contact, can catch passes pretty well, and is a tough inside runner.

As for a speed back, I'd say wait till next year. There this kid, Knile Davis, from Arkansas who is a big back ( 6-0 220 lbs.) and reportedly ran a blistering 4.37 in spring practices.

Canmore
07-11-2011, 02:51 PM
PREACH!:salute:

Truth be told, I think it'll take at least three more drafts before we become competitive again.

OT- Don't know why, but for whatever reason, I think this guy will be a Bronco this year. I know he stunk up the joint in AZ. But if the team really plans on spending big bucks on a RB, they'll have to sign some second tier players along the DL IMO.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/video/nfl-draft/2007-NFL-Draft-Alan-Branch-2213

I definitely hear what you are saying. There is no way to plug all the holes this year. I hope we are competitive by next year though. :salute:

BroncoJoe
07-11-2011, 03:03 PM
I would love to see Williams or Bradshaw. But I think Giants will get Bradshaw asap. I think we should pursue Bush if we can not get Williams, not to mentioned taking away from the Raiders running game

Bradshaw (IIRC) is under contract, but the Giants are expected to release him.

I'd love to see him in Orange & Blue.

underrated29
07-11-2011, 03:19 PM
Since FB regains prominence in our offense, I like for the team to try and bring in CFA Henry Hynoski from Pitt. He's a 6-1. 255 lb old school type back who craves contact, can catch passes pretty well, and is a tough inside runner.

As for a speed back, I'd say wait till next year. There this kid, Knile Davis, from Arkansas who is a big back ( 6-0 220 lbs.) and reportedly ran a blistering 4.37 in spring practices.

I like hynoski too...he was in my list..but I dont think we are going to get him. But I hope so.


Kniles sounds sick- Unfortunately a guy like that will probably be top 10 or top 5. I am not so sure we will be picking that this year. At least we all hope not.

Im still hoping for 2-3 UDFA- with Locke being my #1.

T.K.O.
07-11-2011, 03:51 PM
Terrell Davis ran 4.72 40 at the combine.....:salute:

SOCALORADO.
07-11-2011, 04:12 PM
My question is what does EFX know about our current DL -specifically DT- that gives them comfort this position isn't priority number one? What are we missing?

I think EFX have a plan, but DT is a very, very hard position historically to aquire in FA, and so i think you wont hear much about what they are looking at doing in regards to that position. Super, double probation, top secret stuff.
RB on the other hand is a cake walk. A bunch of options, and its an easy position to fill via FA this year.

I see Cofield and DWill as their top priorities.
We'll see.

Lonestar
07-11-2011, 04:14 PM
Too me, this is a question I keep asking myself. Hopefully EFX has a plan to address the defensive tackle position. And what about middle linebacker? Is Irving going to be the answer? I see such a gigantic hole in the middle. :rolleyes:

I kept asking that question when Nolan came to town and he brought fields with him.

Fwiw we have been rebuilding since John retired just nobody wanted to acknowledge it
We took a healthy step forward last year with two good to great OL guys and wiyh another this year that position should be covered for up to a decade now just need some quality backups.
May also have our WRs of the future in DT and the new Eddie Mac
Now perhaps if TEbow is the stud everyone thinks he is the 10 draft just might be the best ever.
Time will tell.

SOCALORADO.
07-11-2011, 04:15 PM
Terrell Davis ran 4.72 40 at the combine.....:salute:

And had Barry Sanders vision and moves. Davis wasnt quick, but he was decepitively fast, and you couldnt tackle him in a phone booth.
Not to mention that if you did manage to hit him, you often just bounced off.

Take a little barry and a little emmit, and WALA! Terrel Davis.

Ravage!!!
07-11-2011, 06:27 PM
And had Barry Sanders vision and moves. Davis wasnt quick, but he was decepitively fast, and you couldnt tackle him in a phone booth.
Not to mention that if you did manage to hit him, you often just bounced off.

Take a little barry and a little emmit, and WALA! Terrel Davis.

Not to mention, when he was in the open field, he flat OUT RAN teams to the endzone. If ran a 4.7 at the combine, he did it with 2 sprained ankles, but he was MUCh faster than that on the field.

Ravage!!!
07-11-2011, 06:30 PM
We took a healthy step forward last year :shocked:


May also have our WRs of the future in DT and the new Eddie Mac
Now perhaps if TEbow is the stud everyone thinks he is the 10 draft just might be the best ever.
Time will tell.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :rofl:

BroncoJoe
07-11-2011, 06:35 PM
Senility is not something to joke about.

MOtorboat
07-11-2011, 07:02 PM
And had Barry Sanders vision and moves. Davis wasnt quick, but he was decepitively fast, and you couldnt tackle him in a phone booth.
Not to mention that if you did manage to hit him, you often just bounced off.

