runnning back option

[weazel]

I do not ever start these kind of threads because I hate them, but we are very short on RB depth...

Pittsburgh just released Davenport, do the Broncos take a flyer on him? he wouldn't cost spit, and he has looked good at times. I dont think the guy is an all-star or anything, but we're down to a couple guys left on the roster.

Other guys are talking about Mike and Tatum Bell and these guys arent even playing, at least Davenport has been in game shape this season.

[MOtorboat]

Sure, why not, right now Peyton Hillis is our best running back.

[BeefStew25]

I want Dookie to take a dump in Tubby's hamper.

[DenBronx]

my guess is were going to sign cory boyd from the practice squad but id also like us to pick up davenport. any depth at this point will be good. i think hillis really needs to stay at fb.

[broncohead]

The last couple of years people have been talking about drafting a stuf RB. This year it really seems like a need as of now. I know there are problems on the D as well but this is worse then last year. What happened to Torrain?

[MOtorboat]

The last couple of years people have been talking about drafting a stuf RB. This year it really seems like a need as of now. I know there are problems on the D as well but this is worse then last year. What happened to Torrain?

Denver needs an elite defensive player. Drafting a running back would be crazy. Which is why Shanahan will do it.

This team needs to draft nothing but defensive players next year...imo.

[SR]

I wouldn't mind us picking up Davenport. I'd like to see Hillis stay at FB as he is a good threat out of the back field. Davenport won't get us 1k yards in eight games or anything like that, but he is a viable option and would be a half-decent threat for us in our running game. I wouldn't be opposed to us picking up Tatum Bell either.

[weazel]

I wouldn't mind us picking up Davenport. I'd like to see Hillis stay at FB as he is a good threat out of the back field. Davenport won't get us 1k yards in eight games or anything like that, but he is a viable option and would be a half-decent threat for us in our running game. I wouldn't be opposed to us picking up Tatum Bell either.

I hear Tatum is in Denver, The Hilton Garden Inn heard how fast he can grab luggage, so they hired him as a bellhop!

ZING!

[SR]

I hear Tatum is in Denver, The Hilton Garden Inn heard how fast he can grab luggage, so they hired him as a bellhop!

ZING!

Zinger!!! LMAO!

[Slick]

I want Dookie to take a dump in Tubby's hamper.

I've longed for Chris Berman to utter the phrase "Najeh, I'll shit in your hamper, Davenport."

[SR]

I've longed for Chris Berman to utter the phrase "Najeh, I'll shit in your hamper, Davenport."

Or Najeh, I shat on your chest, Davenport.

[broncohead]

Denver needs an elite defensive player. Drafting a running back would be crazy. Which is why Shanahan will do it.

This team needs to draft nothing but defensive players next year...imo.

So your saying we don't need a RB? I know we need defense more and i'm not saying to grab one high. We just need somebody that will take a little pressure off the passing game.

[MOtorboat]

So your saying we don't need a RB? I know we need defense more and i'm not saying to grab one high. We just need somebody that will take a little pressure off the passing game.

Not as bad as we need a defensive over-haul, no.

[lex]

Not as bad as we need a defensive over-haul, no.
With Slowik in the fold, we dont even know to what degree we need defense.

[MOtorboat]

With Slowik in the fold, we dont even know to what degree we need defense.

So you're saying just keep drafting offensive players because the defense sucks?

[SR]

So you're saying just keep drafting offensive players because the defense sucks?

He doesn't know what he's saying bro

[lex]

So you're saying just keep drafting offensive players because the defense sucks?


No.

[MOtorboat]

No.

Please explain, because obviously, no one has any clue as to what you're referring to.

[SR]

Please explain, because obviously, no one has any clue as to what you're referring to.

He's saying Slowick sucks, but refuses to believe that our level of talent on defense has anything to do with the poor play.

[MOtorboat]

He's saying Slowick sucks, but refuses to believe that our level of talent on defense has anything to do with the poor play.

Thus the question...should we just not draft defense because it won't matter who we draft, Slowick sucks...

[SR]

Thus the question...should we just not draft defense because it won't matter who we draft, Slowick sucks...