Take a little barry and a little emmit, and WALA! Terrel Davis.

Not to mention, when he was in the open field, he flat OUT RAN teams to the endzone. If ran a 4.7 at the combine, he did it with 2 sprained ankles, but he was MUCh faster than that on the field.

There's really something to be said about game speed vs. Combine speed. I covered a kid about five years ago who was, as his coach admitted, slow in a 40-yard dashes during fall practices ("slowest" wide receiver), and then flat out out-run every kid on the field in games. That's what made TD great.

Canmore
07-11-2011, 07:05 PM
There's really something to be said about game speed vs. Combine speed. I covered a kid about five years ago who was, as his coach admitted, slow in a 40-yard dashes during fall practices ("slowest" wide receiver), and then flat out out-run every kid on the field in games. That's what made TD great.

TD definitely had game speed, something different from his combine 40 time which I think TD hated. What was it 4.72 I think.

randyschwimmer7
07-11-2011, 07:26 PM
To be completely honest, I think I would love to see us grab Sproles (spelling) and get John Clay in the UDFA pool. Moreno should be 45-50% better than last year. I like, and have liked Moreno since his last year of college ball. I ultimately wish we would have taken Orakpo or Matthews with that pick, and taken someone else with the 18th pick, and then taken Shonn Green in the second with the 09 draft, but that is here-say...Bring on FA

Canmore
07-11-2011, 07:30 PM
To be completely honest, I think I would love to see us grab Sproles (spelling) and get John Clay in the UDFA pool. Moreno should be 45-50% better than last year. I like, and have liked Moreno since his last year of college ball. I ultimately wish we would have taken Orakpo or Matthews with that pick, and taken someone else with the 18th pick, and then taken Shonn Green in the second with the 09 draft, but that is here-say...Bring on FA

I voted Michael Bush to pair with Moreno, but he like Moreno has some injury concerns. Guess we will know in a little while (hoping).

randyschwimmer7
07-11-2011, 07:52 PM
I voted Michael Bush to pair with Moreno, but he like Moreno has some injury concerns. Guess we will know in a little while (hoping).

I agree with the assessment about MB. Hard stud runner, but maybe a little to fragile. John Clay is a lot like Bush, but no injury concerns. Moreno in rotation with Clay, LenDale, and. Sproles as 3rd down back would be a sick backfield.
I also wouldn't mind seeing Norwood in place of LenDale...he is a home run hitter

Canmore
07-11-2011, 07:57 PM
I agree with the assessment about MB. Hard stud runner, but maybe a little to fragile. John Clay is a lot like Bush, but no injury concerns. Moreno in rotation with Clay, LenDale, and. Sproles as 3rd down back would be a sick backfield.
I also wouldn't mind seeing Norwood in place of LenDale...he is a home run hitter

I'm not expecting White to make the team. An achilles injury at his age is just devatating. Too bad for him. We need a hard nosed runner, a bruiser I feel.

Denver Native (Carol)
07-11-2011, 08:22 PM
I'm not expecting White to make the team. An achilles injury at his age is just devatating. Too bad for him. We need a hard nosed runner, a bruiser I feel.

Lendale is 27 - is that too old to come back from an achilles injury?

MOtorboat
07-11-2011, 08:30 PM
Lendale is 27 - is that too old to come back from an achilles injury?

Achilles injuries for running backs at any age can be devastating.

dogfish
07-11-2011, 08:39 PM
Achilles injuries for running backs at any age can be devastating.

particularly guys that were slow before. . .

i'll be shocked if he makes the roster. . .

MOtorboat
07-11-2011, 08:43 PM
Achilles injuries for running backs at any age can be devastating.

particularly guys that were slow before. . .

i'll be shocked if he makes the roster. . .

Much less wide receivers :eek:

Canmore
07-11-2011, 08:43 PM
Lendale is 27 - is that too old to come back from an achilles injury?

My bad, I was thinking he was older than that, still it's not a good injury for a skill player or any pro athlete. I wonder how Thomas is going to do after his injury.

WARHORSE
07-11-2011, 11:06 PM
What about Derrick Ward? Isnt he a UFA?

We came super close to signing him before but he didnt like our deal and signed with tampa for more money.

I still say we need speed. But you guys know what I think because I have posted it enough. So i wont do it again.

I voted for Derrick Ward, and think he will start ahead of Knowshon in this system.

No, Im not kidding.

Canmore
07-12-2011, 01:39 AM
I voted for Derrick Ward, and think he will start ahead of Knowshon in this system.

No, Im not kidding.