I think Slowick is the least of our defensive problems. Obviously, the injury bug has bitten us. We're lacking a right side corner that's worth a shit. Our safeties blow. Our defensive line blows as a collective unit. What does that have to do with Slowick? It's his fault that our talent is below average? Hardly. We NEED to draft defensive players, and STUD defensive players like Orakbo (sp?) from UT.

[red98]

I think Slowick is the least of our defensive problems. Obviously, the injury bug has bitten us. We're lacking a right side corner that's worth a shit. Our safeties blow. Our defensive line blows as a collective unit. What does that have to do with Slowick? It's his fault that our talent is below average? Hardly. We NEED to draft defensive players, and STUD defensive players like Orakbo (sp?) from UT.

I agree we need more talent on defense no matter what.

But still, Slowick leaves me wanting. I mean, is it just me ? I don't see too many twists or stunts and when was the last time we blitzed with a corner back?

Slowick doesn't seem too creative to me, doesn't seem to be adjusting his scheme to cover the weaknesses. He's got alot to try to overcome with injuries and young back-ups, maybe that's the problem.

Still, I'd like to see more creative calls on D.

[lex]

I agree we need more talent on defense no matter what.

But still, Slowick leaves me wanting. I mean, is it just me ? I don't see too many twists or stunts and when was the last time we blitzed with a corner back?

Slowick doesn't seem too creative to me, doesn't seem to be adjusting his scheme to cover the weaknesses. He's got alot to try to overcome with injuries and young back-ups, maybe that's the problem.

Still, I'd like to see more creative calls on D.

No, its not just you. Ive complained about this many times as well. But his coverage also really undermines the pass rush.

[underrated29]

Tatum bell is one of the worst running backs i have ever seen. I would much rather have marcus vick running the ball than him.

Cory boyd, pj pope will get the job...

I would Ultimately love to have RON DAYNE back, but it seems myself and very few others only think in our system he is the goods.

As for najeh, why not. We are short, and need players- lets do a battle royal for rb and best man gets the dream job.

[broncohead]

I think with a real DC this defense would be a lot better. Not top 10 but most likely
17-20. I don't think it is the talent as much as the DC.

[fcspikeit]

Please explain, because obviously, no one has any clue as to what you're referring to.

well I can't speek for lex and in a lot of cases I don't agree with him. But I believe I see what he's saying here and in part, I agree with it.

We need to get a proven DC to come in here and take control of our defense. Someone we're willing to give 3 or 4 years to make something out of this mess. I have almost absolute faith that no matter the time we give Slowick we will still have a crap D.

If we turn this and the next couple year's draft over to Slowick to draft who he feels will fit in his scheme and we end up canning him it will have been for nothing. The new DC will need guys to fit his scheme.

It is one of the main problems we have had drafting defensive players the last 4 years. Every time we get a new DC we have to start over.

IMO the only way we give this draft to Slowick is if we plan on keeping him for a while. The thought of that scares the hell out of me.

[fcspikeit]

And that was what I was asking him to answer with... *****edit****

LOL..

I don't know the details surrounding your relationships and I wont pretend too :D

The mods do a good job around here of cleaning that stuff up. I thank them for that :salute:

[MOtorboat]

LOL..

I don't know the details surrounding your relationships **edit** and I wont pretend too :D

The mods do a good job around here of cleaning that stuff up. I thank them for that :salute:

Athough, I'm still trying to figure out what you're agreeing with him about, though, because he's made no actual argument...

[lex]

well I can't speek for lex and in a lot of cases I don't agree with him. But I believe I see what he's saying here and in part, I agree with it.

We need to get a proven DC to come in here and take control of our defence. Someone we're willing to give 3 or 4 years to make something out of this mess. I have almost absolute faith that no matter the time we give Slowick we will still have a crap D.
Kind of. Slowik is a DC whose resume proves him to be incompetent. Id be cool with a proven DC but Id also prefer, someone who is less known that we dont know is bad, which is the case with Slowik. If we take a chance on a younger DC, or someone who has not been a DC, I think we should target guys who come from teams whose scematics suit what we can do with our personnel...some from Philly maybe.