There well may be a number of backs that start in front of Moreno. If runningback is our number one need, I don't think that is a huge vote of confidence with regards to Knowshon. I know Fox has talked about pairing someone with Moreno but still it makes me wonder, especially with our huge hole at defensive tackle. :defense:

Lonestar
07-12-2011, 09:07 AM
I do not see us coming away with a stud at DT IIRC Foxs teams never had one much less two

But he was always big on super stud DEs and LBs.

Let's hope that John helps hm to understand the need foe stopping the run and creating a bit of pressure up the middle is good.

Although the number of DT that they passed on in the draft has me concerned that even he does not think it is a priority.

Lonestar
07-12-2011, 09:12 AM
Let me add that even had we got one in the draft most if them take a year or three to realize their potential. the Suhs of the NFL are few an far between.

I'm also guessing that they will have a built in excuse because of the money that is going to be thrown around and the brevity of signing them most great players will never get away from their first visit.

Traveler
07-12-2011, 12:17 PM
Guess this thread is as good as any to ask to following question:

Does anyone have info on how much Knowshon participated in the workouts with Brian Dawkins?

OaklandRaider
07-12-2011, 01:09 PM
Michael Bush won't be a free agent. He has only has 3 years of service because he missed all of his rookie season with a broken leg. So he'll be back with the Raiders.

But the Broncos definitely need to upgrade the RB position, especially if they are planning on going run-heavy like John Fox wants to.

Knowshon Moreno is very underwhelming. I didn't like him as a prospect coming out of Georgia, and he hasn't shown much promise at all. There is literally nothing about him that strikes fear into a defense. He's not big, he's not fast, he's not quick, doesn't have great hands. He is just very "meh" all around, nothing that you can really hang your hat on about his game. I think he can be a solid back, but I don't ever see him justify being picked 12th overall.

As a Raider fan, I would be very concerned if the Broncos ended up signing Deangelo Williams. Dude is a stud.

NightTerror218
07-12-2011, 01:46 PM
Michael Bush won't be a free agent. He has only has 3 years of service because he missed all of his rookie season with a broken leg. So he'll be back with the Raiders.

But the Broncos definitely need to upgrade the RB position, especially if they are planning on going run-heavy like John Fox wants to.

Knowshon Moreno is very underwhelming. I didn't like him as a prospect coming out of Georgia, and he hasn't shown much promise at all. There is literally nothing about him that strikes fear into a defense. He's not big, he's not fast, he's not quick, doesn't have great hands. He is just very "meh" all around, nothing that you can really hang your hat on about his game. I think he can be a solid back, but I don't ever see him justify being picked 12th overall.

As a Raider fan, I would be very concerned if the Broncos ended up signing Deangelo Williams. Dude is a stud.


The same was said about Terrel Davis when he was drafted and he was a SB MVP. And if Michael Bush is gone what then?

Joel
07-12-2011, 02:07 PM
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand the old cap rules, signing bonus', guaranteed money were prorated over the life of the contract. Elvis signed a six year deal worth $61.5 million through 2015 that includes $43.168 million in guarantees. If a player was traded or cut that bonus was accelerated to count against this years cap or the option of next years cap if after June 30th I believe. In Elvis' case only 7.195 million in guaranteed money has already counted against the cap leaving 35.973 million counting againstthe cap. Since it's after June 30th we could just count 7.195 million against the 2011 cap leaving a whopping 28.778 million to count against the cap in 2012 if he were traded. 27.778 million is a cap hit most teams can't afford, and I'm sure we can't making Elvis for the most part untradable. How the new cap rules will be written, I don't know.
OK, fair enough, and thanks; at least I don't have that to worry about anymore. We can't realistically trade him and he's too expensive too keep on the bench so we should get at least some benefit from his incredible ability unless our coaches are just too dense to do so.

do you or anyone doubt for a minute that BM is a head case?
I'm not convinced of it, no; most of his on the field problems seemed to stem from wanting to win and conflicts with the boy genius who made that impossible (which is why when we only needed to win one of three games to make the playoffs we lost them all, and benched Marshall for the last one). As I recall, he wasn't the only who had problems like that, especially among Shannys offensive players (that he and not McDaniels drafted them seemed like much of the problem). I'm not saying we should have paid huge amounts of money to keep him, but benching him and making clear to every team that they could have him for next to nothing was a mistake, IMHO.

As for Harris, I was never that big on him anyway; again, I was less bothered by the prospect of losing him than by how much the rationale for dumping him sounded like that for dumping a lot of players who've been very productive elsewhere.

Returning to the question at hand, I'm more interested in what you might call an "economy back" right now than a proven star. Proven or not it'll still be a gamble, running backs tend to have a short life expectancy, a huge salary would make him difficult to keep for more than a couple years anyway and we have too many other glaring needs to mortgage them for one back who may or may not be worth it.

My emphasis would be more on versatility than explosiveness, someone we don't have to rotate in or out on third down (that kind of thing does a great job of telegraphing your playcalling and a poor job of winning games). Give me an every down back who can block, catch and pick up short yardage and the uncertainty that creates for defenses will probably pump our average yards per play by a yard or two by itself. Again, Addai is appealing because he comes from that kind of environment, isn't over the hill, won't break the bank and has decent speed, power and elusiveness.

Lonestar
07-12-2011, 02:21 PM
I'm not convinced of it, no; most of his on the field problems seemed to stem from wanting to win and conflicts with the boy genius who made that impossible (which is why when we only needed to win one of three games to make the playoffs we lost them all, and benched Marshall for the last one). As I recall, he wasn't the only who had problems like that, especially among Shannys offensive players (that he and not McDaniels drafted them seemed like much of the problem). I'm not saying we should have paid huge amounts of money to keep him, but benching him and making clear to every team that they could have him for next to nothing was a mistake, IMHO.

As for Harris, I was never that big on him anyway; again, I was less bothered by the prospect of losing him than by how much the rationale for dumping him sounded like that for dumping a lot of players who've been very productive elsewhere.

Returning to the question at hand, I'm more interested in what you might call an "economy back" right now than a proven star. Proven or not it'll still be a gamble, running backs tend to have a short life expectancy, a huge salary would make him difficult to keep for more than a couple years anyway and we have too many other glaring needs to mortgage them for one back who may or may not be worth it.

My emphasis would be more on versatility than explosiveness, someone we don't have to rotate in or out on third down (that kind of thing does a great job of telegraphing your playcalling and a poor job of winning games). Give me an every down back who can block, catch and pick up short yardage and the uncertainty that creates for defenses will probably pump our average yards per play by a yard or two by itself. Again, Addai is appealing because he comes from that kind of environment, isn't over the hill, won't break the bank and has decent speed, power and elusiveness.


BM is a huge head case.

Was it my memory about the punting the ball in practice,, or on one game were another WR had to come over to him and restrain him from putting on a black and a white glove.

the horse play that got his arm cut and almost ended his career.

the bitch slapping

the 31 or more police reports. while in DEN

the DUI.

your wrong he is the typical WR head case that is immature at best.

wanting the biggest WR contract in the NFL and while it sounded like he got it it also sounds like film flam.

harris no loss IMO

as far as dumping players that go on to play else where..

sometime you just have to bite the bullet..

when they are disruptive in the lockeroom or on or off the playing field you make the cut..

as far as benching BM.. we got two good seconds for him not bad considering everyone knew he was leaving DEN one way or the other..

could we have gotten more perhaps but benching him sent a message to him and the other players no BS was going to be allowed..
AS far as making the playoffs who really cared, that team did not have the talent to do anything anyway.. for the experience getting our asses handed to us again just how much experience like that can you want to take..

T.K.O.
07-12-2011, 03:19 PM
calling in run support.................

http://d.yimg.com/i/ng/ne/ap/20101219/21/1613676815-denver-broncos-quarterback-tim-tebow-15-breaks-oakland-raiders-safety.jpg;)

TXBRONC
07-12-2011, 03:40 PM
Lendale is 27 - is that too old to come back from an achilles injury?


My bad, I was thinking he was older than that, still it's not a good injury for a skill player or any pro athlete. I wonder how Thomas is going to do after his injury.

It's not his age that's the issue it's the type of injury.

Canmore
07-12-2011, 03:54 PM
It's not his age that's the issue it's the type of injury.

Agreed. An achilles injury is so hard to come back from, D Thomas?

NightTerror218
07-12-2011, 06:07 PM
how about a RB like this

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d820bc3c6/article/shurmurs-schemes-could-help-hillis-surge-in-production?module=HP_cp2

TXBRONC
07-12-2011, 06:41 PM
I do not see us coming away with a stud at DT IIRC Foxs teams never had one much less two

But he was always big on super stud DEs and LBs.

Let's hope that John helps hm to understand the need foe stopping the run and creating a bit of pressure up the middle is good.

Although the number of DT that they passed on in the draft has me concerned that even he does not think it is a priority.

Kris Jenkins.

CrazyHorse
07-16-2011, 02:56 AM
Tiki Barber?

MOtorboat
07-16-2011, 03:28 AM
Kris Jenkins.

They will be employing a lot of under and over formations to compensate. I'm not worried about DT at all right now.

Canmore
07-17-2011, 03:25 AM
They will be employing a lot of under and over formations to compensate. I'm not worried about DT at all right now.

We need some run stuffers to compensate for getting blown off the ball for how long? Our run defense has been so porus for so long it seems something must be done about it. It will be interesting to see how it is addressed in free agency.