If we turn this and the next couple year's draft over to Slowick to draft who he feels will fit in his scheme and we end up canning him it will have been for nothing. The new DC will need guys to fit his scheme.

As long as Slowik is the DC, there is going to be the inverse of synergy. He is always going to get less out of the talent that is there. So I feel whatever talent we have will be wasted. Its akin to throwing money at fixing a car when it makes more sense to buy a new car.


It is one of the main problems we have had drafting defensive players the last 4 years. Every time we get a new DC we have to start over.

I know this is a sore spot with people but this is not a justification for keeping an incompetent DC. And in actuality, I will submit that its often the case that teams improve their defense after they simplify their scheme. You often hear about DC wanting their players to play more and think less...to be able to be more aggressive. So, Im not so sure a scheme change will be as overly sophisticated as people think as much as it will be a question as finding someone who can scheme.


IMO the only way we give this draft to Slowick is if we plan on keeping him for a while. The thought of that scares the hell out of me.

Im not averse to drafting defense. But I am averse to overdrafting defense because of an incometent DC. And if we drafted an interior OL or a RB in the first or second, I wouldnt have a fit. I also wouldnt have a problem with us drafting a LB. What I find amusing are the people who insist that every draft pick needs to be on defense because they are clearly oblivious to how bad Slowik is.

[MOtorboat]

What I find amusing are the people who insist that every draft pick needs to be on defense because they are clearly oblivious to how bad Slowik is.

You continue to not explain what you mean by these comments. So we shouldn't make defensive draft picks because Slowick is not good? I am, as is everyone else, confused. If you want to continue to post, you're going to have to actually be able to construct coherent arguments, which you repeatedly cannot do.

So I ask you, we shouldn't draft defensive players because of Slowik, because that's what your current argument states, although I'm expecting you to tell me that I don't understand what you're saying. Please explain...no defensive players unless Slowick is gone?

[DenBronx]

i dont see what the big deal is...just fire slowik. pull the trigger and get it over with. fire him! we need to bring someone in that actually has a scheme and a plan. give our defense some viagra because its really soft. i think the 3-4 would be a nice fit for us. maybe we should try and replicate pitts d.

[BeefStew25]

Willow angry.

[SR]

MB doesn't need to support that argument with anything.

Maybe Slowick isn't the answer at DC, but no DC can take a group of league rejects and expect to turn them in to a competitive D. At least now, we've got pine riders on the field and they will play with passion because they, unlike our normal starters, have everything to lose. We need better talent first, before we can expect to do anything with a DC.

[lex]

MB doesn't need to support that argument with anything.

Maybe Slowick isn't the answer at DC, but no DC can take a group of league rejects and expect to turn them in to a competitive D. At least now, we've got pine riders on the field and they will play with passion because they, unlike our normal starters, have everything to lose. We need better talent first, before we can expect to do anything with a DC.


Your argument would hold more meaning if the defensive coverage wouldnt be so prone to the allowing the offense to convert on 3rd downs. The 12 yard cushion on 3rd and 5 kind of kills your argument as does blitzing with routine 12 yard cushions. We've put the other team in a number of 3rd downs only to be undone by bad scheming, which makes everyone on the defense look bad. If we didnt fail to hold them on third downs so often because of poor scheming, people would be singing a different tune.

Yeah, the personnel on defense isnt top 5, but its not bottom 5 either. There are positions on the defense that are upgradeable but possibly, but with a more competent DC, they would be passable players.

[dogfish]

wait, we're going to start running the option?

[broncohead]

MB doesn't need to support that argument with anything.

Maybe Slowick isn't the answer at DC, but no DC can take a group of league rejects and expect to turn them in to a competitive D. At least now, we've got pine riders on the field and they will play with passion because they, unlike our normal starters, have everything to lose. We need better talent first, before we can expect to do anything with a DC.

Just like our offense used to produce good RBs because of our system a DC can do the same thing on defense. It's not the talent it's the DC.