Tned
07-17-2011, 07:12 AM
your just about dead on except for it was jun 1st.

but they also made a little known rule that you could designate one player you were going to cut after Jun 1 to get rid of them early so they could get a job elsewhere easier, and still get the after Jun1 proration...

It was two players that could be designated June 1st cuts, not one, FWIW.

It's going to be a pain learning all the new nuances of the the new CBA. I had finally gotten comfortable with most of the current one and whammo, they change on me.

atwater27
07-17-2011, 10:22 AM
I'm not worried about DT at all right now.

I thought you fancied yourself as a knowledgable Broncos fan. How could you not know that our DT position is the worst in the NFL? How could you not be concerned?:confused:

Tned
07-17-2011, 10:37 AM
I thought you fancied yourself as a knowledgable Broncos fan. How could you not know that our DT position is the worst in the NFL? How could you not be concerned?:confused:

Probably the same way that the last three head coaches (including Fox by all accounts) have not been nearly as worried about the position as fans.

Broncos fans have been obsessed with the holy grail that is great DT's, while our HC's have been far more focused on other positions. Now, one could argue that the results from our defense over the last half decade or more says the fans are right, but once again we have a new HC come in -- a defensive minded one -- and he seems to have little concern about making DT a high priority.

Maybe we are smarter than these head coaches. Then again, maybe we aren't.

claymore
07-17-2011, 11:32 AM
Im just glad they didnt panic and reach on someone they werent comfortable with.

MOtorboat
07-17-2011, 12:36 PM
I'm not worried about DT at all right now.

I thought you fancied yourself as a knowledgable Broncos fan. How could you not know that our DT position is the worst in the NFL? How could you not be concerned?:confused:

We haven't even had free agency. I know a lot of people wanted a DT in the draft, but if they didn't feel like the right player was there, I can trust that. We, finally, have a coach with a defensive background, and that gives me confidence that one of the top free agent DTs, if not two, will land in Denver because of that. The lockout has just come at such a terrible time for the Broncos. I think a DT would have been acquired in a draft-day trade for Orton, and it is my belief that was probably part of X's plan, but that option obviously got FUBARed by the lockout.

I also think some of his schemes and what he probably wants to do with the DT position, because of the circumstances and players on the team, will cater to that not being a huge priority. I am worried about stopping the run; worried about an undersized DE coming off a bad injury and a rookie OLB that presumably will be playing up on the line quite a bit. Because of those two worries, if we do not get a good DT in free agency, I will be worried after free agency closes. Until then, and until I see no solid DTs in training camp, I won't be worried. But if we hit camp, with no DTs, I will be just as worried as everyone else.

I think a lot of people are pointing at Kris Jenkins and wondering where our Kris Jenkins is to fit into Fox's scheme. And its my belief that X and Fox didn't believe that player was out there this year in the draft, and may not be out there in free agency, so they will have to compensate in other ways, and hope that player is out there in the future, most likely next year's draft, hopefully.

I still think that Denver has three of the four key pieces, which is why I am still stunned at how bad last season was. Denver has the pass rusher (now maybe two or three), they have the stud corner, they have the LT. The fourth piece is the quarterback, and then you find great role players, and its the role players this team is lacking. Middle linebacker and DT are on that second tier of importance, and we need those two pieces. So, again, come opening kick, if there aren't better and more DTs on this team, I'll be extremely concerned.

Joel
07-17-2011, 01:23 PM
They will be employing a lot of under and over formations to compensate. I'm not worried about DT at all right now.
I'm not saying a quality productive running game shouldn't be a priority; that's one of MANY missing pieces we're missing now. However, I don't think it should be the NUMBER ONE priority because that puts the cart before the horse: Even an unstoppable running back will be taken out of the game unless we stop the run first. That's a must in football defence; otherwise opponents ball control you to death so you have to hope you score every time and have the ball last so you can force OT--where you'll lose in sudden death when they spend 7:00 scoring a TD 4 yards at a time. We need a solid running game to create that threat and prevent defenses blitzing nine guys or dropping them all into double coverage, but if we can't PREVENT that threat FROM other teams all the Champ Baileys and Brian Dawkinses in the world won't help us against opponents who never pass because we never make them. Since Fox is a defensive guru it worries me that he either doesn't see or isn't acting on that.

Incidentally, I also disagree that DT and MLB are on the second tier of importance; the former is the literal and figurative core of any good 3-4, as the latter is for any good 4-3. Most of the defensive reads and audibles come from the MLB in a 4-3, which should be enough by itself to elevate it the top tier, but the need to excel at run stuffing, pass coverage AND blitzing makes the MLB critical to a 4-3 in a way that Al Wilsons painfully demonstrated; DJ's a great LB, but filling that gap wasn't as simple as just plugging in another great LB. The 3-4 NT isn't doesn't face the versatility demands of a MLB, but singlehandedly shutting down the inside run and pressing the middle of the pocket frees the rest of the front 7 to address the remaining defensive needs with few concerns about runs up the gut. That role isn't as vital in a 4-3 because you have two DTs instead of just one, but we've seen for years that two good finesse DTs will still get pancaked by a power running game: We still need a man-mountain to play immovable object in the middle of our line, he just doesn't have to do so to the almost superhuman degree of a good 3-4 NT, because he has help from the other DT. Hoping two mediocre DTs will be able to help each other into one one good one is a faint hope unsupported by history.

MOtorboat
07-17-2011, 02:21 PM
I'm not saying a quality productive running game shouldn't be a priority; that's one of MANY missing pieces we're missing now. However, I don't think it should be the NUMBER ONE priority because that puts the cart before the horse: Even an unstoppable running back will be taken out of the game unless we stop the run first. That's a must in football defence; otherwise opponents ball control you to death so you have to hope you score every time and have the ball last so you can force OT--where you'll lose in sudden death when they spend 7:00 scoring a TD 4 yards at a time. We need a solid running game to create that threat and prevent defenses blitzing nine guys or dropping them all into double coverage, but if we can't PREVENT that threat FROM other teams all the Champ Baileys and Brian Dawkinses in the world won't help us against opponents who never pass because we never make them. Since Fox is a defensive guru it worries me that he either doesn't see or isn't acting on that.

Incidentally, I also disagree that DT and MLB are on the second tier of importance; the former is the literal and figurative core of any good 3-4, as the latter is for any good 4-3. Most of the defensive reads and audibles come from the MLB in a 4-3, which should be enough by itself to elevate it the top tier, but the need to excel at run stuffing, pass coverage AND blitzing makes the MLB critical to a 4-3 in a way that Al Wilsons painfully demonstrated; DJ's a great LB, but filling that gap wasn't as simple as just plugging in another great LB. The 3-4 NT isn't doesn't face the versatility demands of a MLB, but singlehandedly shutting down the inside run and pressing the middle of the pocket frees the rest of the front 7 to address the remaining defensive needs with few concerns about runs up the gut. That role isn't as vital in a 4-3 because you have two DTs instead of just one, but we've seen for years that two good finesse DTs will still get pancaked by a power running game: We still need a man-mountain to play immovable object in the middle of our line, he just doesn't have to do so to the almost superhuman degree of a good 3-4 NT, because he has help from the other DT. Hoping two mediocre DTs will be able to help each other into one one good one is a faint hope unsupported by history.

Again, free agency has not happened yet, so I'm not going to criticize X for forgetting to address it until he actually forgets to address it. Clearly, X didn't believe that player was in this draft, or, which i forgot to mention above, Denver wasn't in position to draft said player. You can't always get every player you target.

I think, that player just wasn't in this draft. And the permanent solution at DT, just might not be there at all this year, and Denver will just have to supplement the position. I know that makes fans mad, but if that player isn't available to you, he doesn't just materialize out of thin air. Fox's statement may have been more of a message to Moreno than an actual philosophical idea of how he wants the team put together. Besides, aren't we supposed to believe that it's X's team to put together now, not Fox's?

Canmore
07-17-2011, 02:28 PM
Again, free agency has not happened yet, so I'm not going to criticize X for forgetting to address it until he actually forgets to address it. Clearly, X didn't believe that player was in this draft, or, which i forgot to mention above, Denver wasn't in position to draft said player. You can't always get every player you target.

I think, that player just wasn't in this draft. And the permanent solution at DT, just might not be there at all this year, and Denver will just have to supplement the position. I know that makes fans mad, but if that player isn't available to you, he doesn't just materialize out of thin air. Fox's statement may have been more of a message to Moreno than an actual philosophical idea of how he wants the team put together. Besides, aren't we supposed to believe that it's X's team to put together now, not Fox's?

I too have wondered if this is a message to Moreno. We are going to run the football with or without you. If it is with you it is time to stand up and be accounted for and I'm sure that starts with training camp witch Moreno hasn't made it through in two seasons. A decent camp would go a long ways toward having a productive season.

dogfish
07-17-2011, 02:30 PM
there is no such thing as a defensive tackle! pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain, comrades!

MOtorboat
07-17-2011, 02:41 PM
there is no such thing as a defensive tackle! pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain, comrades!

The shear fact that there is one signed defensive tackle on the roster means they are going to sign defensive tackles.

I think.