[fcspikeit]

Kind of. Slowik is a DC whose resume proves him to be incompetent. Id be cool with a proven DC but Id also prefer, someone who is less known that we dont know is bad, which is the case with Slowik. If we take a chance on a younger DC, or someone who has not been a DC, I think we should target guys who come from teams whose scematics suit what we can do with our personnel...some from Philly maybe.

Well a proven guy would be the safest bet. Neither of us can say for sure if we would “prefer” an unknown because he is an unknown. He could be worse then Slowick and then we would be calling for his head. But I agree an unknown would be better then a proven loser.

Again, one of our problems is that we don’t give our DC long enough to really implement their scheme. That don’t mean I think we should give the loser more time to prove once again he is a loser. But we really need to find a guy who we have enough faith in to give him at least 3 years. Rather that’s a Nolan or a new guy who shows a lot of promise. I would rather us find that guy before we start our true defensive overhaul. I know some think you can just draft good defensive players and they will work in any scheme. But except for a few really good players in our league that isn’t the case. When you look over the league at the better teams, they find guys who are less talented and more suited to do what is required for the defensive scheme to work.

For instance, who is Pitt’s starting CB’s? Most don’t know but we can trust that whoever they are they will at least be adequate. We have one of the best CB’s to ever play the game and we can trust our secondary will have holes all over the field and make guys like BQ look like league MVP’s. Can you imagine what Pitt’s secondary would be like if they had Champ Bailey playing corner for them? If they could constantly rely on him to hold up in one on one, what would they be able to do with the free guy and stopping the other side? Look at the Giants D-line. They lost their 2 starters from last year and you would never know it. That’s good coaching and finding guys who know and can believe in the system. I just don’t believe Slowick will ever have that. It seems even when the guys are doing exactly what their told, the system just wont work. For instance, no matter who you have playing LB, they will never be able to cover a slot wide receiver. Yet we see our LB’s being asked to do just that. If your playing for that defense you will never be able to believe that system will work because it wont.




As long as Slowik is the DC, there is going to be the inverse of synergy. He is always going to get less out of the talent that is there. So I feel whatever talent we have will be wasted. Its akin to throwing money at fixing a car when it makes more sense to buy a new car.

I agree with this, and I think your example is a good one. However I would go a step further, I don’t believe the car can be fixed. If you want a mustang and you own a Pinto, no amount of money will ever make that Pinto a Mustang. All you can really do is pour money into accessories to make the Pinto a little better. But at the end of the day, all you have is a pinto and you will get left in the dust by the Mustang every time. Imagine what the mustang could do with the same accessories.




I know this is a sore spot with people but this is not a justification for keeping an incompetent DC. And in actuality, I will submit that its often the case that teams improve their defense after they simplify their scheme. You often hear about DC wanting their players to play more and think less...to be able to be more aggressive. So, Im not so sure a scheme change will be as overly sophisticated as people think as much as it will be a question as finding someone who can scheme.

With what I see on the field. I would take either or, a simplified scheme that will work, Or a complicated scheme that shows promise of a higher payout in the future. I am all for giving a DC the time to prove his scheme can work. But there has to be some promise, a light at the end of the tunnel, something. I have seen nothing out of slowick past or present that would lead me to believe he should even be a DC in this league.




Im not averse to drafting defense. But I am averse to overdrafting defense because of an incometent DC. And if we drafted an interior OL or a RB in the first or second, I wouldnt have a fit. I also wouldnt have a problem with us drafting a LB. What I find amusing are the people who insist that every draft pick needs to be on defense because they are clearly oblivious to how bad Slowik is.

I would rather us take a Starter at one of the needed positions then take a backup at our biggest need position. One thing is for sure, if we go all defense, the overhaul has began. I believe it is greatly needed, I just don’t want it to be with Slowick at the helm. IMO, the end result of that will be bad. We might find a couple really good players that will work in any scheme, but all the purely scheme players will amount to nothing when Slowick finally gets shown the door

[fcspikeit]

MB doesn't need to support that argument with anything.

Maybe Slowick isn't the answer at DC, but no DC can take a group of league rejects and expect to turn them in to a competitive D. At least now, we've got pine riders on the field and they will play with passion because they, unlike our normal starters, have everything to lose. We need better talent first, before we can expect to do anything with a DC.

Yet that is exactly what is being asked of lex.

Can you name more then 3 starters on defense for the other 31 teams? If they are so filled with talent this should be easy. The simple fact is that even the good defenses only have 2 or 3 really good players. The rest are scheme players. Guys who understand what is asked of them and can fill a role. The defense is set around the key players. The reason they are Key players is because they are what is needed for the scheme to work. That is why we know their names.

We will never have 11 Pro Bowlers playing on D. A good DC should be able to take 2 or 3 Pro Bowlers and put a descant defence on the field with scheme players. Slowick has not shown he can do this.

[G_Money]

I agree with lex (and spikeit).

Slowik has to go. While he's here, I have no faith that he can take even good players and make a good defense out of them. He doesn't get the most out of the good players he does have - Champ is neutralized, DJ isn't put in a position to make plays, Bly needs press coverage to be successful but we don't give it to him, et al - so why would adding more good players fix our problem?

Using a draft on players that will fit Slowik's scheme will hamper us in the same way that using it on players for the Bates Scheme did. We drafted 3 DL, none of whom have made a significant impact for us and at least two of whom may not be with us in the next 1-2 years.

We need to get a DC who HAS a scheme, a VIABLE scheme, in order to then draft adequate-or-better players who can be good IN that scheme. Even if we were to use a whole draft on defense, drafts are not deep enough to add seven starters - or even seven contributors - based solely on their athletic talent.

In the same way that most of our runners have gone on to be mediocre in other places because their success here was predicated on being the right fit for our scheme, and that our linemen for many years were perfect fits for us but ill-suited to most of the schemes in the league, talent is not the only necessity for success.

We appear to have blown the '07 draft because we weren't committed to the scheme, or the schemer, that we drafted for. We got the wrong guy, and that guy led us to make bad draft decisions for personnel that were not a fit for us except in his scheme.

No sense making the same mistake two years later.

I don't want to draft a bunch more DL when we have no one to teach them how to succeed in the pros and no one to scheme for their success.

I don't want to draft run-stopping safeties if we're gonna go to a cover-safety defense a year later because Slowik's D is still terrible.

I don't want more light, quick LBs if we switch to a 3-4 with our 2010 defense and need bigger, stronger ones.

On offense, we need a RB. If we spent a first-day pick on a RB I could be reasonably sure that if healthy that RB would be good for 1200+ yards in our offense, and since our offense will remain the same year after year I would also feel safe that his production value will not be diminished by scheme changes in the foreseeable future.

If we were to draft a TE on draft day and took Cook or Beckum because we don't think Scheffler can stay healthy, well, TE has been a VERY productive position for us over the years. We understand how to make a TE pick a successful one. Whether minor successes or major ones, I'm not afraid of getting nothing for my pick.

I want a lot of defense on draft day. I want a LB, a safety, and some DL at a minimum.

But if Slowik stays I want my franchise RB so I'm not wasting early defensive picks. We need quality, long-term pieces out of this draft. We need more of them on defense right now, but I'll take what I can get. If Slowik stays then I really don't want early DL picks. I'll want skill-position defenders who can adapt to a variety of schemes and just have more talent than our current defenders.

Early DL picks + Slowik remaining = disaster...and early drinking for G on Draft Weekend.

~G

[weazel]

word is, Najeh has deceided to retire from football and has accepted an offer to work on a crab fishing boat maintaining the poop deck!

:confused:

[broncobryce]

I agree with lex (and spikeit).

Slowik has to go. While he's here, I have no faith that he can take even good players and make a good defense out of them. He doesn't get the most out of the good players he does have - Champ is neutralized, DJ isn't put in a position to make plays, Bly needs press coverage to be successful but we don't give it to him, et al - so why would adding more good players fix our problem?

Using a draft on players that will fit Slowik's scheme will hamper us in the same way that using it on players for the Bates Scheme did. We drafted 3 DL, none of whom have made a significant impact for us and at least two of whom may not be with us in the next 1-2 years.

We need to get a DC who HAS a scheme, a VIABLE scheme, in order to then draft adequate-or-better players who can be good IN that scheme. Even if we were to use a whole draft on defense, drafts are not deep enough to add seven starters - or even seven contributors - based solely on their athletic talent.

In the same way that most of our runners have gone on to be mediocre in other places because their success here was predicated on being the right fit for our scheme, and that our linemen for many years were perfect fits for us but ill-suited to most of the schemes in the league, talent is not the only necessity for success.

We appear to have blown the '07 draft because we weren't committed to the scheme, or the schemer, that we drafted for. We got the wrong guy, and that guy led us to make bad draft decisions for personnel that were not a fit for us except in his scheme.

No sense making the same mistake two years later.

I don't want to draft a bunch more DL when we have no one to teach them how to succeed in the pros and no one to scheme for their success.

I don't want to draft run-stopping safeties if we're gonna go to a cover-safety defense a year later because Slowik's D is still terrible.

I don't want more light, quick LBs if we switch to a 3-4 with our 2010 defense and need bigger, stronger ones.

On offense, we need a RB. If we spent a first-day pick on a RB I could be reasonably sure that if healthy that RB would be good for 1200+ yards in our offense, and since our offense will remain the same year after year I would also feel safe that his production value will not be diminished by scheme changes in the foreseeable future.

If we were to draft a TE on draft day and took Cook or Beckum because we don't think Scheffler can stay healthy, well, TE has been a VERY productive position for us over the years. We understand how to make a TE pick a successful one. Whether minor successes or major ones, I'm not afraid of getting nothing for my pick.

I want a lot of defense on draft day. I want a LB, a safety, and some DL at a minimum.

But if Slowik stays I want my franchise RB so I'm not wasting early defensive picks. We need quality, long-term pieces out of this draft. We need more of them on defense right now, but I'll take what I can get. If Slowik stays then I really don't want early DL picks. I'll want skill-position defenders who can adapt to a variety of schemes and just have more talent than our current defenders.

Early DL picks + Slowik remaining = disaster...and early drinking for G on Draft Weekend.

~G

Good points. I think Shanahan will do what we did last year, sit in our spot and grab the best option that is left. Rumor was we would have taken Jonathan Stewart from Oregon if Clady wasn'st there. I just hope whoever we pick, they are impact players. I don't know about this drafting oft-injured players because IF they stay healthy they are valuable picks. That didn't work out too well so far.

[fcspikeit]

word is, Najeh has deceided to retire from football and has accepted an offer to work on a crab fishing boat maintaining the poop deck!

:confused:

I must have missed something :confused:

I take it Davinport took a crap somewhere he shouldn't have?

[Retired_Member_001]

Thus the question...should we just not draft defense because it won't matter who we draft, Slowick sucks...

Yeah!

And the Chiefs should just stop drafting players because their head coach sucks.

The comment from lex made no sense at all.

[BeefStew25]

I must have missed something :confused:

I take it Davinport took a crap somewhere he shouldn't have?

Yeah he broke into a chicks apartment and laid a turd in the clothes hamper in her closet. Think it was in Miami.

I am not kidding, by the way.

[broncofaninfla]

Yeah he broke into a chicks apartment and laid a turd in the clothes hamper in her closet. Think it was in Miami.

I am not kidding, by the way.

Wow, I was for signing him until I read that. My guess is Denver signs somebody today to add depth if nothing else. I'd also guess we about to see Pope and Boyd get their chance.

[BeefStew25]

Wow, I was for signing him until I read that. My guess is Denver signs somebody today to add depth if nothing else. I'd also guess we about to see Pope and Boyd get their chance.

I think since then he has keep his ass clean. Was only arrested once for beating the shit out of his girlfriend, so we should be okay.

[BroncoJoe]

Yeah he broke into a chicks apartment and laid a turd in the clothes hamper in her closet. Think it was in Miami.

I am not kidding, by the way.

Thus, his nickname of "Deuce" or "The Dump Truck".

[weazel]

I think since then he has keep his ass clean. Was only arrested once for beating the shit out of his girlfriend, so we should be okay.

yeah, thats much better! LOL