Dean
07-17-2011, 05:01 PM
I would sure as hell hope so! It has always been my experience that to stop the run, to be strong in goal line D, and to consistantly win in third and short situations you must be strong up the middle of your defense.

Juriga72
07-17-2011, 07:36 PM
The shear fact that there is one signed defensive tackle on the roster means they are going to sign defensive tackles.

I think.

OR....
John Fox is going to run the vaunted

1-6-4 defense they ran up at Kishwaukee Community College last year...:laugh:

atwater27
07-17-2011, 08:01 PM
I still think that Denver has three of the four key pieces, which is why I am still stunned at how bad last season was. Denver has the pass rusher (now maybe two or three), they have the stud corner, they have the LT. The fourth piece is the quarterback, and then you find great role players, and its the role players this team is lacking. Middle linebacker and DT are on that second tier of importance, and we need those two pieces. So, again, come opening kick, if there aren't better and more DTs on this team, I'll be extremely concerned.
Good post, yet I disagree with your tiers of importance. So you believe the 4 factors of being a contender are a pass rusher, a stud corner, a LT and a QB. And DT and MLB are on the second tier of importance. We have had a stud corner for years, haven't won a championship, and he is just a year or 2 away from losing stud status to old age. I am very happy we have passrushers, but what good are passrushers when the other team can just run the ball with success, eliminating key situations to use said passrushers?

Having a DT or 2 that can command double teams is like the holy grail for the defense. Just ask Ray Lewis. It opens up the world.
In my opinion, if I were to pick 4 tiers, it would start with a solid offensive and interior defensive line. You have nothing meaningful as a team without a solid backbone blocking for you, and a solid backbone controlling the point of attack on defense. Al things being perfect, and I know they aren't, as a new GM with a crappy team, I build first with DT or 2; LT of course and other linemen, then QB. Because unless you can penetrate the opposing team's offensive front, Champ Bailey can't help you all that much, and will be wasting his considerable skills doing tackling drills on running backs 10 yards downfield. But if Champ has a formidable line, specifically in the middle, he and his backfield teammates can let their balhawk skills loose.

Skill players on defense are only as good as the pressure put on the offense by the line. Sure, a blitz or an outside passrusher can get results, but if that's all you got a decent OC will focus on them and neutralize, exposing your interior line weakness with obvious results. Doom pestering the QB? run at him for half the game and beat him up. Von sneaking up for some action? get some screen, play action or just a simple line shift into the mix. If you got no threat at DT, they are virtually usless and invisible and a liability on D, cancelling out your strengths.

I know DT's are hard to find and get injured easily. And that may be why we don't have any yet in the Fox regime. He could shut my ass up this free agency cycle. But I am scared.

MOtorboat
07-17-2011, 09:08 PM
One only needs to look at the highest paid players in the league to see that QB, Pass-rush specialist, LT, CB are the most important positions. There's a reason they are paid higher than MLB and DT. DT is debatable, but only for a 3-4. Middle linebackers don't nearly make as much as the other five, and clearly not as much as QB and rush specialists.

NFL GMs are not stupid. I know NFL fans think they are smarter than those in the business, but they are not, and there's a reason those four positions typically get the highest paychecks (outside the idiots who paid Haynesworth).

atwater27
07-18-2011, 12:06 AM
One only needs to look at the highest paid players in the league to see that QB, Pass-rush specialist, LT, CB are the most important positions. There's a reason they are paid higher than MLB and DT. DT is debatable, but only for a 3-4. Middle linebackers don't nearly make as much as the other five, and clearly not as much as QB and rush specialists.

NFL GMs are not stupid. I know NFL fans think they are smarter than those in the business, but they are not, and there's a reason those four positions typically get the highest paychecks (outside the idiots who paid Haynesworth).

I'd rather have a Patrick Willis over a Demarcus Ware any day.

As far as CB, there are other receivers and tight ends and running backs the QB can throw to, and even if you are a Champ bailey or an Assamugger, you still get toasted once in awhile. CB's are overpaid.

If you are an elite defensive tackle, you get paid just as much as the skill positions.

Lonestar
07-18-2011, 06:55 PM
It was two players that could be designated June 1st cuts, not one, FWIW.

It's going to be a pain learning all the new nuances of the the new CBA. I had finally gotten comfortable with most of the current one and whammo, they change on me.

Sounds like this one is for ten years so w may have it all down by then.

Except for the exceptions of if the guy has one brown eye and one green one and is wearing purple socks on the third tuesday of the 4th month he can not be traded except to the new York jets but they have to cut two players to accept him because he weighs to much for the new team plane.

Hate all the backside deals they have to include because of a few players insist on them.

Hear one if the sticking points is a player can now only be franchised once in his career.

sneakers
07-19-2011, 04:25 AM
I picked them all in the poll because I could.

Traveler
07-19-2011, 08:10 AM
This is disheartening....


The Broncos have 72 players on their roster and nearly $129 million in salary commitments. That's after releasing tight end Daniel Graham and defensive linemen Justin Bannan and Jamal Williams.

Read more: Q&A: Broncos will have some juggling to do to get under NFL's new salary cap - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_18501898#ixzz1SYWMO0nc

Atfter reading this article, looks like the Broncos won't be as active in FA as once thought.

If I'm interpreting this article correctly, they are $ 9 million over the cap with nearly $12 million in dead money.


Makes me want to punch McDaniels in the gut!

Tned
07-19-2011, 08:19 AM
Sounds like this one is for ten years so w may have it all down by then.

Except for the exceptions of if the guy has one brown eye and one green one and is wearing purple socks on the third tuesday of the 4th month he can not be traded except to the new York jets but they have to cut two players to accept him because he weighs to much for the new team plane.

Hate all the backside deals they have to include because of a few players insist on them.

Hear one if the sticking points is a player can now only be franchised once in his career.

The 10 year thing sounds good. Don't have to relearn the rules and that should give us a decade without a strike or lockout.

Yea, I was hearing the same about franchising a player. Not sure if they are still negotiating, or it's settled. I think that's the way the NBA does it, or at least that's what someone told me.

Tned
07-19-2011, 08:20 AM
This is disheartening....



Atfter reading this article, looks like the Broncos won't be as active in FA as once thought.

If I'm interpreting this article correctly, they are $ 9 million over the cap with nearly $12 million in dead money.


Makes me want to punch McDaniels in the gut!

Crap, you just ruined my morning. That rumored $120 million cap doesn't sound very good righ now.

Joel
07-19-2011, 12:24 PM
One only needs to look at the highest paid players in the league to see that QB, Pass-rush specialist, LT, CB are the most important positions. There's a reason they are paid higher than MLB and DT. DT is debatable, but only for a 3-4. Middle linebackers don't nearly make as much as the other five, and clearly not as much as QB and rush specialists.

NFL GMs are not stupid. I know NFL fans think they are smarter than those in the business, but they are not, and there's a reason those four positions typically get the highest paychecks (outside the idiots who paid Haynesworth).
Looking at it that way neglects one very important fact though: NFL defenses are about evenly split between 3-4s and 4-3s. That means that while EVERY team needs QBs, LTs, blitzers and CBs, only about half of them need MLBs, and only the remaining half needs a true stud NT. That's not to say a 3-4 can't use a MLB or a 4-3 can't use a NT, they just aren't VITAL. If we were still running a 3-4 we couldn't even consider using over and under rotations to compensate for the complete absence of a solid NT. That doesn't make NTs or MLBs any less vital than QBs to teams that DO need them, it's just that the fact there are half as many of each kind of team reduces the demand.

For my part, unless we get an inexpensive young journeyman to MAKE a star back I hope the speculation (in which I've joined) that this is just an attempt to send Moreno a message through the press is accurate.

NightTerror218
07-19-2011, 12:26 PM
Looking at it that way neglects one very important fact though: NFL defenses are about evenly split between 3-4s and 4-3s. That means that while EVERY team needs QBs, LTs, blitzers and CBs, only about half of them need MLBs, and only the remaining half needs a true stud NT. That's not to say a 3-4 can't use a MLB or a 4-3 can't use a NT, they just aren't VITAL. If we were still running a 3-4 we couldn't even consider using over and under rotations to compensate for the complete absence of a solid NT. That doesn't make NTs or MLBs any less vital than QBs to teams that DO need them, it's just that the fact there are half as many of each kind of team reduces the demand.

For my part, unless we get an inexpensive young journeyman to MAKE a star back I hope the speculation (in which I've joined) that this is just an attempt to send Moreno a message through the press is accurate.


I hope that was a slap in the face wake up call to Moreno that he needs to give it his all this season to prove he is worth a woot.

Traveler
07-19-2011, 12:39 PM
I hope that was a slap in the face wake up call to Moreno that he needs to give it his all this season to prove he is worth a woot.

Probably won't do much the inspire Moreno. My guess is we'll see the back we thought he should be in his contract year.

Lonestar
07-19-2011, 01:53 PM
Hey folks donnit get your hopes up. We are already 9 mil over the cap. And have not signed the rookies yet.

Looks like a pipe dream to me.

Canmore
07-19-2011, 03:55 PM
Hey folks donnit get your hopes up. We are already 9 mil over the cap. And have not signed the rookies yet.

Looks like a pipe dream to me.

Definitely doesn't sound promising. Rumors are there is 10 million in dead money in that cap. Very disheartening. :defense: