Broncos May Avoid 1st-Round QB: ESPN

[Joel]

"If the best player is a cornerback, then that's who we'll take; if the best player is a quarterback, then that's who we'll take," said a team source. "But the way (Tebow) is making strides as a quarterback -- not just the winning part -- it means we won't have to force it."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7341718/sources-denver-broncos-closer-committing-tim-tebow-2012

Several interesting comments in there, apart from the obvious one that leaves me thinking, WTF must Tebow to ENSURE they avoid a 1st-round QB, win the Super Bowl?

In particular, the shortcomings of automatic and constant BPA drafting: What if the BPA is a guy you'll have to pay $5 million/year to ride pine while your secondary's being torched for 40 points a game, your line's giving up a half dozen sacks/week and your starting back has double digit fumbles? Really think a fifth Pro Bowl WR will fix any of that?

[bcbronc]

"If the best player is a cornerback, then that's who we'll take; if the best player is a quarterback, then that's who we'll take," said a team source. "But the way (Tebow) is making strides as a quarterback -- not just the winning part -- it means we won't have to force it."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7341718/sources-denver-broncos-closer-committing-tim-tebow-2012

Several interesting comments in there, apart from the obvious one that leaves me thinking, WTF must Tebow to ENSURE they avoid a 1st-round QB, win the Super Bowl?

In particular, the shortcomings of automatic and constant BPA drafting: What if the BPA is a guy you'll have to pay $5 million/year to ride pine while your secondary's being torched for 40 points a game, your line's giving up a half dozen sacks/week and your starting back has double digit fumbles? Really think a fifth Pro Bowl WR will fix any of that?

I'm guessing if we have four pro-bowl WRs they'll pass on the fifth. Rest easy Joel.

I agree completely with the FO position. One, you don't want to tip your hand one way or the other. The less other teams know about our draft board, the better situated we are.

Second, the FO can't get dazzled by the miracles. We can't always depend on divine intervention to pull out wins. If the FO is doing their jobs, things like 3 and outs, 3rd down % and the slow first halfs will be included in the final analysis of Tebow's performance.

I'll be surprised if we end up taking a QB in RD1. But if QB is BPA, you have to ask "by how much?" End of the day, I'm loving the direction EFx is taking this club...if they deem Tebow's their guy, I'm on board. If they decide at the draft to go a different direction, I'm still on board. In EF.............x I trust.

[VonSackemMiller]

We do need a cornerback, we need another WR, We need a DT, We need a play making RB.

I dont care what order it comes in aslong as we get more talent at those positions.

[threefolddead]

Why would you want the front office to come out and say what position they are drafting at so that some team could trade up in front of them to steal a player. Why show your hand? This is the craziness that Tebow brings. Everyone reads to much into stuff. This is probably something we have heard a million times but because Tebow is here its a rip on him. I don't get it! What will really be fun is when we start working out QBs like we do EVERY year and people complain about that.

[claymore]

BPA. I love it. Dont reach on any position. Tebow doing what he does took us out of the QB race. The franchise would be stupid to say otherwise, same goes for every other position.

[slim]

BPA is the only way to draft.

People were clamoring for it back when Shanny was constantly reaching to fill needs. Now people want to draft for need. :noidea:

I don't care if the BPA is a QB....draft him. Now, I find it hard to believe that a quality QB will be around when we pick, given that we will be drafting in the 20s....

[rcsodak]

I would like to know how we had 5 ProBowl wr's in the initial scenario........... :eek:

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[UnderArmour]

We really need to take a corner in the first two rounds. Goodman just isn't going to cut it for much longer. We also will need to take another defensive tackle in the first three rounds. We loaded up on TE and safety last draft, hopefully Carter and Moore develop so we don't have to worry about that yet. Dawkins is definitely helping both players get better and cut down on the foolishness and hopefully that shows next year.

IMO, rounds 1-3 in no order:
DT, CB, BPA(Non QB)

[Cugel]

First of all, Tebow started out playing HORRIBLY. He couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. His mechanics were awful. He looked totally out of his depth in the first two games. It's true he came back and won the Miami game, but that was more of a fluke than anything. They GAVE the game away with horrible play and worse decisions.

So naturally all Elway had seen was Tebow making endless mistakes and being unable to execute the most basic QB stuff like the 3 step drop. They wanted to see what Tebow could do and then draft a QB with their top 10 draft pick.

But now, especially if the team makes the playoffs the Broncos will be drafting in the mid-20s. There's no way they will be able to draft one of the elite QB prospects without surrendering 3 or 4 draft picks.

And they don't need to. Tebow's play ensures him another season. Unfortunately for the Broncos THIS is the QB dream class and widely considered the best QB class since 1983. NEXT year, IF Tebow were to turn into Rex Grossman (whom the Ravens Brian Billick was sure was his "franchise QB" remember), then the team would be screwed.

That is my nightmare scenario. That Tebow hits a plateau that is good enough to win some games against a last place schedule and a bunch of teams decimated by injury, but will never be good enough a passer to win a SB. AND he leads the team to just enough wins this season that they can't draft a QB from among the best QB class in 30 years.

That's a double disaster for the team. Fortunately, that hasn't happened yet. All that HAS happened is that Tebow has improved his throwing accuracy to the point where he can hit some passes. He's still not Tom Brady out there, but he doesn't have to be. IF (and I mean IF, it's not by any means a done deal) he can become a Ben Roethlisberger clone then he can have success even though he will never be Drew Brees.

You'll notice that the Broncos are in the process of ABANDONING the OPTION READ! They ran it a handful of times last game and the Bears stuffed it each time.

So much for Tebow "revolutionizing the NFL with his brand new breakthrough offense."

He's going to try and become a semi-traditional pocket passing QB who can make some plays with his feet -- i.e. they're trying to turn him into another Ben Roethlisberger. Which is a good thing. Ben won 2 SBs after all with great defense, solid running attack and accurate passing to guys like Hines Ward.

[Cugel]

We really need to take a corner in the first two rounds. Goodman just isn't going to cut it for much longer. We also will need to take another defensive tackle in the first three rounds. We loaded up on TE and safety last draft, hopefully Carter and Moore develop so we don't have to worry about that yet. Dawkins is definitely helping both players get better and cut down on the foolishness and hopefully that shows next year.

IMO, rounds 1-3 in no order:
DT, CB, BPA(Non QB)

I would think by "best player available" they mean "best player available at a position of need." The PURE "best player available" trick turns you into Matt Millen taking a WR in the top 5 two years in a row. That's the epitome of stupidity that got Millen FIRED from the Lions!

They do need S, DT, CB, OL, RB(2), TE(2), LB and QB in no particular order.

They could afford to take a QB #1 if one fell they like. You'll notice that Broderick Bunkley has become a decent DT, not elite like Suh or Vince Wilfork but decent. That plugs a big hole. Marcus Thomas clearly is making plays in Allen's new defense.

Probably the biggest change from 1 year ago is getting a GOOD defensive coordinator and a good defensive scheme that allows players to make plays instead of the useless 3-4 defense that had them the worst in the league the last 2 years.

DJ has had a rebirth, Doom has successfully made the transition to DE, Miller has become a force from the LB position. Meanwhile Dawkins and Champ have been making plays. Probably the one serious weakness has been the play of Goodman who had serious breakdowns in coverage. But, even he made a big play against the Bears.

The secondary needs to get younger since they are starting 3 of the 6 OLDEST DBs in the league in Bailey, Goodman and Dawkins.

And it's not at all clear that Rahim Moore is any good. They might need to draft another S or CB with their 1st pick.

[Jsteve01]

First of all, Tebow started out playing HORRIBLY. He couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. His mechanics were awful. He looked totally out of his depth in the first two games. It's true he came back and won the Miami game, but that was more of a fluke than anything. They GAVE the game away with horrible play and worse decisions.

So naturally all Elway had seen was Tebow making endless mistakes and being unable to execute the most basic QB stuff like the 3 step drop. They wanted to see what Tebow could do and then draft a QB with their top 10 draft pick.

But now, especially if the team makes the playoffs the Broncos will be drafting in the mid-20s. There's no way they will be able to draft one of the elite QB prospects without surrendering 3 or 4 draft picks.

And they don't need to. Tebow's play ensures him another season. Unfortunately for the Broncos THIS is the QB dream class and widely considered the best QB class since 1983. NEXT year, IF Tebow were to turn into Rex Grossman (whom the Ravens Brian Billick was sure was his "franchise QB" remember), then the team would be screwed.

That is my nightmare scenario. That Tebow hits a plateau that is good enough to win some games against a last place schedule and a bunch of teams decimated by injury, but will never be good enough a passer to win a SB. AND he leads the team to just enough wins this season that they can't draft a QB from among the best QB class in 30 years.

That's a double disaster for the team. Fortunately, that hasn't happened yet. All that HAS happened is that Tebow has improved his throwing accuracy to the point where he can hit some passes. He's still not Tom Brady out there, but he doesn't have to be. IF (and I mean IF, it's not by any means a done deal) he can become a Ben Roethlisberger clone then he can have success even though he will never be Drew Brees.

You'll notice that the Broncos are in the process of ABANDONING the OPTION READ! They ran it a handful of times last game and the Bears stuffed it each time.

So much for Tebow "revolutionizing the NFL with his brand new breakthrough offense."

He's going to try and become a semi-traditional pocket passing QB who can make some plays with his feet -- i.e. they're trying to turn him into another Ben Roethlisberger. Which is a good thing. Ben won 2 SBs after all with great defense, solid running attack and accurate passing to guys like Hines Ward.


Pretty sure you're referring to Kyle Boller. Grossman never played in Baltimore

[Jsteve01]

BPA. I love it. Dont reach on any position. Tebow doing what he does took us out of the QB race. The franchise would be stupid to say otherwise, same goes for every other position.

why is this so complicated. It's as if people have forgotten that drafting guys like Lelie, Moss, etc meant passing up on guys like Ed Reed, Paul Poluszny and Dwayne Bow. BPA is always the best tact as long as it's not a ridiculous situation where you get the best WR when you have two pro bowlers

[Cugel]

why is this so complicated. It's as if people have forgotten that drafting guys like Lelie, Moss, etc meant passing up on guys like Ed Reed, Paul Poluszny and Dwayne Bow. BPA is always the best tact as long as it's not a ridiculous situation where you get the best WR when you have two pro bowlers

Like I said "best player available at a position of need." There's usually not a "best player" who stands head and shoulders above all the other players available. As for passing on players like Reed, Poluszny and Bowe, that's nothing!

They took Moreno instead of Orakpo and Ayers instead of Clay Matthews! Demaryius Thomas has also been a bust at WR and they took him instead of several players including Rob Broncowski. And they really could use a TE who's a threat right now, since they threw away the only pass-catching TE on the roster in Tony Sheffler because he accidentally hit on McMoron's wife at a party when that imbecile blew into town.

Just another nail in the coffin McMoron created for the Broncos through his unbounded incompetence.

[Cugel]

Pretty sure you're referring to Kyle Boller. Grossman never played in Baltimore

You're right. Brain fart because it's early in the morning and I haven't had my coffee yet. :coffee: :ranger:

However, same thing really: Grossman with the Bears and Boller with the Ravens. Both were unguided missiles who destroyed their franchise's chances to win a SB despite dominating defenses good enough to win a championship.

[slim]

Like I said "best player available at a position of need." There's usually not a "best player" who stands head and shoulders above all the other players available. As for passing on players like Reed, Poluszny and Bowe, that's nothing!

They took Moreno instead of Orakpo and Ayers instead of Clay Matthews! Demaryius Thomas has also been a bust at WR and they took him instead of several players including Rob Broncowski. And they really could use a TE who's a threat right now, since they threw away the only pass-catching TE on the roster in Tony Sheffler because he accidentally hit on McMoron's wife at a party when that imbecile blew into town.

Just another nail in the coffin McMoron created for the Broncos through his unbounded incompetence.

I think it's way too early to call DT a bust. Have you even watched the last few games?

[TXBRONC]

I think it's way too early to call DT a bust. Have you even watched the last few games?

He's had several dropped passes but he's also made several plays.

[slim]

He's had several dropped passes but he's also made several plays.

Yeah, the jury is still out.

Personally, I think he has a chance to be a great WR. He isn't there right now, but he can get there.

I just don't get why some people are so quick to write-off young players. Players develop...they get better. What you see now is not what he will be a year from now. It's the same trap that TT haters fell into. I just don't get it.

[wayninja]

I understand Cugel's concern and there is a good cause to be worried about it. But for some strange reason, I'm just not worried. While I think luck has played a large part in our wins, I have seen Tebow get better and better on the field. I think an off season and some draft help around him will significantly improve this offense and I honestly just don't think we are terribly close to Tebow's peak...

[Cugel]

I think it's way too early to call DT a bust. Have you even watched the last few games?

I've watched Thomas's entire career and he's CLEARLY a bust for a 1st round pick! He can't stay on the field he's injured about every other game.

And then when he finally DOES get into a game Tebow hits him RIGHT ON THE HANDS and he drops the ball. Just flat drops it. The announcers were incredulous last game at some of his plays.

IF he and Decker had managed to hang onto some perfectly accurate passes against the Bears Tebow wouldn't have NEEDED a miracle come-back because the Broncos would have scored a couple of TDs!

No, I'm not underestimating Demaryius Thomas. Not one bit. A pass reception in the last 2 minutes when nobody is covering you because the defense is playing "prevent defense" and the 2 safeties are 20 yards downfield does NOT make up for acting like your hands are covered in oil for the first 3 quarters! :ranger:

[slim]

I've watched Thomas's entire career and he's CLEARLY a bust for a 1st round pick! He can't stay on the field he's injured about every other game.

And then when he finally DOES get into a game Tebow hits him RIGHT ON THE HANDS and he drops the ball. Just flat drops it. The announcers were incredulous last game at some of his plays.

IF he and Decker had managed to hang onto some perfectly accurate passes against the Bears Tebow wouldn't have NEEDED a miracle come-back because the Broncos would have scored a couple of TDs!

No, I'm not underestimating Demaryius Thomas. Not one bit. A pass reception in the last 2 minutes when nobody is covering you because the defense is playing "prevent defense" and the 2 safeties are 20 yards downfield does NOT make up for acting like your hands are covered in oil for the first 3 quarters! :ranger:

Let's go back and take a look at some of your TT predictions. How are those turning out?

A smarter man might learn from his mistakes.

[Cugel]

Yeah, the jury is still out.

Personally, I think he has a chance to be a great WR. He isn't there right now, but he can get there.

I just don't get why some people are so quick to write-off young players. Players develop...they get better. What you see now is not what he will be a year from now. It's the same trap that TT haters fell into. I just don't get it.

Thomas hasn't even been on the field for most of the games because he's been so often injured. That means he's a busted pick. I don't know what's so complicated about it. He's a FIRST round draft pick. More is expected than that MAYBE he can develop into a decent WR who WON'T drop most of the passes that come his way, EVENTUALLY!

We don't expect the pro-bowl in his second season. Just hold onto the damn ball when Tebow hits you on the hands. Period.

[Jsteve01]

Like I said "best player available at a position of need." There's usually not a "best player" who stands head and shoulders above all the other players available. As for passing on players like Reed, Poluszny and Bowe, that's nothing!

They took Moreno instead of Orakpo and Ayers instead of Clay Matthews! Demaryius Thomas has also been a bust at WR and they took him instead of several players including Rob Broncowski. And they really could use a TE who's a threat right now, since they threw away the only pass-catching TE on the roster in Tony Sheffler because he accidentally hit on McMoron's wife at a party when that imbecile blew into town.

Just another nail in the coffin McMoron created for the Broncos through his unbounded incompetence.

So you think passing on Bowe and Poz for a Moss is nothing? BPA allows you to stock your team for a run at a championship. Look at teams like Pitt and Green Bay. They've got guys you've never heard of stashed on their roster to replace their Pro Bowlers when they leave.

[Jsteve01]

Thomas hasn't even been on the field for most of the games because he's been so often injured. That means he's a busted pick. I don't know what's so complicated about it. He's a FIRST round draft pick. More is expected than that MAYBE he can develop into a decent WR who WON'T drop most of the passes that come his way, EVENTUALLY!

We don't expect the pro-bowl in his second season. Just hold onto the damn ball when Tebow hits you on the hands. Period.

hey Cugel, no offense but you were certain that the Broncos would be much worse with Tebow at qb. So as to Thomas, the jury is still out. I remember a guy named Rod Smith who would drop easy balls and then make fantastic catches early in his career. Don't be so quick to write Thomas off.

[Jsteve01]

Let's go back and take a look at some of your TT predictions. How are those turning out?

A smarter man might learn from his mistakes.

beat me to the punch slim...did you make it to Denver for the game this weekend?

[Cugel]

Let's go back and take a look at some of your TT predictions. How are those turning out?

A smarter man might learn from his mistakes.

I have NO idea what Tebow might do in the future. Right now it looks like he's developing his passing ability. When he started he looked HORRIBLE and John Elway who is a BIT better QB analyst than any fan didn't like what he saw. At all. Elway was scouting college QBs right and left.

IF Tebow continues to develop next season then we can say he'll be on track to be a successful NFL QB.

BUT that jury is still out! A few miracle finishes do not PROVE Tebow is the second coming any more than 6 miracle wins in 2009 proved that Kyle Orton was the answer. :ranger:

[slim]

beat me to the punch slim...did you make it to Denver for the game this weekend?

No, I couldn't make it. Sounds like they had a good time, though.

Did you go?

[Jsteve01]

I have NO idea what Tebow might do in the future. Right now it looks like he's developing his passing ability. When he started he looked HORRIBLE and John Elway who is a BIT better QB analyst than any fan didn't like what he saw. At all. Elway was scouting college QBs right and left.

IF Tebow continues to develop next season then we can say he'll be on track to be a successful NFL QB.

BUT that jury is still out! A few miracle finishes do not PROVE Tebow is the second coming any more than 6 miracle wins in 2009 proved that Kyle Orton was the answer. :ranger:

damn I thought you'd forgotten about the coffee drinking icon. that's one facet of your posts I didn't miss while you were gone

[Jsteve01]

No, I couldn't make it. Sounds like they had a good time, though.

Did you go?

No my daughter's health hasn't been very good this year so I stayed home and listened to Dave and Brian on the radio. very enjoyable. Maybe next year huh?

[slim]

I have NO idea what Tebow might do in the future. Right now it looks like he's developing his passing ability. When he started he looked HORRIBLE and John Elway who is a BIT better QB analyst than any fan didn't like what he saw. At all. Elway was scouting college QBs right and left.

IF Tebow continues to develop next season then we can say he'll be on track to be a successful NFL QB.

BUT that jury is still out! A few miracle finishes do not PROVE Tebow is the second coming any more than 6 miracle wins in 2009 proved that Kyle Orton was the answer. :ranger:

Right, he is developing...that is the point. 8 weeks ago you told us that he wasn't capable of developing into a pro QB.

Just like you are telling us now that DT isn't capable of developing.

Maybe they will both plateau and fail. I won't pretend to know that answer. I will leave the pretending to you.

[slim]

No my daughter's health hasn't been very good this year so I stayed home and listened to Dave and Brian on the radio. very enjoyable. Maybe next year huh?

That sucks.

I hope it's nothing serious with your daughter.

Next year is a definite possibility.

[rcsodak]

I would think by "best player available" they mean "best player available at a position of need." The PURE "best player available" trick turns you into Matt Millen taking a WR in the top 5 two years in a row. That's the epitome of stupidity that got Millen FIRED from the Lions!

They do need S, DT, CB, OL, RB(2), TE(2), LB and QB in no particular order.

They could afford to take a QB #1 if one fell they like. You'll notice that Broderick Bunkley has become a decent DT, not elite like Suh or Vince Wilfork but decent. That plugs a big hole. Marcus Thomas clearly is making plays in Allen's new defense.

Probably the biggest change from 1 year ago is getting a GOOD defensive coordinator and a good defensive scheme that allows players to make plays instead of the useless 3-4 defense that had them the worst in the league the last 2 years.

DJ has had a rebirth, Doom has successfully made the transition to DE, Miller has become a force from the LB position. Meanwhile Dawkins and Champ have been making plays. Probably the one serious weakness has been the play of Goodman who had serious breakdowns in coverage. But, even he made a big play against the Bears.

The secondary needs to get younger since they are starting 3 of the 6 OLDEST DBs in the league in Bailey, Goodman and Dawkins.

And it's not at all clear that Rahim Moore is any good. They might need to draft another S or CB with their 1st pick.
Cug, they just spent 4 draft picks THIS YEAR on S/TE. Dont you think its wise to allow the rooks an offseason and some coaching before wasting more picks? :confused:
Pitt hardly ever play their rooks. They sit until theyre up to speed or an injury forces their hand.

EFX has said theyre drafting for the future. That tells me they plan on getting more than 1 season out of their picks.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[TXBRONC]

Yeah, the jury is still out.

Personally, I think he has a chance to be a great WR. He isn't there right now, but he can get there.

I just don't get why some people are so quick to write-off young players. Players develop...they get better. What you see now is not what he will be a year from now. It's the same trap that TT haters fell into. I just don't get it.

I think he can too.

[Cugel]

So you think passing on Bowe and Poz for a Moss is nothing? BPA allows you to stock your team for a run at a championship. Look at teams like Pitt and Green Bay. They've got guys you've never heard of stashed on their roster to replace their Pro Bowlers when they leave.

You misunderstand. I don't mean it wasn't BAD. I meant that passing on Orakpo and Matthews was even worse by comparison. Moss was the WORST draft pick in Broncos history. They traded a 3rd round pick to move up to #17 and take him. And he utterly sucked.

It's just that if you look at the players who were drafted around that point in the draft there weren't many defenders taken after Moss in the first round who would have been better. Posluszny was taken in the 2nd round so a lot of teams whiffed on him.

And the Broncos needed Defensive help desperately, so Bowe was not an option. Jon Beason was probably the player they should have taken at #21 if they had not made a trade to grab Moss.

But they would have probably have taken S Reggie Nelson, who has had an up and down career since being traded from the Jagwads.

Mike Shanahan was actually lusting for DT Justin Harrell who was a complete and total bust with the Packers (slacker and oft-injured) and is now out of football. But, the Packers grabbed him a few picks before. So, Shanny panicked and made the move to move up and grab Jarvis Moss because he was the last player on "his board."

[rcsodak]

Like I said "best player available at a position of need." There's usually not a "best player" who stands head and shoulders above all the other players available. As for passing on players like Reed, Poluszny and Bowe, that's nothing!

They took Moreno instead of Orakpo and Ayers instead of Clay Matthews! Demaryius Thomas has also been a bust at WR and they took him instead of several players including Rob Broncowski. And they really could use a TE who's a threat right now, since they threw away the only pass-catching TE on the roster in Tony Sheffler because he accidentally hit on McMoron's wife at a party when that imbecile blew into town.

Just another nail in the coffin McMoron created for the Broncos through his unbounded incompetence.
Sometimes, just sticking to the facts better suits you, cug. :coffee:

DT is finally healthy....and in his 2nd yr. A bust? Lmao.
You have the patience of a fly.

They drafted a pass catching TE....who is hurt, AND a rook.

And who the hell is Broncowski?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[TimHippo]

BUT that jury is still out! A few miracle finishes do not PROVE Tebow is the second coming any more than 6 miracle wins in 2009 proved that Kyle Orton was the answer. :ranger:

Those weren't miracle wins. McDummy got lucky with a soft schedule to start the season. I hope you didn't jump on the McDummy bandwagon like that guy who ran the firejoshmcdaniels website who changed the website to supporjoshmcdaniels for 6 weeks before changing it back to firejoshmcdaniels.

[Ranger]

The starting WRs are dropping way too many passes. If I were HC, I'd get ALL over the OC and the receivers' coach. If that means benching the droppers (Decker/Thomas) for a few plays or just calling them into a meeting to read the riot act, then do it. I've even heard of the receivers (on other teams) themselves putting money into a pool for every dropped pass. In other words, a way for self discipline and mild ostracization.

[catfish]

Yeah, the jury is still out.

Personally, I think he has a chance to be a great WR. He isn't there right now, but he can get there.

I just don't get why some people are so quick to write-off young players. Players develop...they get better. What you see now is not what he will be a year from now. It's the same trap that TT haters fell into. I just don't get it.

Just from my point of view I think a lot of the "writing the receivers off" is backlash from the fact that if you brough up the fact that the receiver core was somewhat sub-par as a defense of Tebow earlier in the season you got crucified. They are fair game now after 3 quarters of poor play and the people who were making that argument earlier and forced to hold their tonuges are going to be screaming. Just as the Tebow detractors are going to scream after the next loss

As far as bust goes I don't think they are busts, I think DT is a high quality #2 and Decker is a very high quality #3. Unfortunately they are being asked to be a #1 and #2 and they aren't ready for it right now. That doesn't mean they won't ever be. It's a question of how long you want to give a 2nd year player to develop....cough QB cough

[Cugel]

Cug, they just spent 4 draft picks THIS YEAR on S/TE. Dont you think its wise to allow the rooks an offseason and some coaching before wasting more picks? :confused:
Pitt hardly ever play their rooks. They sit until theyre up to speed or an injury forces their hand.

EFX has said theyre drafting for the future. That tells me they plan on getting more than 1 season out of their picks.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Good god! Did you see the point where I said "in no particular order"? I'm not arguing that they should go out and use a 1st round draft pick on a TE! Only that the Broncos TEs SO FAR have not shown great pass catching ability.

I would imagine that the team will look to pick up a TE or two in the draft or via FA. Probably FA where they can usually acquire a veteran for not too much money.

As for RBs clearly that's a big need. Moreno is a bust and McGahee won't last forever.

DT is a need despite the improved play of starters Bunkley and Thomas. They need at least 2 more good DTs. They could use a backup DE or maybe 2, but that is not as vital.

They could use a C to either push Walton who has not impressed me particularly or replace him. Beadles has played better, but then they are running a lot more which helps a young OL. The OL has played great at run blocking but struggles at times with pass-blocking. Fortunately Tebow is highly mobile which helps. But, still they could use some more great players along the OL.

As for WRs I don't see any WRs on the roster who are a real threat that teams have to game plan how they are going to cover that guy. You need a serious threat at that position. True Thomas and Decker are young, but they drop WAY too many balls.

I've criticized Tebow's accuracy before but you can't blame all those incompletions on him last game. He hit the WRs right on the hands 4 times last game and they just dropped the ball. No excuses. That can't continue. Period.

So they have to look at WR with one of their top draft picks. CB is a big need because the DBs are the oldest in the NFL and Rahim Moore has been moved out of the starting lineup. Maybe he will develop but he hasn't so far and they have to consider drafting a S, although NOT with their first round pick.

LB -- they need more depth there as well. They could use some backups in case of injury. After Von Miller it's a real drop off.

And of course they will need to draft a QB because they won't have Brady Quinn next season and need at least 2 QBs.

[Traveler]

Most everyone agrees that drafting the BPA (especially in the 1st round) is the best way to proceed.

Don't quite agree with Cugel when he states teams should draft the BPA "at a position of need."

It's best to draft BPA even at a position of strength, but not over abundance.

Having said that, if the BPA head and shoulders better than player(s) already on the team, even at a position of strength, you do it. That just makes someone at the position trade bait so it's a win-win situation.

As to drafting the BPA at a position of need, that's where teams get in trouble IMO. Now, if teams are drafting BPA, and that player happens to fit at a posiition of need, that's okay.

Following Cugels philosophy lends itself to drafts similar to many of those poor selections by Reeves and Shanahan. Jury is still out on McDaniels' picks.

Reaching for the likes of Moss, Middlebrooks, O'Neal, Foster, Nash, Williams etc., will set a franchise back years.

While there are times when players available are not head and shoulders above others, you will still be better served by chosing the best player from that grouping regardless of position.

[Cugel]

Those weren't miracle wins. McDummy got lucky with a soft schedule to start the season. I hope you didn't jump on the McDummy bandwagon like that guy who ran the firejoshmcdaniels website who changed the website to supporjoshmcdaniels for 6 weeks before changing it back to firejoshmcdaniels.

Are you kidding me? :laugh:

I was actually banned several times from the official boards for blasting McMoron the instant I learned of the attempt to trade Cutler for Matt Cassel. McMoron lied from the start and it was just a total INSULT to the intelligence of every fan that he expected anybody to believe anything he said. I won't go into the proof of that. You either know it by now or don't care.

I HATED McMoron with a passion from day 1 and never changed my view.

And they WERE "miracle wins." The "Immaculate Deflection?" Ball bounces off the defender's hands on a desperation last second throw and straight into the arms of Brandon Stokely for an 89 yard TD? That was the most lucky play I've ever seen since the original miracle "Immaculate Reception" of Franco Harris against the Raiders.

That's just pure, blind luck. Nothing else. And there were SEVERAL plays almost as lucky in that streak. The Broncos should have been 3-3 at best during that stretch. Total luck.

[Cugel]

Most everyone agrees that drafting the BPA (especially in the 1st round) is the best way to proceed.

Don't quite agree with Cugel when he states teams should draft the BPA "at a position of need."

It's best to draft BPA even at a position of strength, but not over abundance.

Having said that, if the BPA head and shoulders better than player(s) already on the team, even at a position of strength, you do it. That just makes someone at the position trade bait so it's a win-win situation.

As to drafting the BPA at a position of need, that's where teams get in trouble IMO. Now, if teams are drafting BPA, and that player happens to fit at a posiition of need, that's okay.

Following Cugels philosophy lends itself to drafts similar to many of those poor selections by Reeves and Shanahan. Jury is still out on McDaniels' picks.

Reaching for the likes of Moss, Middlebrooks, O'Neal, Foster, Nash, Williams etc., will set a franchise back years.

While there are times when players available are not head and shoulders above others, you will still be better served by chosing the best player from that grouping regardless of position.

And drafting the "best player available" regardless of position leads to stupid decisions like Matt Millen taking a WR with 3 top 5 draft picks, despite the desperate need on defense and OL.

But, normally a team has at least SEVERAL if not more needs and can fill any one of them with any given pick. What should Detroit have done with their picks? Drafted an OT and not Charles Rodgers, that's what! If they'd done that Matt Millen might still have a GM job in this league.

Normally, there's not only ONE player who's obviously better than any other available. For instance Von Miller -- is he better than Marcel Dareus? Who knows at this point. It takes a DT up to 3 years to develop. We won't know who made the better selection for a couple of years now. Miller looks like the better choice right now -- but that could change if Dareus becomes a Hall of Famer or something.

What if the Broncos already have Miller and had that choice NEXT year? Are you saying they wouldn't take Dareus instead because he fills a need at DT and another Miller isn't as necessary?

It's only when you have an established team where you don't have a lot of roster spots a rookie can fill that you have to be more picky. The Packers for instance.

Obviously, you can't just say like Mike Shanahan: "We need a WR and Marcus Nash is the best left on the board, so let's take him." They should have taken a different position in that case.

The Broncos won't have ANY trouble finding a player to draft who can make their roster. They have needs at almost every position. RB, WR, TE, S, CB, DT, DE, QB. There is not ONE position where they don't need anybody. Not ONE position where they're totally set and couldn't use any help.

[TimHippo]

Are you kidding me? :laugh:

I was actually banned several times from the official boards for blasting McMoron the instant I learned of the attempt to trade Cutler for Matt Cassel. McMoron lied from the start and it was just a total INSULT to the intelligence of every fan that he expected anybody to believe anything he said. I won't go into the proof of that. You either know it by now or don't care.

I HATED McMoron with a passion from day 1 and never changed my view.


Hmm, really . . . you didn't jump on the McDummy bandwagon during the streak . . . I don't know if I believe you.

Regardless your anger at Tebow is misplaced. Tebow was not a McDummy evaluation. The only reason he picked Tebow was because he knew Belicheck wanted Tebow. That's why McDummy panicked and traded up and took Tebow in the first round. Belicheck knows a thing or two about evaluating players and thinking outside the box. (Rob Gronkowksi, Stephen Neal a NCAA wrestler, etc, etc)

The other reason McDummy vitally needed Tebow was P.R. McDummy is the most unlikeable person on the planet personality wise so he had to use Tebow's charisma as a human shield to buy himself more time with the fans and organization.

Tebow was a Belicheck pick not a McDummy pick. You need to be able to separate the two (Tebow and McDummy) out of your head.

[Traveler]

And drafting the "best player available" regardless of position leads to stupid decisions like Matt Millen taking a WR with 3 top 5 draft picks, despite the desperate need on defense and OL.

But, normally a team has at least SEVERAL if not more needs and can fill any one of them with any given pick. What should Detroit have done with their picks? Drafted an OT and not Charles Rodgers, that's what! If they'd done that Matt Millen might still have a GM job in this league.

Normally, there's not only ONE player who's obviously better than any other available. For instance Von Miller -- is he better than Marcel Dareus? Who knows at this point. It takes a DT up to 3 years to develop. We won't know who made the better selection for a couple of years now. Miller looks like the better choice right now -- but that could change if Dareus becomes a Hall of Famer or something.

What if the Broncos already have Miller and had that choice NEXT year? Are you saying they wouldn't take Dareus instead because he fills a need at DT and another Miller isn't as necessary?

It's only when you have an established team where you don't have a lot of roster spots a rookie can fill that you have to be more picky. The Packers for instance.

Obviously, you can't just say like Mike Shanahan: "We need a WR and Marcus Nash is the best left on the board, so let's take him." They should have taken a different position in that case.

The Broncos won't have ANY trouble finding a player to draft who can make their roster. They have needs at almost every position. RB, WR, TE, S, CB, DT, DE, QB. There is not ONE position where they don't need anybody. Not ONE position where they're totally set and couldn't use any help.

Are you serious? Millen wasn't drafting BPA, he was just stupid. Using Millen an an example completely ruins your argument.

Go back and look at what I said. But to save you time I'll highlight my exception to this rule.


It's best to draft BPA even at a position of strength, but not over abundance.

[rcsodak]

Hmm, really . . . you didn't jump on the McDummy bandwagon during the streak . . . I don't know if I believe you.

Regardless your anger at Tebow is misplaced. Tebow was not a McDummy evaluation. The only reason he picked Tebow was because he knew Belicheck wanted Tebow. That's why McDummy panicked and traded up and took Tebow in the first round. Belicheck knows a thing or two about evaluating players and thinking outside the box. (Rob Gronkowksi, Stephen Neal a NCAA wrestler, etc, etc)

The other reason McDummy vitally needed Tebow was P.R. McDummy is the most unlikeable person on the planet personality wise so he had to use Tebow's charisma as a human shield to buy himself more time with the fans and organization.

Tebow was a Belicheck pick not a McDummy pick. You need to be able to separate the two (Tebow and McDummy) out of your head.

Belicik's drafting of late hasnt exactly been world beating, so i'm finding reason to pause at your mind reading.
Nor do I think an organization would spend any collateral just to get some positive pr. I will actually go out on a limb and call that idea proponderous.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Ravage!!!]

Millen DID draft the BPA, and because of where he landed the BPA were these WRs that were coming out as GREAT prospects.

Although I'm alllll for BPA, you HAVE to consider what players you already have on the team bfore you make that decision. New Orleans isn't going to draft a QB in the first round. Neither is Carolina, NYG, GB, SD, NE, ATL, SF, CIN, HOU, TENN, MINN, CHI, DAL, STL,DET, PIT, BAL, and the Jets.

I mention all those teams, because you can't tell me that the "BPA" won't be a QB when one or more of these teams draft. But they won't take a QB.

So although the BPA sounds like its the way to go, you MUST take the BPA without taking a filled position. WE may draft a LB, but won't draft a SLB. We may draft an OL, but it will NOT be LT.

[slim]

Millen DID draft the BPA, and because of where he landed the BPA were these WRs that were coming out as GREAT prospects.
Although I'm alllll for BPA, you HAVE to consider what players you already have on the team bfore you make that decision. New Orleans isn't going to draft a QB in the first round. Neither is Carolina, NYG, GB, SD, NE, ATL, SF, CIN, HOU, TENN, MINN, CHI, DAL, STL,DET, PIT, BAL, and the Jets.

I mention all those teams, because you can't tell me that the "BPA" won't be a QB when one or more of these teams draft. But they won't take a QB.

So although the BPA sounds like its the way to go, you MUST take the BPA without taking a filled position. WE may draft a LB, but won't draft a SLB. We may draft an OL, but it will NOT be LT.

This is a bit disingenuous. Millen did not go BPA, necessarily (many people LOL'ed at the Mike Williams pick). Also, Millen is an idiot and so maybe he failed for that reason (not because of any draft strategy). Not to mention the fact that BPA only works if you can actually evaluate talent.

But I agree with you to some extent. You don't have to get crazy with BPA. The truth of the matter is, there will almost always be a few players that have similar grades on a draft board. At that point, team need would obviously be the deciding factor.

[Joel]

I'm guessing if we have four pro-bowl WRs they'll pass on the fifth. Rest easy Joel.
B-b-but... you MUST take the BPA, even a WR when you're the Patriots, even if a three time All American CB is available for your Swiss cheese secondary! :tongue:

I agree completely with the FO position. One, you don't want to tip your hand one way or the other. The less other teams know about our draft board, the better situated we are.
If it is just gamesmanship, great, and thanks to ESPN for helping. However, spending a top 25 pick (and first round cap money) on a star we can't put on the field (or who forces one OFF the field) frankly horrifies me. That's only cost effective by trading the fine player already present to make room for the draft pick--which works fine unless he's a bust, but otherwise makes the FO look like idiots (mainly because they are.)

That's the problem with ALWAYS going BPA, and the better a team is the more positions they have like that. There's no practical difference between saying, "we're drafting the BPA who isn't a QB, RB, T, TE, WR, DB or defensive lineman" and just saying, "we're drafting Gs and LBs." Playoff teams should draft for need; that they pick behind 20 other teams just incentivizes that priority. In the specific case of Denver and QBs...:

Second, the FO can't get dazzled by the miracles. We can't always depend on divine intervention to pull out wins. If the FO is doing their jobs, things like 3 and outs, 3rd down % and the slow first halfs will be included in the final analysis of Tebow's performance.

I'll be surprised if we end up taking a QB in RD1. But if QB is BPA, you have to ask "by how much?" End of the day, I'm loving the direction EFx is taking this club...if they deem Tebow's their guy, I'm on board. If they decide at the draft to go a different direction, I'm still on board. In EF.............x I trust.
If a QB is the BPA we must ask not only how much better he is than any other pick, but how much better than our current QBs. At #20+ the answer MUST be, "not much, even if he turns out as good as predicted." Frankly, looking at most teams' draft records makes me wonder how their scouts stay employed. ESPN also has an archived article about Brady (just before 18-1 when everyone thought he was God) that illustrates the point well:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?id=3219092

Brady was the SEVENTH QB in his draft class, behind guys like Chad Pennington and Tee Martin. The only one of those half dozen QBs who didn't have brief forgettable careers was Marc Bulger--the FIFTH QB taken.

Granted, all draft picks are crap shoots; even legit talent may loaf or be the next Maurice Clarett. But QB is the biggest crap shoot; a few years ago Quinn was rated the top pick until Jamarcus Russell beat him in a bowl game and leap frogged to the #1 overall pick: Where are they now? We'd have to be insane to do something like that while possessing a large KNOWN quantity in Tebow, whose only deficiencies are imminently teachable things he's already greatly improved.

Like I say, all draft picks are crap shoots, but I won't make a big wager like a first round pick (and cap money) without a proportionate payoff. I just don't see that in a QB taken at #20+ when we've already got a rapidly improving QB who's not bad as it is.

It's all worth noting that swapping a good second year QB for a drafted one is an unhelpful habit; winning the crap shoot is hard enough that throwing away the winnings when it happens is madness. I say that not because of Tebow (though it certainly applies there) but because reviewing our 2006 draft class just now sent me into a blind rage:

Jay Cutler, Tony Scheffler, Brandon Marshall, Elvis Dumervil, Domenik Hixon, Chris Kuper, and Greg Eslinger. Three Pro Bowlers, three solid starters and one scrub--only two of which are still in Denver. Maybe instead of firing the GM the following year we should've fired the owner. :tsk:

Why would you want the front office to come out and say what position they are drafting at so that some team could trade up in front of them to steal a player. Why show your hand? This is the craziness that Tebow brings. Everyone reads to much into stuff. This is probably something we have heard a million times but because Tebow is here its a rip on him. I don't get it! What will really be fun is when we start working out QBs like we do EVERY year and people complain about that.
Yeah, if that's all it is, no problem. I just don't want to blow a first day pick when we have so many glaring needs.

BPA. I love it. Dont reach on any position. Tebow doing what he does took us out of the QB race. The franchise would be stupid to say otherwise, same goes for every other position.
It's not a reach if it solidly fills genuine need, it's getting a useful player instead of blowing a valuable early round pick on a useless star. Otherwise, draft Obama; he's famous enough to put butts in the bleachers. :tongue:

BPA is the only way to draft.

People were clamoring for it back when Shanny was constantly reaching to fill needs. Now people want to draft for need. :noidea:

I don't care if the BPA is a QB....draft him. Now, I find it hard to believe that a quality QB will be around when we pick, given that we will be drafting in the 20s....
In a word, no, BPA is not the "only" way to draft. Always ignoring the roster to follow the same draft philosophy is a mistake. ALWAYS doing ANYTHING is usually a mistake; football, like life, is situational. Drafting players we can't use is "always" a mistake, however good they are.

I would like to know how we had 5 ProBowl wr's in the initial scenario........... :eek:[/size]
*shrugs* They were the best BPA at our pick five years in the row, so we completed the set. ;)

We really need to take a corner in the first two rounds. Goodman just isn't going to cut it for much longer. We also will need to take another defensive tackle in the first three rounds. We loaded up on TE and safety last draft, hopefully Carter and Moore develop so we don't have to worry about that yet. Dawkins is definitely helping both players get better and cut down on the foolishness and hopefully that shows next year.

IMO, rounds 1-3 in no order:
DT, CB, BPA(Non QB)
I'd hate going after another safety, but last years are very disappointing so far. On the other hand, a great CB, could start next to Harris in a few years while Champ goes to FS. Either way, I'm afraid the Pats will remove the last doubts about replacing Goodman. We can survive with Bunkley and Thomas at DT, but our secondary is so full of holes people talking about us chewing up the Pats DBs seem ironic.

Tebow's play ensures him another season. Unfortunately for the Broncos THIS is the QB dream class and widely considered the best QB class since 1983. NEXT year, IF Tebow were to turn into Rex Grossman (whom the Ravens Brian Billick was sure was his "franchise QB" remember), then the team would be screwed.

That is my nightmare scenario. That Tebow hits a plateau that is good enough to win some games against a last place schedule and a bunch of teams decimated by injury, but will never be good enough a passer to win a SB. AND he leads the team to just enough wins this season that they can't draft a QB from among the best QB class in 30 years.

That's a double disaster for the team. Fortunately, that hasn't happened yet. All that HAS happened is that Tebow has improved his throwing accuracy to the point where he can hit some passes. He's still not Tom Brady out there, but he doesn't have to be. IF (and I mean IF, it's not by any means a done deal) he can become a Ben Roethlisberger clone then he can have success even though he will never be Drew Brees.

You'll notice that the Broncos are in the process of ABANDONING the OPTION READ! They ran it a handful of times last game and the Bears stuffed it each time.

So much for Tebow "revolutionizing the NFL with his brand new breakthrough offense."

He's going to try and become a semi-traditional pocket passing QB who can make some plays with his feet -- i.e. they're trying to turn him into another Ben Roethlisberger. Which is a good thing. Ben won 2 SBs after all with great defense, solid running attack and accurate passing to guys like Hines Ward.
I see your point, but there's no reason but fear to think Tebow will plateau at mediocrity. Again, he's not just shown vast improvement already, his remaning deficiencies are extremely teachable things only requiring good teachers and an intelligent dedicated student, all of which are present. Even were that not so, there's no guarantee this is the best QB class since '83; it could just be the best since '98, which means you're screwed if you don't have the top pick (as in most "great x" drafts.) Even if we could do it (which you rightly note we can't,) best case scenario is being right where we are--in a couple more years. Denver can become known as that team that always drafts great QBs then trades them away two years later because they don't get great ENOUGH fast enough.

Here's MY nightmare scenario: Denver takes a highly touted QB late in the first round, pays him a commensurate salary. Then we either pay him or Tebow millions to ride pine, or trade one of them to a team that won't give us better than a 3rd round pick for either given the uncertainty around both. Why not just trade someone a first for a third NOW? I'm sure there would be plenty of takers. ;)

Incidentally, they're more likely to try turning Tebow into Sid Luckman or Arnie Herber than Roethlisberger, which is good, because Big Ben isn't much more accurate than Tebow, and has a lot more picks AND fumbles.

BPA is always the best tact as long as it's not a ridiculous situation where you get the best WR when you have two pro bowlers
That's not so ridiculous, just an extreme case of the law of averages, and far easier to predict than the "best" player. Remember how shocked everyone was when the Texans blew off Reggie Bush and VY to take Mario Williams with the #1 pick? ;) That may have been a case where BPA and need coincided (for one thing, Houston already had a high draft pick starting at QB) but it illustrates my point.

BPA is not "always" the best tact because NOTHING is "always" the best tact. That's like saying "running/passing is always best." If it were really that simple there wouldn't be so many people screwing it up routinely.

It's "always" best to take the Best Player for Your Roster, which is SOMETIMES the best (remaining) player. However, that's only when you're lucky enough the BPA happens to play one of your few needed positions, or UNlucky enough you need help EVERYWHERE, so the BPA automatically fills SOME real need. With some star players (and consequently lower picks) the right course getting the help they need to win it all, even if it means passing over better players you can't use.

The sad thing is, that IS pretty simple, but most teams do it backward. Dog teams get blown up at multiple positions weekly, any one of which can tempt a GM to say, "x MUST be our top priority next year." So they pass up talent they may not get another shot at for two decades in favor of the QB (or RB, or LT, or DE, or LB) expected to singlehandedly save the franchise. They ought to get the best players available, when high draft position ensures they ARE the best, and build a team around them that plays to their many strengths. Once playoff appearances become the norm they'll have a core of seasoned Pro Bowlers who don't need much help to go all the way. Then they can use their mediocre playoff team draft picks to get that marginal help, rather than chasing "the best #30 pick available" despite the fact he'll spend his entire contract backing up a Pro Bowler, and probably never be a star on ANY team.

Let's put this "ALWAYS draft need/talent" business to rest once and for all: Should you ALWAYS raise in poker, or ALWAYS fold? Isn't it better to ALWAYS look at your hand first, then make your choice accordingly?

I think it's way too early to call DT a bust. Have you even watched the last few games?
He was good at Minnesota, had four drops Sunday (including an easy TD while scoreless) then redeemed himself with some nice catches at the end. I call Sunday a wash, so he had a good game in September of 2010, another in December of 2011 and NOTHING in the intervening 15 months. This is the guy who justified dumping Gaffney and Marshall? :confused:

[Joel]

So you think passing on Bowe and Poz for a Moss is nothing? BPA allows you to stock your team for a run at a championship. Look at teams like Pitt and Green Bay. They've got guys you've never heard of stashed on their roster to replace their Pro Bowlers when they leave.
No, BPA CAN allow you to stock your team for a run at a championship IF you're drafting so highly that:

1) The best player AVAILABLE is one the top 5-10 in the whole draft class AND

2) You have so many awful starters he'll be star at ANY position will be a big improvement.

Suppose there's an Olympic gold medal winning decathlete on the board at your pick, do you take him? What if I tell you he's a kicker? ;) Granted, I just described Jim Thorpe, but he also started at tailback in a time when that made him the teams leading rusher AND passer; were he ONLY a kicker he would not have been a #1 draft pick (which he wasn't anyway, because the draft didn't exist until 20 years after he retired.)

If you've already got a slew of talent the way you stock up for a SB run is by getting the guys who fill the few remaining chinks in your armor; they may not be the best talents in the draft, but since 20-25 (or more) teams pick before you, you're not getting that guy anyway unless you make some expensive trades. Wanna trade away a Pro Bowler and later picks in this years AND next years draft just to get a raw #3 pick who's more likely to be a bust than a star? Go ahead, but you won't win Super Bowls like that.

Green Bay had several straight bad seasons Favres last years; BPA made sense for them for a lot of reasons. I only hope they and the Steelers keep that up, because the Eagles are about the only team I hate more, and if they want to spend late first and second round picks (and corresponding cap money) on guys to watch Pro Bowlers play their spots, more power to them. I'm not really sure that's what Pitt's doing though; they spent a high pick last year on a center, because they NEEDED one, and were rewarded with amazingly good play that helped them to the Super Bowl.

The right action depends on the situation; no one action is right in ALL situations. To know if I'd shoot a man in the head I must also know whether he's holding my kids head under water or bandaging his scraped knee.


Most everyone agrees that drafting the BPA (especially in the 1st round) is the best way to proceed.
Most everyone once agreed that the Earth was flat.

Don't quite agree with Cugel when he states teams should draft the BPA "at a position of need."

It's best to draft BPA even at a position of strength, but not over abundance.

Having said that, if the BPA head and shoulders better than player(s) already on the team, even at a position of strength, you do it. That just makes someone at the position trade bait so it's a win-win situation.
Not really, because for that to work requires 1) the draft pick isn't a bust and 2) you get a regular season trade of a draft pick better than the one you just spent. Small chance both occur.

As to drafting the BPA at a position of need, that's where teams get in trouble IMO. Now, if teams are drafting BPA, and that player happens to fit at a posiition of need, that's okay.

Following Cugels philosophy lends itself to drafts similar to many of those poor selections by Reeves and Shanahan. Jury is still out on McDaniels' picks.

Reaching for the likes of Moss, Middlebrooks, O'Neal, Foster, Nash, Williams etc., will set a franchise back years.

While there are times when players available are not head and shoulders above others, you will still be better served by chosing the best player from that grouping regardless of position.
Years? Seriously? Shanny had (IIRC) TWO losing seasons in a decade coaching Denver, and even McDumbass managed to eke out a .500 record with the three Pro Bowlers and two starters Shanny "reached" for in '06 (then he dumped most of them and went 4-12.)

A lot of the guys you mentioned weren't reaches in the first place, but draft picks highly regarded at the time that nevertheless proved to be busts--DESPITE being the BPA at our spot. I remember most folks around here being pretty psyched about Moss as much for his perceived talent as for "finally" getting a "great" DE; the minority concerned about his health, work ethic and that most of his good performances were in his last few games were proven right, but they were definitely the minority at the time. Foster and Middlebrooks were both highly regarded when they were drafted, too, but the "best" player available turned out not to be very good.

Fact is, with a .500 season the "best" player available when you pick still isn't likely to be a star, so you might as well address the handful of liabilities that kept you from winning it all last year.

And drafting the "best player available" regardless of position leads to stupid decisions like Matt Millen taking a WR with 3 top 5 draft picks, despite the desperate need on defense and OL.

But, normally a team has at least SEVERAL if not more needs and can fill any one of them with any given pick. What should Detroit have done with their picks? Drafted an OT and not Charles Rodgers, that's what! If they'd done that Matt Millen might still have a GM job in this league.

Normally, there's not only ONE player who's obviously better than any other available. For instance Von Miller -- is he better than Marcel Dareus? Who knows at this point. It takes a DT up to 3 years to develop. We won't know who made the better selection for a couple of years now. Miller looks like the better choice right now -- but that could change if Dareus becomes a Hall of Famer or something.

What if the Broncos already have Miller and had that choice NEXT year? Are you saying they wouldn't take Dareus instead because he fills a need at DT and another Miller isn't as necessary?

It's only when you have an established team where you don't have a lot of roster spots a rookie can fill that you have to be more picky. The Packers for instance.

Obviously, you can't just say like Mike Shanahan: "We need a WR and Marcus Nash is the best left on the board, so let's take him." They should have taken a different position in that case.

The Broncos won't have ANY trouble finding a player to draft who can make their roster. They have needs at almost every position. RB, WR, TE, S, CB, DT, DE, QB. There is not ONE position where they don't need anybody. Not ONE position where they're totally set and couldn't use any help.
Glad somebody gets it. I disagree with that final assessment; I don't think we could use a LB at all once Miller has the experience to play coverage and call defensive audibles at MLB, and taking a highly regarded QB would just fan the flames of controversy. However, that's a disagreement about the state of the team, not the proper course for each of various states.

BPA when you're crap, getting Pro Bowlers and HoFers to build a team around for a decade of playoff runs.

Need once you have enough of them to make the playoffs regularly, only lacking the final few pieces just good enough to put you on top and only have draft picks just good enough to get them.

[Cugel]

This is a bit disingenuous. Millen did not go BPA, necessarily (many people LOL'ed at the Mike Williams pick). Also, Millen is an idiot and so maybe he failed for that reason (not because of any draft strategy). Not to mention the fact that BPA only works if you can actually evaluate talent.

But I agree with you to some extent. You don't have to get crazy with BPA. The truth of the matter is, there will almost always be a few players that have similar grades on a draft board. At that point, team need would obviously be the deciding factor.

Charles Rogers, Roy Williams and Mike Williams WERE the "top rated prospects" and Matt Millen DID go "Best player available" and he said so publicly at the time.

There was NO sense in drafting 4 WRs in the top 10 in 5 years but Millen stubbornly did it anyway! He was a moron. But his stupidity was due to his adhering blindly to the "best player available" instead of taking OTHER perfectly good players. For instance in 2005 he took Roy Williams #10.

Know what the next 2 players selected were? DeMarcus Ware and Shawne Merriman!

That ought to be enough to CROAK the stupid "best player available" theory! Get a player at a position of need. NOBODY KNOWS who will be great and who will maybe suck. SO, you can't always tell who the real prospect is.

Remember that Reggie Bush went #2 overall and Demeco Ryans wasn't drafted until the 2nd round! Devin Hester lasted until #57 that year. Oh, and in 2007 Ted Ginn, Jr. went ahead of Patrick Willis!

[Cugel]

Glad somebody gets it. I disagree with that final assessment; I don't think we could use a LB at all once Miller has the experience to play coverage and call defensive audibles at MLB, and taking a highly regarded QB would just fan the flames of controversy. However, that's a disagreement about the state of the team, not the proper course for each of various states.

BPA when you're crap, getting Pro Bowlers and HoFers to build a team around for a decade of playoff runs.

Need once you have enough of them to make the playoffs regularly, only lacking the final few pieces just good enough to put you on top and only have draft picks just good enough to get them.

You have to get a good player with your #1 pick of course, and that means you can't reach. BUT, you should be able to find a decent talent at ONE of the positions where you need help. Unless somebody just jumps off the charts take the best guy on your board at some position where you need some help. And if you're honest with most teams that is a LOT more than 1 or two positions.

So, you can't lock in on one position, but you can't lock in on 1 player either. That was Shanahan's mistake! He had a very narrow draft board and assumed that only the players on it were worth drafting. That's blind ARROGANCE on his part -- thinking that he could identify who were the best talents and ignoring everybody else.

Only he made too many mistakes for that to work. He ignored his scouts and had his own ideas. The worst examples of this of course were drafting WRs Marcus Nash and Darius Watts when no other teams had either of them as 1st or 2nd round talents.

Having only 100 players on his draft board to start with was the beginning of his problems. McMoron was worse in that he had "his player" types and kept getting rid of everybody else regardless of talent if they weren't "his guys."

It was like he wanted to create an exclusive "club" with himself as the star and center of attention and kick everybody else out of his club if they "didn't fit in." Total douche bag and attention whore.

Notice the difference between the extreme arrogance of McMoron who always had to be right and the calm humility of John Fox? He manages to get along with everybody. No personality conflicts at all and his ego just doesn't get in the way.

He manages to get everybody, both players he inherited and those he brought in, playing and working together in harmony. Probably the only exceptions were Kyle Orton and Brandon Lloyd and they were both gone by mid-season. And he did it in a way where there wasn't any bad blood and it didn't hurt the team.

It's like a breath of fresh air having an actual ADULT as head coach instead of a petulant child! If the Broncos make the playoffs you pretty much have to consider John Fox for coach of the year!

[bcbronc]

Charles Rogers, Roy Williams and Mike Williams WERE the "top rated prospects" and Matt Millen DID go "Best player available" and he said so publicly at the time.

There was NO sense in drafting 4 WRs in the top 10 in 5 years but Millen stubbornly did it anyway! He was a moron. But his stupidity was due to his adhering blindly to the "best player available" instead of taking OTHER perfectly good players. For instance in 2005 he took Roy Williams #10.

Know what the next 2 players selected were? DeMarcus Ware and Shawne Merriman!

Like already stated, Matt Millen is a moron. Pretty much everyone else understands that some roster consideration will go into determining who is the best player available.


That ought to be enough to CROAK the stupid "best player available" theory! Get a player at a position of need. NOBODY KNOWS who will be great and who will maybe suck. SO, you can't always tell who the real prospect is.

And the other side of that coin is you can't always tell where a position of need is going to be in a year or two. Take 2004/05 as an example.

Culpepper throws for 4700 yards, 39 TDs, 11 Ints and a passer rating of 110 in the 2004 season. During the 2005 draft, Minn is in the 18 slot, and a young passer from Cal is falling down the boards. Be crazy of Minn to take a QB with Culpepper on the roster, right.

Aaron Rodgers slips all the way to 24. The Vikings draft Erasmus James, who misses his sophomore and junior seasons due to injury before being waived. Culpepper would never play more than 7 games, throw for more than 1600 yards, or throw more TDs than Ints in a season again. Think Minnesota would have won a SuperBowl if they had Rodgers instead of Favre the past couple years? Maybe.

This is a pretty extreme example. No one would have taken Rodgers in the 1st coming off the seasons Culpepper had had the previous two years. But it illustrates perfectly how you just don't know how a position will look in a year or two. One year it looks like you've got all the CBs you could need, so you pass on the next Champ only to have circumstances destroy you're CB depth.

As far as DT goes, 11 catches, 222 yards, 3 TDs over the past 2 games. That's even with the drops he had. Considering he's probably still trying to get into game shape after all the time off, it's way premature to be calling him a bust. Most WRs don't break out until their 3rd season and DT's just a rookie (if Tebow can be a rookie, so can DT! :laugh: )

[Canmore]

You have to get a good player with your #1 pick of course, and that means you can't reach. BUT, you should be able to find a decent talent at ONE of the positions where you need help. Unless somebody just jumps off the charts take the best guy on your board at some position where you need some help. And if you're honest with most teams that is a LOT more than 1 or two positions.

So, you can't lock in on one position, but you can't lock in on 1 player either. That was Shanahan's mistake! He had a very narrow draft board and assumed that only the players on it were worth drafting. That's blind ARROGANCE on his part -- thinking that he could identify who were the best talents and ignoring everybody else.

Only he made too many mistakes for that to work. He ignored his scouts and had his own ideas. The worst examples of this of course were drafting WRs Marcus Nash and Darius Watts when no other teams had either of them as 1st or 2nd round talents.

Having only 100 players on his draft board to start with was the beginning of his problems. McMoron was worse in that he had "his player" types and kept getting rid of everybody else regardless of talent if they weren't "his guys."

It was like he wanted to create an exclusive "club" with himself as the star and center of attention and kick everybody else out of his club if they "didn't fit in." Total douche bag and attention whore.

Notice the difference between the extreme arrogance of McMoron who always had to be right and the calm humility of John Fox? He manages to get along with everybody. No personality conflicts at all and his ego just doesn't get in the way.

He manages to get everybody, both players he inherited and those he brought in, playing and working together in harmony. Probably the only exceptions were Kyle Orton and Brandon Lloyd and they were both gone by mid-season. And he did it in a way where there wasn't any bad blood and it didn't hurt the team.

It's like a breath of fresh air having an actual ADULT as head coach instead of a petulant child! If the Broncos make the playoffs you pretty much have to consider John Fox for coach of the year!

Well said. It is refreshing having adults in charge in Denver. No matter how the Broncos finish, I think you have to mention John Fox for coach of the year. He may not win but at least he deserves to be in the conversation.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Yeah, the jury is still out.

Personally, I think he has a chance to be a great WR. He isn't there right now, but he can get there.

I just don't get why some people are so quick to write-off young players. Players develop...they get better. What you see now is not what he will be a year from now. It's the same trap that TT haters fell into. I just don't get it.

^^^ This. Whatever happened to the thought process that WRs need 3 years to fully develop? Sure there are some Megatrons, Fitzgeralds, and AJ Greens out there, but most WRs aren't superstars overnight.

DEs, RBs, and LBs are usually about as good as they are going to get right out of the box because the differences between the NCAA and NFL are minimal. Every other position, especially depending on where they played their college ball, typically needs some time to develop.

[rcsodak]

No, BPA CAN allow you to stock your team for a run at a championship IF you're drafting so highly that:

1) The best player AVAILABLE is one the top 5-10 in the whole draft class AND

2) You have so many awful starters he'll be star at ANY position will be a big improvement.

Suppose there's an Olympic gold medal winning decathlete on the board at your pick, do you take him? What if I tell you he's a kicker? ;) Granted, I just described Jim Thorpe, but he also started at tailback in a time when that made him the teams leading rusher AND passer; were he ONLY a kicker he would not have been a #1 draft pick (which he wasn't anyway, because the draft didn't exist until 20 years after he retired.)

If you've already got a slew of talent the way you stock up for a SB run is by getting the guys who fill the few remaining chinks in your armor; they may not be the best talents in the draft, but since 20-25 (or more) teams pick before you, you're not getting that guy anyway unless you make some expensive trades. Wanna trade away a Pro Bowler and later picks in this years AND next years draft just to get a raw #3 pick who's more likely to be a bust than a star? Go ahead, but you won't win Super Bowls like that.

Green Bay had several straight bad seasons Favres last years; BPA made sense for them for a lot of reasons. I only hope they and the Steelers keep that up, because the Eagles are about the only team I hate more, and if they want to spend late first and second round picks (and corresponding cap money) on guys to watch Pro Bowlers play their spots, more power to them. I'm not really sure that's what Pitt's doing though; they spent a high pick last year on a center, because they NEEDED one, and were rewarded with amazingly good play that helped them to the Super Bowl.

The right action depends on the situation; no one action is right in ALL situations. To know if I'd shoot a man in the head I must also know whether he's holding my kids head under water or bandaging his scraped knee.


Most everyone once agreed that the Earth was flat.

Not really, because for that to work requires 1) the draft pick isn't a bust and 2) you get a regular season trade of a draft pick better than the one you just spent. Small chance both occur.

Years? Seriously? Shanny had (IIRC) TWO losing seasons in a decade coaching Denver, and even McDumbass managed to eke out a .500 record with the three Pro Bowlers and two starters Shanny "reached" for in '06 (then he dumped most of them and went 4-12.)

A lot of the guys you mentioned weren't reaches in the first place, but draft picks highly regarded at the time that nevertheless proved to be busts--DESPITE being the BPA at our spot. I remember most folks around here being pretty psyched about Moss as much for his perceived talent as for "finally" getting a "great" DE; the minority concerned about his health, work ethic and that most of his good performances were in his last few games were proven right, but they were definitely the minority at the time. Foster and Middlebrooks were both highly regarded when they were drafted, too, but the "best" player available turned out not to be very good.

Fact is, with a .500 season the "best" player available when you pick still isn't likely to be a star, so you might as well address the handful of liabilities that kept you from winning it all last year.

Glad somebody gets it. I disagree with that final assessment; I don't think we could use a LB at all once Miller has the experience to play coverage and call defensive audibles at MLB, and taking a highly regarded QB would just fan the flames of controversy. However, that's a disagreement about the state of the team, not the proper course for each of various states.

BPA when you're crap, getting Pro Bowlers and HoFers to build a team around for a decade of playoff runs.

Need once you have enough of them to make the playoffs regularly, only lacking the final few pieces just good enough to put you on top and only have draft picks just good enough to get them.
Still sutuck on miller to mike?
Wheres youre reasoning to take away one of the 2 pass rushers on the team?

You do realize thats what elway wanted for, yes? To wreak havoc oin the backfield, ala DThomas. You do realize at mike, he NOT going to be lined up on the edge, right?
You seem to have some cranial matter, by your postings.
Maybe divulge your reasonings?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Joel]

Still sutuck on miller to mike?
Wheres youre reasoning to take away one of the 2 pass rushers on the team?

You do realize thats what elway wanted for, yes? To wreak havoc oin the backfield, ala DThomas. You do realize at mike, he NOT going to be lined up on the edge, right?
You seem to have some cranial matter, by your postings.
Maybe divulge your reasonings?
Pretty straightforward: I don't think moving Miller to Mike would sacrifice blitzing. As I noted in another thread, the Mike is closer to the QB than anywhere else on D; he just has to get between the guards (just as edge rushers must get between tackles and TE/RBs.) And Mikes aren't obligated to line up in the middle if someone else has the pass coverage assignment there; he would hardly be the first Mike to come off the edge for a sack.

Most of the time though I think we'd see him blitzing up the middle like a strong safety or, I dunno, a MIKE, and get to the QB through those big old scary guards at least as well at 245 as Dawkins does at 210. The difference is that when he DIDN'T blitz we'd have someone who moves faster AND hits harder than Mays covering the short middle of the field and knocking backs out of the hole (not that I think Mays is bad, but not as elite as Miller would be if he had the savvy to match his speed and power.) Speaking of which, we'd have a 274 lb. tank in Haggan starting at Sam, and wouldn't get eaten up with so many outside runs; backs would be much more likely to go to weakside at DJ, which Miller, the coaches and everyone else would know and play.

The question isn't whether Miller could and would be as effective blitzing from Mike as he is from Sam; Brian Urlacher does OK. The question is whether, and how fast, he can pick up the mental awareness and coverage skills to play the role of defensive QB, which demands more high level versatility than perhaps any position on that side of the ball (perhaps the reason we've seen so many SSs supplementing it in recent years.) It's a valid and big question, but present to a far greater degree in any rookie we draft, whereas Miller answering it would give us a SOLID LB corps consisting of:

Sam: Haggan (Mays) Mike: Miller (Mays) Will: DJ (Woodyard)

Where could we add a drafted LB in that rotation? Haggan would be in a role that minimizes his only weakness, Miller would be a significant upgrade at Mike without losing his blitzing ability, and Mays would be a reliable backup for either. In MLB we're talking about a position analogous to the 3-4 OLB, so a former 3-4 OLB who still plays that style starting at Will makes as much sense as starting a FB at quarter--never mind.... :tongue:

Anyway, that's my rationale.

[Joel]

You have to get a good player with your #1 pick of course, and that means you can't reach. BUT, you should be able to find a decent talent at ONE of the positions where you need help. Unless somebody just jumps off the charts take the best guy on your board at some position where you need some help. And if you're honest with most teams that is a LOT more than 1 or two positions.

So, you can't lock in on one position, but you can't lock in on 1 player either.
You can't lock in on arbitrary draft value either; early round picks are more valuable than later ones solely because they give you prior access to talent other teams might otherwise get before you.

A pick is NEVER a reach IF it significantly improves your team; the only question is "would another available player improve a different starter under contract the next 3+ years EVEN MORE?"

That's seldom if ever a legitimately Boolean variable; call it a "Boolean probability:"

It's LESS likely to be true the better your team is (because you have few needs and worse talent access) and MORE likely to be true the worse your team is (because you have many needs and better talent access.)

Not gonna parse Shanny and McDumbass; I'm still steaming from looking over three Pro Bowlers and three starters in Shannys last draft and remembering what McDumbass did to them because he knew he could do better.

[VonSackemMiller]

Drafting best player available last year really worked for us. And drafting who we wanted really worked for mcdaniels his last year. I guess its a toss up, I just want them to continue getting it right.

[bcbronc]

Most of the time though I think we'd see him blitzing up the middle like a strong safety or, I dunno, a MIKE, and get to the QB through those big old scary guards at least as well at 245 as Dawkins does at 210. The difference is that when he DIDN'T blitz we'd have someone who moves faster AND hits harder than Mays covering the short middle of the field and knocking backs out of the hole (not that I think Mays is bad, but not as elite as Miller would be if he had the savvy to match his speed and power.) Speaking of which, we'd have a 274 lb. tank in Haggan starting at Sam, and wouldn't get eaten up with so many outside runs; backs would be much more likely to go to weakside at DJ, which Miller, the coaches and everyone else would know and play.

Problem here, as I see it, Miller has played on the edge his entire life, as far as I know. Either a DE or OLB, his instincts aren't those of someone who's played in the middle his whole life. The reads, the way the play develops in front of you, who you're taking on as blockers, all very different from the inside compared to the outside.

Think of moving DJ around throughout his career.


The question isn't whether Miller could and would be as effective blitzing from Mike as he is from Sam; Brian Urlacher does OK.


Urlacher's best season is 8 sacks, and that was during his rookie year. Since then, he's never been over 6. Von has 11.5 in his first 12 games as a pro.

Ray Lewis, best season is 5 sacks. Pat Willis 6 sacks. Jon Beason 3 sacks. Jon Vilma 4 sacks (only 9.5 in his career). These are some of the best MLBs right now, arguably ever for Urlacher, Lewis and Willis, and they don't put up a lot of sacks.

Also, note the way they are built. Ray Lewis is about the same weight as Miller, but 3 inches or so shorter. Urlacher is about the same height as Miller, but 20+ pounds heavier. Miller is too long and lean for MLB imo. Add that he has a Hall of Fame first step coming off the edge, and the better course of action is to upgrade the Mike through the draft and allow Von to continue blowing shit up coming off the corner.



Sam: Haggan (Mays) Mike: Miller (Mays) Will: DJ (Woodyard)



I like Haggan, but he's not a starter on a legit defense. I've got no problem with him as a depth player, but Mays is a much better Mike than Haggan is a Sam, imo.

[Joel]

Drafting best player available last year really worked for us. And drafting who we wanted really worked for mcdaniels his last year. I guess its a toss up, I just want them to continue getting it right.
Last year we had a garbage team where BPA was a can't miss proposition AND the draft picks for elite talent. The only thing that wouldn't have made sense would've been WR, and once we started having a fire sale on them even that was legitimate.

McDumbass benefited from Shannys last draft being a very good one, but arrogantly and idiotically failed to see that, giving away a pair of Pro Bowlers and a solid starter (plus cutting a Pro Bowl center.) The team immediately collapsed, a cause and effect foreshadowed clearly (to everyone but him) when he benched his best (only) two receivers for the must win season finale. A few of his draft picks have worked out OK, but many were awful, and I'd say he just benefited from the law of averages and the draft pick smorgasbord he got trading away Cutler, Marshall and Schef.

Problem here, as I see it, Miller has played on the edge his entire life, as far as I know. Either a DE or OLB, his instincts aren't those of someone who's played in the middle his whole life. The reads, the way the play develops in front of you, who you're taking on as blockers, all very different from the inside compared to the outside.

Think of moving DJ around throughout his career.
That's a valid point; I had focused on all his various positions at A&M, but they WERE all on the outside. He may well not be able to adapt, and if he didn't seem to be getting the hang of it in camp I'd probably pull the plug.

Urlacher's best season is 8 sacks, and that was during his rookie year. Since then, he's never been over 6. Von has 11.5 in his first 12 games as a pro.

Ray Lewis, best season is 5 sacks. Pat Willis 6 sacks. Jon Beason 3 sacks. Jon Vilma 4 sacks (only 9.5 in his career). These are some of the best MLBs right now, arguably ever for Urlacher, Lewis and Willis, and they don't put up a lot of sacks.
I did consider that, but those aren't bad numbers, and I don't expect Miller to get as many sacks now that people know he's out there. Jevon Kearse (the DE Millers chasing for the rookie record) had double digit sacks his first three years then never hit that range again (though he did have 9.5 one year.) I think any drop would be marginal, and more than made up for by what we'd gain in pass coverage improvements and defensive playcalling (though he could theoretically do the latter from the side, it would just be harder for everyone to hear the audibles.)

Also, note the way they are built. Ray Lewis is about the same weight as Miller, but 3 inches or so shorter. Urlacher is about the same height as Miller, but 20+ pounds heavier. Miller is too long and lean for MLB imo. Add that he has a Hall of Fame first step coming off the edge, and the better course of action is to upgrade the Mike through the draft and allow Von to continue blowing shit up coming off the corner.
I think he's have a HoF step up the middle, too, and am not really sure where his playing weight will end up. After the draft he was listed at 230, but now one site shows him at 237 and ESPN says 245. NFL.com gives the latter value, and both of them put Urlacher at 258, so about 13 lbs. difference, assuming he gets no heavier. The height/weight ratio, however, is also a good point, but not necessarily a fatal one.

I like Haggan, but he's not a starter on a legit defense. I've got no problem with him as a depth player, but Mays is a much better Mike than Haggan is a Sam, imo.
I think he's a bona fide Sam; you can't expect him to provide much coverage at that weight, but if coverage were a Sams primary duty Miller would be backing up Doom.

Solid counterarguments though; you've definitely forced me to back off a bit on the idea of moving Miller to Mike. I still think it would be worth a try, but unless it looked very good very early I wouldn't stick with it, and drafting a really great MLB prospect isn't so unthinkable now. I do appreciate the need; part of why I'm so eager to move Miller there is that my first reaction to drafting him was "ANOTHER Will? We need a MIKE, so I hope they plan to bulk him up and move him over instead of just trading Woodyard!" Of course, that was before he gained 15 lbs. and started chasing sack records.

[VonSackemMiller]

I dont know how mcdaniels benefited from shanahan when mcdaniels is the one who drafted bay bay, tebow, beadles, walton and decker. It was a pretty good draft. The first draft mcd had was poor but the 2nd one looks like most of them are panning out. I dont know what thomas beadles walton and decker and tebow have to do with shanahan

[Joel]

I dont know how mcdaniels benefited from shanahan when mcdaniels is the one who drafted bay bay, tebow, beadles, walton and decker. It was a pretty good draft. The first draft mcd had was poor but the 2nd one looks like most of them are panning out. I dont know what thomas beadles walton and decker and tebow have to do with shanahan
I did fumble the date of the '06 draft earlier, but McDaniels benefited from Shanny drafting:

2006
Cutler (Pro Bowler)
Scheffler (solid starter)
Marshall (Pro Bowler)
Dumervil (Pro Bowler)
Kuper (solid starter)

2007
M Thomas (solid starter)
R Harris (solid starter)

2008
Clady (Pro Bowler)

I'll grant '08 was kind of a bust, and I'm only counting good players who were here when McDumbass arrived (e.g. not Hillis,) but HE got us Ayers, Tebow and Decker. With 19 picks; that's almost as many as most teams get in THREE years; comparing McDumbass' three years worth of drafting to Shannys is a joke. Beadles and Walton are panning out so well G is one of the top three positions I'd like us target next year; it was #2, but since that's also how many good games Bay Bay had in as many years and Lloyd and Gaffney are gone, it's fallen to third. Barely.

Shannys draft handed McDumbass an 8-8 team that only missed the playoffs because it lost its last three games. He took that team on another 8-8 campaign that culminated in him throwing a hissy fit and benching Marshall and Scheff for the season finale that could have sent us to the playoffs (and instead was a 20 point blow out where his replacement for Cutler had two pick sixes.) Then he dumped Marshall and Scheff, leaving his hand picked team that had the worst record in the 40 year history of the franchise.

Those were not pretty good drafts, despite ample opportunities with 19 picks; if Decker rediscovers his hands and Thomas finally stays healthy and finds his they MIGHT be salvagable, but otherwise we basically got Tebow and Ayers. Yea. One good and one serviceable player out of 19. Genius.

[VonSackemMiller]

I dont get it your saying he benefited from shanny when we were losers. We didnt benefit anything in all reality. Those same players shanny had here was losers, McDaniels inherited the players and was a loser also. Nobody benefited from anything.

Your making this way deeper than it needs to be. All the dumps and whatever doesnt really matter anymore. Im not at all missing anybody MCD dumped ive moved on from his mistakes and him period. Everybody knows MCD did alot of dumb shit but that 2010 class the first 5 picks are keepers and I dont think we need any OL IMO. They just need to continue playing together as a unit.

[Joel]

I dont get it your saying he benefited from shanny when we were losers. We didnt benefit anything in all reality. Those same players shanny had here was losers, McDaniels inherited the players and was a loser also. Nobody benefited from anything.
We were not losers under Shanahan. He took over in 1995, and during his tenure our record was:

1995 8-8
1996 13-3 (AFCW Champs #1 in AFC, tied with GB for #1 in NFL)
1997 12-4 (SB Champs)
1998 14-2 (SB Champs)
1999 6-10
2000 11-5 (Lost Wildcard to SB Champs)
2001 8-8
2002 9-7
2003 10-6 (Lost Wildcard to Colts)
2004 10-6 (List Wildcard to Colts AGAIN)
2005 13-3 (AFCW Champs, lost AFCCG to SB Champs)
2006 9-7
2007 7-9
2008 8-8 (failed to clinch Wildcard by winning any of our last 3)
Tot 138-86 (0.616; 10-6=0.625)

That's 2 losing seasons in 15 years; even one of THOSE was just 1 game from .500. 2 Super Bowl wins by Shannys fourth year (could be 3 straight if we don't phone it in against a second year expansion team that went to the AFCCG.) Hosted (but lost) an AFCCG. 4 Division titles. 6 playoff appearances. A bubble team down to the last game 3 other times. .500 Shannys last season, which was our average for his last three. McDumbass inherited 4 Pro Bowlers and 4 guys who started every year (except for Marcus Thomas, who's hurt a lot) JUST FROM SHANNYS DRAFTS! How are they "losers"? Since they're a third of the starters, how is the TEAM a loser?

In what universe are those teams "losers"? At worst we were the .500 team our record of the previous three years indicates. For all the talk of Shannys "dafts" he took not one, not two, but THREE CBs when trading for Champ didn't stop the Colts torching us in the playoffs two years straight. Result: Hosted next years AFCCG, losing to the eventual Champs because Plummer had 2 fumbles and 2 picks. A few months later Shanny "reached" again for Cutler and replaced Plummer shortly after the following Thanksgiving, acquiring Marshall, Scheffler and Doom along the way.

We went into a very successful rebuild that only lasted 3 years, and only had a single losing season (by ONE game) in the process. How many "losers" have you seen do that? That's the non-losing team McDumbass inherited, and in his first (and best) year he took it all the way to 8-8--right where it started. If that was a loser for Shanny it was a loser for him. Then he "cleaned house," giving away 2 Pro Bowlers (3 if you count Wiegmann, whom the Chiefs resigned as soon as we cut him to make room for Walton) and a good starter for NOTHING. He replaced them with scrubs and cheated his way to the second worst record in the League and the worst in Broncos history. You seem to have badly transposed the meanings of "loser" and "winner."

Your making this way deeper than it needs to be. All the dumps and whatever doesnt really matter anymore. Im not at all missing anybody MCD dumped ive moved on from his mistakes and him period. Everybody knows MCD did alot of dumb shit but that 2010 class the first 5 picks are keepers and I dont think we need any OL IMO. They just need to continue playing together as a unit.
Apparently I'm NOT making it deeper than it NEEDS to be, because you have completely inverted incontrovertible facts easily found in a couple minutes at multiple online databases.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/1995.htm
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2008/draft/teams/broncos.html

The dumps matter much when you (incorrectly) state we were losers and (incorrectly) state McDumbass had success because he had better drafts (which is also incorrect.) Shannys best season was 14-2 and a successfully defended Super Bowl; his worst was 6-10. McDaniels' best season was 8-8; his worst was 4-12, second worst in the League and the worst in Broncos history (Note: That automatically makes it worse than any of Shannys seasons.) That WAS after he purged Shannys draft picks and replaced them with his stellar 2010 picks. Again, you're calling winners "losers" and losers "winners;" if demonstrating that requires complex things like looking at records and draft classes, well, I'm sorry you brought it up then. If someone steadfastly claims 2+2=5, pulling out a calculator to show it's 4 isn't going too deep into irrelevant things: It is the very thing being discussed. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, "everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."

You're obviously entitled to YOUR opinion, but I am no less so, and DO think we need interior offensive linemen. I certainly don't think Beadles or Walton were improvements over Wiegmann, or Ben Hamilton who was a steady pulling guard for years until Nalens retirement forced him to assume duties at center (hence we got Pro Bowler Wiegmann to take over, which worked fine until McDumbass cut and the Chiefs re-signed him.) Unless they get MUCH better very fast I doubt Beadles and Walton are no better than benchwarmers AT BEST. If Thomas can't turn in more than 1 good game per season he'll be lucky to stay on the team; if you're counting THAT as a successful first round pick, I'm adding Eddie Royal to my list of successful Shanny picks; he's been more reliable and productive than Thomas as a SECOND round pick. Tebow and Decker are PROBABLY keepers, and Thomas could be. That's, like, 2.5 good players, not 5. Out of 9 drafted. McDumbass' best draft got ALMOST as many starters as Shannys had Pro Bowlers. With 2 more picks.

Sorry if that got too involved or emphatic, but you seem to badly misrecollect perhaps THE most destructive thing to reduce an organization that took greatness for granted to the nadir of its very existence.

Shanahan:McDaniels::Elway:Orton. In every way, that is, not just restricted to drafting, but DEFINITELY including that.

[Canmore]

We were not losers under Shanahan. He took over in 1995, and during his tenure our record was:

1995 8-8
1996 13-3 (AFCW Champs #1 in AFC, tied with GB for #1 in NFL)
1997 12-4 (SB Champs)
1998 14-2 (SB Champs)
1999 6-10
2000 11-5 (Lost Wildcard to SB Champs)
2001 8-8
2002 9-7
2003 10-6 (Lost Wildcard to Colts)
2004 10-6 (List Wildcard to Colts AGAIN)
2005 13-3 (AFCW Champs, lost AFCCG to SB Champs)
2006 9-7
2007 7-9
2008 8-8 (failed to clinch Wildcard by winning any of our last 3)
Tot 138-86 (0.616; 10-6=0.625)

That's 2 losing seasons in 15 years; even one of THOSE was just 1 game from .500. 2 Super Bowl wins by Shannys fourth year (could be 3 straight if we don't phone it in against a second year expansion team that went to the AFCCG.) Hosted (but lost) an AFCCG. 4 Division titles. 6 playoff appearances. A bubble team down to the last game 3 other times. .500 Shannys last season, which was our average for his last three. McDumbass inherited 4 Pro Bowlers and 4 guys who started every year (except for Marcus Thomas, who's hurt a lot) JUST FROM SHANNYS DRAFTS! How are they "losers"? Since they're a third of the starters, how is the TEAM a loser?

In what universe are those teams "losers"? At worst we were the .500 team our record of the previous three years indicates. For all the talk of Shannys "dafts" he took not one, not two, but THREE CBs when trading for Champ didn't stop the Colts torching us in the playoffs two years straight. Result: Hosted next years AFCCG, losing to the eventual Champs because Plummer had 2 fumbles and 2 picks. A few months later Shanny "reached" again for Cutler and replaced Plummer shortly after the following Thanksgiving, acquiring Marshall, Scheffler and Doom along the way.

We went into a very successful rebuild that only lasted 3 years, and only had a single losing season (by ONE game) in the process. How many "losers" have you seen do that? That's the non-losing team McDumbass inherited, and in his first (and best) year he took it all the way to 8-8--right where it started. If that was a loser for Shanny it was a loser for him. Then he "cleaned house," giving away 2 Pro Bowlers (3 if you count Wiegmann, whom the Chiefs resigned as soon as we cut him to make room for Walton) and a good starter for NOTHING. He replaced them with scrubs and cheated his way to the second worst record in the League and the worst in Broncos history. You seem to have badly transposed the meanings of "loser" and "winner."

Apparently I'm NOT making it deeper than it NEEDS to be, because you have completely inverted incontrovertible facts easily found in a couple minutes at multiple online databases.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/1995.htm
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2008/draft/teams/broncos.html

The dumps matter much when you (incorrectly) state we were losers and (incorrectly) state McDumbass had success because he had better drafts (which is also incorrect.) Shannys best season was 14-2 and a successfully defended Super Bowl; his worst was 6-10. McDaniels' best season was 8-8; his worst was 4-12, second worst in the League and the worst in Broncos history (Note: That automatically makes it worse than any of Shannys seasons.) That WAS after he purged Shannys draft picks and replaced them with his stellar 2010 picks. Again, you're calling winners "losers" and losers "winners;" if demonstrating that requires complex things like looking at records and draft classes, well, I'm sorry you brought it up then. If someone steadfastly claims 2+2=5, pulling out a calculator to show it's 4 isn't going too deep into irrelevant things: It is the very thing being discussed. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, "everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."

You're obviously entitled to YOUR opinion, but I am no less so, and DO think we need interior offensive linemen. I certainly don't think Beadles or Walton were improvements over Wiegmann, or Ben Hamilton who was a steady pulling guard for years until Nalens retirement forced him to assume duties at center (hence we got Pro Bowler Wiegmann to take over, which worked fine until McDumbass cut and the Chiefs re-signed him.) Unless they get MUCH better very fast I doubt Beadles and Walton are no better than benchwarmers AT BEST. If Thomas can't turn in more than 1 good game per season he'll be lucky to stay on the team; if you're counting THAT as a successful first round pick, I'm adding Eddie Royal to my list of successful Shanny picks; he's been more reliable and productive than Thomas as a SECOND round pick. Tebow and Decker are PROBABLY keepers, and Thomas could be. That's, like, 2.5 good players, not 5. Out of 9 drafted. McDumbass' best draft got ALMOST as many starters as Shannys had Pro Bowlers. With 2 more picks.

Sorry if that got too involved or emphatic, but you seem to badly misrecollect perhaps THE most destructive thing to reduce an organization that took greatness for granted to the nadir of its very existence.

Shanahan:McDaniels::Elway:Orton. In every way, that is, not just restricted to drafting, but DEFINITELY including that.

McDaniels sucked would have pretty much summed it up. :D

[VonSackemMiller]

Okay we were mediocre from 2000 and on. win some regular season games and get beat by 40 in the playoffs round 1 whenever we did make the playoffs, outside that fluke 13-3 year.

[Cugel]

I can't believe fans have forgotten or never understood what was going on with Shanahan and McMoron's drafting. Shanahan found amazing talent on OFFENSE, but failed utterly to find defensive talent. His only good defensive pick was Doom. DJ is a good player but they could and should have drafted Vince Wilfork.

As for Moss, Crowder, Watt, Terry Pierce, etc. just one wasted pick after another. Thomas now is a decent backup DT, but not better than that. He's earned his 4th round draft pick status.

When McMoron came in and blew up the team he threw around pro-bowl players like a drunken sailor on leave. Then he failed to get the most draft picks he could have gotten from his idiotic decisions to cut/trade Cutler, Sheffler, Marshall and Hillis.

THen he drafted idiotically -- taking Moreno and Ayers instead of Orakpo and Clay Matthews. Then he took Demaryius Thomas instead of Dez Bryant or S Nate Allen who went to the Eagles.

You can say that his moves for Tim Tebow were warranted as long as Tebow is the long term answer at QB, but he didn't need to take him in the 1st round when nobody else in football considered him a 1st round talent. He could have used a high 2nd rounder on Tebow -- which he would have had if he hadn't made the insane decision to trade a 1st round pick for a 2nd, in order to grab CB Alphonso Smith, whom they threw away. That pick was #14 of the 1st round (Seahawks selected S Nate Thomas, but the Broncos could have grabbed Jason Pierre-Paul who went to the Giants #15). It's not as if they didn't need any DL!

In short, McMoron was a WORSE GM than Matt Millen! And that is as bad as it gets people. He was unquestionably the worst GM in the last 10 years if not the last 20 years.

[wayninja]

Okay we were mediocre from 2000 and on. win some regular season games and get beat by 40 in the playoffs round 1 whenever we did make the playoffs, outside that fluke 13-3 year.

What do you see happening this year?

[Ravage!!!]

Miller will never be moved to Mike. He's not a mike, and we don't want him at Mike. I don't even know what thats a thought.

We ABSOLUTELY need a MLB.. and would LOVE to take one in the first round. There is a beast coming out at MLB (cant rmeember his name), and Denver needs that presence.

But we want Miller right where he is....being the outside threat that he is and playing the position he was drafted to play. He was the top prospect in the draft because of where he plays, and will win DROY because of the position he is playing. He's not a MLB in the least.

[slim]

Miller will never be moved to Mike. He's not a mike, and we don't want him at Mike. I don't even know what thats a thought.

We ABSOLUTELY need a MLB.. and would LOVE to take one in the first round. There is a beast coming out at MLB (cant rmeember his name), and Denver needs that presence.

But we want Miller right where he is....being the outside threat that he is and playing the position he was drafted to play. He was the top prospect in the draft because of where he plays, and will win DROY because of the position he is playing. He's not a MLB in the least.

I agree. Moving Miller to MLB would be asinine.

[Joel]

McDaniels sucked would have pretty much summed it up. :D
While true, I can't just make a statement that strong without supporting it well. ;)

Okay we were mediocre from 2000 and on. win some regular season games and get beat by 40 in the playoffs round 1 whenever we did make the playoffs, outside that fluke 13-3 year.
So we were just "mediocre" then, not "losers." ;) Even were I to accept that underestimation of Shannys record (which I don't; being a playoff contender 9/15 seasons, making it 6 times and winning 2 SBs is "mediocrity" the Colts could only envy even when beating us annually) the fact remains McDaniels couldn't even maintain, let alone surpass, THAT low standard. He did not inherit "loser" or even "mediocre" teams, but above average improving ones he demolished in a single season.

In two years McDaniels cheated his way to the worst record in franchise history: That is by definition worse than Shanahan OR ANY DENVER COACH ever did!

As for his drafts, while I generally agree with Cugel about Shannys eye for defensive talent, he still found more than McDaniels, and FAR more offensive talent. We're comparing Shannys multiple Pro Bowlers and career starters to McDaniels' 2-3 starters and scrubs; how is that even close? McDaniels' only career achievements were in NE, which Spygate suggests was just cheating, a view the absence of other accomplishments supports.

He's a "wunderkind," alright; first the world wondered

1) if the Cheatriots would have ANY Super Bowls without Spygate, then
2) why he gave away all but two of Denvers stars for NOTHING, then
3) why he kept cheating when it came out his old team did it while he was there and now
4) how far he's set back Sam Bradfords development.

The man is combative, overconfident inexperienced and dishonest; he should not be allowed within 10 miles of any team, because he's a menace to the game. If he's caught cheating one more time (which he probably will be; he seemingly can't win any other way and will likely get desperate sooner or later) I hope the NFL bans him for life. If Tebows character is half as good as represented I don't know how he could stand working for him.

Miller will never be moved to Mike. He's not a mike, and we don't want him at Mike. I don't even know what thats a thought.
Because every D needs a great QB (and ideally a pretty good backup) just like every offense, Mays has proven merely adequate and Miller has the necessary speed, size and power, lacking only the experience that would be even more lacking in any rookie. There are many good reasons, but his height/weight ratio along with his history of always playing on the outside are valid reasons to reconsider.

We ABSOLUTELY need a MLB.. and would LOVE to take one in the first round. There is a beast coming out at MLB (cant rmeember his name), and Denver needs that presence.
I've seen several mentioned, though I'm not sure how many beasts at such a vital position will fall to 20+. I know people talk about 3-4 vs. 4-3 making more 4-3 players available, but that's not applicable here; any good 4-3 MLB will be at least as good as a 3-4 OLB, because the only real difference is he'll be in coverage less.

But we want Miller right where he is....being the outside threat that he is and playing the position he was drafted to play. He was the top prospect in the draft because of where he plays, and will win DROY because of the position he is playing. He's not a MLB in the least.
He's more of a MLB than a 4-3 Sam; he was among the top draft prospects because now that he's gained about 15 lbs. he's an ideal 3-4 OLB. Mike's get their share of sacks, too, more than most 4-3 Sams, if less than 3-4 Sams. His sack totals would (probably) slip a little, but not much, and Tom Brady is about to demonstrate why a MLB who can quickly read offenses, call the right audible and play solid pass coverage over the middle IN ADDITION to blitzing and run stuffing is worth trading 2-3 sacks/year. The idea is not as implausible as many seem to think, though I do admit it's wouldn't necessarily be as automatic as I thought.

[VonSackemMiller]

What do you see happening this year?

Were set up to make a SB run with this defense and run game. Everybody says thats what you have to do in the playoffs. Play good defense and run the ball. I dont see why were not SB contenders.

[VonSackemMiller]

And Von Miller is not a MLB. That would totally be misusing your talent. Nomore sacks, Nomore qb pressure if you move him to MLB. He needs to be on the edge somewhere fulltime where he can make plays on the run game and smoke tackles getting to the QB. That would be the worst move since Shanny taking a perfectly fine Weakside backer and moving him all over the place. DJ hasnt been the same since his rookie year at weakside. Hes playing good this year though at weakside

[Jsteve01]

Sad how poor coaching and misutilization of of personnel can have a negative impact on players. DJ could have been a perennial Pro Bowler at Will. Should have just signed a sam rather than bringing Gold back

[MOtorboat]

Joel, Fox isn't using him like a traditional 4-3 Sam. In that respect, you're right, but the over schemes and zone blitzing combinations that Allen is building into this defense are unique and dangerous.

Why would you change that. His skill set is no where near a MLB skill set.

[Jsteve01]

I said it from the day we drafted the kid. Use him like Adalius Thomas was used in Baltimore. Line him up all over the formation to wreak havoc.

[Medford Bronco]

First of all, Tebow started out playing HORRIBLY. He couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. His mechanics were awful. He looked totally out of his depth in the first two games. It's true he came back and won the Miami game, but that was more of a fluke than anything. They GAVE the game away with horrible play and worse decisions.

So naturally all Elway had seen was Tebow making endless mistakes and being unable to execute the most basic QB stuff like the 3 step drop. They wanted to see what Tebow could do and then draft a QB with their top 10 draft pick.

But now, especially if the team makes the playoffs the Broncos will be drafting in the mid-20s. There's no way they will be able to draft one of the elite QB prospects without surrendering 3 or 4 draft picks.

And they don't need to. Tebow's play ensures him another season. Unfortunately for the Broncos THIS is the QB dream class and widely considered the best QB class since 1983. NEXT year, IF Tebow were to turn into Rex Grossman (whom the Ravens Brian Billick was sure was his "franchise QB" remember), then the team would be screwed.

That is my nightmare scenario. That Tebow hits a plateau that is good enough to win some games against a last place schedule and a bunch of teams decimated by injury, but will never be good enough a passer to win a SB. AND he leads the team to just enough wins this season that they can't draft a QB from among the best QB class in 30 years.

That's a double disaster for the team. Fortunately, that hasn't happened yet. All that HAS happened is that Tebow has improved his throwing accuracy to the point where he can hit some passes. He's still not Tom Brady out there, but he doesn't have to be. IF (and I mean IF, it's not by any means a done deal) he can become a Ben Roethlisberger clone then he can have success even though he will never be Drew Brees.

You'll notice that the Broncos are in the process of ABANDONING the OPTION READ! They ran it a handful of times last game and the Bears stuffed it each time.

So much for Tebow "revolutionizing the NFL with his brand new breakthrough offense."

He's going to try and become a semi-traditional pocket passing QB who can make some plays with his feet -- i.e. they're trying to turn him into another Ben Roethlisberger. Which is a good thing. Ben won 2 SBs after all with great defense, solid running attack and accurate passing to guys like Hines Ward.


Try to be a Steve Young type. He was not that great early in his career. I would take 3/4 of what Young did.

[bcbronc]

For all the continued McDummy hate, we're a young team that (should) win it's division. People can nitpick and gripe over this missed pick and that, but no front office ever goes 100%. Or even close.

If a magic fairy appeared and offered to give me back the Broncos team McDaniel's inherited in exchange for the team we have right now, I'd laugh in her face. At this point, who gives a shit who McDaniels drafted or didn't draft. He gave the organization the purge by fire it needed, we hit rock bottom and got Von Miller because of it.

That alone is worth every bitter second of the McDaniels era. Now let's just shut up about it and move on.

:coffee:

[Simple Jaded]

The Broncos current mindset on their draft needs is clearly nothing more than an honest assessment of their draft position. Denver will, and should, continue to look at QB's leading up to draft but they have won their way outta position to draft a franchise QB.

Because of this there is no longer any need for Tebow/Gator fans to panick and run to twitter on bash the FO's supposed sabatoge of Tebow's career. But don't kid yourself, QB is easily one of the weakest starting positions on this team and Tim Tebow is just as replacable as any QB in the league.......

[elsid13]

Joel, Fox isn't using him like a traditional 4-3 Sam. In that respect, you're right, but the over schemes and zone blitzing combinations that Allen is building into this defense are unique and dangerous.

Why would you change that. His skill set is no where near a MLB skill set.

You are correct, the front seven is morphing into a clone of what is being played in Baltimore. With Miller taking on the role of Terrell Suggs. That why I kinda getting interested in Memphis DE/DT Dontari Poe. A big body (325 plus) that supposedly explosive enough to play DE like Ngata.

[HammeredOut]

Demaryius Thomas has also been a bust at WR .

Actually I disagree with this post. D.Thomas has only started 5 games in his career. And in one of those starts, he managed 144 yards in the game with a QB who only averages 1.79 completions per quarter, per game.

Essentially, D.Thomas who we selected in the First Round, looks really good. I noticed that a ton of uncatchable balls have been called drops by the media, which I think has become the new unfair bias of Tebow's recievers. Obvously they havn't watched this kid practice, and miss on a routine basis. So I wouldn't be so quick to judge D.Thomas as a bust, but I would be looking at the guy throwing the ball, and only averaging 1.79 completions per quarter for the first 3 quarters of any game. Im guessing it would be just asmuch as a guess to the Broncos Recievers if the ball is coming there way with a pass.

I say its an unfair bias to tag D.Thomas with. The guy only started 5 games, and fought off some major injuries already.

[catfish]

Actually I disagree with this post. D.Thomas has only started 5 games in his career. And in one of those starts, he managed 144 yards in the game with a QB who only averages 1.79 completions per quarter, per game.

Essentially, D.Thomas who we selected in the First Round, looks really good. I noticed that a ton of uncatchable balls have been called drops by the media, which I think has become the new unfair bias of Tebow's recievers. Obvously they havn't watched this kid practice, and miss on a routine basis. So I wouldn't be so quick to judge D.Thomas as a bust, but I would be looking at the guy throwing the ball, and only averaging 1.79 completions per quarter for the first 3 quarters of any game. Im guessing it would be just asmuch as a guess to the Broncos Recievers if the ball is coming there way with a pass.

I say its an unfair bias to tag D.Thomas with. The guy only started 5 games, and fought off some major injuries already.

the Denver receivers have the third highest drop rate per pass attempt per stats.com. I don't think DT is a bust, just like I don't think he is top 40, I don't think Tebow is a bust just as I don't think he is top 12.

As to the 1.76 completions per qtr that is stats from the 1st 3 quarters and could be as much a result of poor receiver play as QB play. It isn't totally, but it is a useless stat to support the argument that the receivers aren't a problem. Also if you are going to use stats you need to use a full game. I can quote the 4th quarter stats and say Tebow is the best QB to ever grace the NFL. Use the whole game and the stats in context or don't use stats at all.

[HammeredOut]

Try to be a Steve Young type. He was not that great early in his career. I would take 3/4 of what Young did.

Most QB's didn't have the pleasure of throwing the ball to JERRY RICE, BRETT JONES, or handing it off to Ricky Watters, with Guy McIntyre blocking. Between them, they have over 30 pro bowls.

On Defense, Young had guys racking up 17 sacks like Tim Harris, plugged with Ted Washington, had Bill Romanowski cleaning up the tackles. The 49'ers team was all in all, one of the best. It is an insult to bring up Steve Youngs name in a Tim Tebow thread.

[HammeredOut]

the Denver receivers have the third highest drop rate per pass attempt per stats.com. I don't think DT is a bust, just like I don't think he is top 40, I don't think Tebow is a bust just as I don't think he is top 12.

As to the 1.76 completions per qtr that is stats from the 1st 3 quarters and could be as much a result of poor receiver play as QB play. It isn't totally, but it is a useless stat to support the argument that the receivers aren't a problem. Also if you are going to use stats you need to use a full game. I can quote the 4th quarter stats and say Tebow is the best QB to ever grace the NFL. Use the whole game and the stats in context or don't use stats at all.

This is essentially the same crew of recievers that Kyle Orton had, when he was third in the league in yards per game in the air at 281. So I disagree, the recievers are to blame. Now we average 95 yards a game in the air.

[catfish]

This is essentially the same crew of recievers that Kyle Orton had, when he was third in the league in yards per game in the air at 281. So I disagree, the recievers are to blame. Now we average 95 yards a game in the air.

except for his favorite target the pro bowl guy who had an all career year that year?...other than that exactly the same

edit: in the 4 games he completed Orton was

304 yds 1 TD 1 INt - loss
195 yds 2 TD 0 INT - win
173 yds 2TD 2 INT - loss
273 yds 3TD 3 INT - loss
not 281 yds/game


if you meant last year, then Denver lost Lloyd and Gaffney the top 2 targets last year who accounted for a total of 43% of the total receptions. The current #1 and #2 DT/Decker had a total of 28 receptions between the two of them. Eddie Royal actually had twice as many catches last year as both of those 2 put together

[Ravage!!!]

YEah.. but ORton is a better passer. We've seen throughout the league that receivers aren't as good as they look when they normally have a good QB behind center. Look at the Colts when Manning left...or even the mediocre WRs that are in Chicago the last few weeks after Cutler has been hurt.

So although we can do everything we can to blame the WRs for the low completions, thats just not accurate. We've seen some REALLY REALLY bad passers in the NFL, and we still have some in the NFL. Very few will complete only 3 passes in 3/4 of a game, no matter who is at WR ( or who isn't). Very few will go 11 passes in a row without a completion. That isn't something you can put on the WRs.

Sure you can say 1 or 2 ... but 11 in a row isn't a WR dropping problem. 3 in 3 quarters isn't a dropping problem. There were MAJOR concerns with Tebow's throwing when coming out of college, before the season, and at the start of the season.... and we can see why there were those concerns. He's not an accurate thrower. Its time we just accept that and stop doing our best to blame everything else around him.

[catfish]

YEah.. but ORton is a better passer. We've seen throughout the league that receivers aren't as good as they look when they normally have a good QB behind center. Look at the Colts when Manning left...or even the mediocre WRs that are in Chicago the last few weeks after Cutler has been hurt.

So although we can do everything we can to blame the WRs for the low completions, thats just not accurate. We've seen some REALLY REALLY bad passers in the NFL, and we still have some in the NFL. Very few will complete only 3 passes in 3/4 of a game, no matter who is at WR ( or who isn't). Very few will go 11 passes in a row without a completion. That isn't something you can put on the WRs.

Sure you can say 1 or 2 ... but 11 in a row isn't a WR dropping problem. 3 in 3 quarters isn't a dropping problem. There were MAJOR concerns with Tebow's throwing when coming out of college, before the season, and at the start of the season.... and we can see why there were those concerns. He's not an accurate thrower. Its time we just accept that and stop doing our best to blame everything else around him.

when 5 of 11 are dropped passes it actually is a dropping passes problem. When you say he didn't complete 11 in a row and use it to question a QB's accuracy when 5 of the 11 were right on target and the recevier dropped them it is a huge freaking deal. Tebow aslo later complete what 10 of 11 with a total of 18/24 that doesn't mean he is a 75% passer or overly accurate. Stats need to be taken as a whole you start taking 6 pass bits here and there and you can make a case for or against basically any QB.

I'm not saying that no other receivers drop passes or that dropped passes are the reason the completion% is so bad. I actually dont think % completion is a very useful stat in any way(it hasn't affected the ability to score passing TD's compared to other 2nd years). As Doug Flutie said there is noone on this team where Tebow can throw the ball up in man to man coverage and say go get it, those aren't my words those are his, he also says there isn't a receiver on this team that a defense can't cover 1on 1. That doesn't mean they won't improve they are 2nd year players, just like your QB. I don't feel the need to make excuses for Tebow as he is performing basically in line with the other 2nd year qb's in the league and he has shown game to game improvement. I don't expect him to be a world beater right away.

However saying that the level of talent in the receiver position on this team is relatively the same as last year is ridiculous. It would be one thing if the numbers for the receivers dropped significantly after Tebow took over, but it is impossible to make a judgement on the receiver core because they have no history of being anything other than injured or #4 receivers. The receivers aren't even the same from the beginning of the year. They are all learning new routes as well so there is plenty of reason to give them a break. They seem to have stepped up in the last 2 weeks despite some drops, they are 2nd year players and that is all anyone can want.

The statistics show that the denver broncos have the 3rd highest drop rate in the NFL. I am not making grandiose statements about that...it is a fact. Anything other than that can be argued either against the receivers or the QB as it is usually a 50% either way. The only standalone stat for a QB is interceptions and the only standalone stat for receivers is drops. It is the only thing that a qb or receiver has 100% control over

[Ravage!!!]

The statistics show that the denver broncos have the 3rd highest drop rate in the NFL. I am not making grandiose statements about that...it is a fact. Anything other than that can be argued either against the receivers or the QB as it is usually a 50% either way. The only standalone stat for a QB is interceptions and the only standalone stat for receivers is drops. It is the only thing that a qb or receiver has 100% control over

Thats just another stat, a stat that has often been controversial because of those that judge what is a drop and what isn't a drop. Those are nothing more than judgement calls on their own. Sure there are the obvious one, and then there are the "drops" that happen because the WR has to make an exception effort to even get his hands on the ball.

Tebow's completions did go WAYY up once Chicago dropped back into prevent defense, there is no doubt about that.

But I think we are forgetting that Tebow is just NOT a good passer. He's not an accurate passer, and trying to say the "stat" of dropped passes proves that its not him, but the receivers, is disingenuous.

Also, stats for INTs are NOT a "standalone" stat at ALL. I know Tebow is excelling in THIS stat, but come on now. Lets not do our best to simply pick out the stats that help Tebow out (and thats truly how it's coming across since those are the only two stats you wish to accept).

How many times have we seen deflected passes get INTs? TONS. TONNNNS. How many times have we seen where a receiver broke the wrong direction and caused the INT, or the receiver slipped and fell after the ball was already thrown? TONS. Tips at the LoS? All these things cause INTs that are NOT the QBs fault. So it most certainly is NOT a "stand alone" stat.

[Ravage!!!]

Lets not forget that Drew Brees led the NFL in INTs last year. I believe Manning was second. No one is going to pick out that stat and tell us that these two are not accurate passers because they led the NFL in INTs.

[catfish]

Thats just another stat, a stat that has often been controversial because of those that judge what is a drop and what isn't a drop. Those are nothing more than judgement calls on their own. Sure there are the obvious one, and then there are the "drops" that happen because the WR has to make an exception effort to even get his hands on the ball.

Tebow's completions did go WAYY up once Chicago dropped back into prevent defense, there is no doubt about that.

But I think we are forgetting that Tebow is just NOT a good passer. He's not an accurate passer, and trying to say the "stat" of dropped passes proves that its not him, but the receivers, is disingenuous.

Also, stats for INTs are NOT a "standalone" stat at ALL. I know Tebow is excelling in THIS stat, but come on now. Lets not do our best to simply pick out the stats that help Tebow out (and thats truly how it's coming across since those are the only two stats you wish to accept).

How many times have we seen deflected passes get INTs? TONS. TONNNNS. How many times have we seen where a receiver broke the wrong direction and caused the INT, or the receiver slipped and fell after the ball was already thrown? TONS. Tips at the LoS? All these things cause INTs that are NOT the QBs fault. So it most certainly is NOT a "stand alone" stat.

drops are counted the same for every team, so even if more are counted by the stats people than you would consider drop it should be uniform across the league.

again I am not trying to excuse the passing % I don't need to because it is a useless statistic. Tebow is scoring TD's at a high rate, limitign turnovers, running the ball at a high yards per rush, has a relatively high passer rating. Actually the only two stats that make him look bad are completion % which you seem to like and Yds/att which is rising. I guess you could argue sacks as well

I guess I should have said that INT % is the stat that the QB is most in control of. In any sport where teammates work together every stat is dependent on someone else.

Tebow has thrown the ball in the last 2 games, he tore it up against the vikings. He had ups and downs againt the bears but still ended up with over 200 yds and over 50% completion % despite the drops. He isn't Tom Brady by a stretch, point me out a 2nd year that is.

Once again I am not trying to use the receivers as an excuse for Tebow's play he doesnt need to be excused as he is performing up to standards based on Bradford and McCoys numbers, rather trying to point out a hole in the overall offense....like the O-line, the fact that there is only 1 real RB, the lack of pass catching tight ends. You have a lot of young players on the offense...there only seems to be 1 that some people aren't willing to let develop.

[wayninja]

Sure you can say 1 or 2 ... but 11 in a row isn't a WR dropping problem. 3 in 3 quarters isn't a dropping problem.

This argument is nonsensical. Receivers were (dis)credited with 6 drops in 18 attempts in the first three quarters. That's 1 in every 3.

It would be easy to see 11 incompletions in a row with numbers like that. Also you act like 11 incompletions in a row is common for Tebow or something. He didn't have the best game in the world and his receivers weren't doing much to help. That's it. It's not some grand, this-stat-explains-all deal that you are making out to be.

[HammeredOut]

except for his favorite target the pro bowl guy who had an all career year that year?...other than that exactly the same

edit: in the 4 games he completed Orton was

304 yds 1 TD 1 INt - loss
195 yds 2 TD 0 INT - win
173 yds 2TD 2 INT - loss
273 yds 3TD 3 INT - loss
not 281 yds/game


if you meant last year, then Denver lost Lloyd and Gaffney the top 2 targets last year who accounted for a total of 43% of the total receptions. The current #1 and #2 DT/Decker had a total of 28 receptions between the two of them. Eddie Royal actually had twice as many catches last year as both of those 2 put together


Eddie Royal came into the league and had 91 receptions and close to a thousand yards as a rookie. Being drafted in the 2nd round, I'd say he panned out, and has some good talent. Ed even to a trip to the pro bowl. If that isn't talent, I don't know what is.

D Thomas, Ran a 4.36 in the 40, and was reguarded as the best reciever in his draft year. Which is why he was a first rounder. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..

Eric Decker, if anybody remembers the old tape in each of his preseasons, you will know that he looked alot like a young wayne cherbet. He is proving to be solid when he catches the ball, and just like wes welker, Decker isn't afraid to get hit. His heart is on his sleeve and a solid 3rd rounder.. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..


The Broncos have spent 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounds on these players, and even though D.Thomas hasn't had the opportunity until this year, he does look good. He is so fast, he actually has to come back to the ball. With Tebows 30 something completion rate to the sidelines, our wideouts will never get the ball.

[catfish]

Eddie Royal came into the league and had 91 receptions and close to a thousand yards as a rookie. Being drafted in the 2nd round, I'd say he panned out, and has some good talent. Ed even to a trip to the pro bowl. If that isn't talent, I don't know what is.

D Thomas, Ran a 4.36 in the 40, and was reguarded as the best reciever in his draft year. Which is why he was a first rounder. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..

Eric Decker, if anybody remembers the old tape in each of his preseasons, you will know that he looked alot like a young wayne cherbet. He is proving to be solid when he catches the ball, and just like wes welker, Decker isn't afraid to get hit. His heart is on his sleeve and a solid 3rd rounder.. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..


The Broncos have spent 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounds on these players, and even though D.Thomas hasn't had the opportunity until this year, he does look good. He is so fast, he actually has to come back to the ball. With Tebows 30 something completion rate to the sidelines, our wideouts will never get the ball.


Tim Tebow is widely considered one of the best players to ever play the game in college....he was a first round pick hence he must be the best QB ever. It is a ridiculous statement Tebow is a middle of the pack 2nd year QB with 11 starts, no more no less

DT has suffered injuries in his career I have no idea what his 40 time is now. Also running fast doesn't matter if you can't remember your route, or you have no confidence in your body, or you use poor technique to catch the ball there are mant things that can cause a receiver to be either great or a bust Usain bolt if the fastest mother****** on the planet, I don't see him making it in the pros. The jury is out on DT, but he has stepped up the last 2 games and could turn in to a #1 eventually need more evidence than 2 games. Decker shows flashes of brilliance as well, but I don't think he is ever going to be the guy where you can throw a ball up as you are getting hit and he will have the physicality to go outfight the defender for the ball(DT could turn into that guy once he gets body confidence back). That isn't a knock on Decker I have always thought he has the skill to be a solid #2 or a great #3.

you seem to be confusing talent with potential, draft pick speed etc doesnt mean anything unless it comes together to make you able to actually do something . Aside from the drops I have been very impressed with DT the last 2 games, he is starting to live up to his potential coincidentally Tebow also had what you could say were his 2 best passing games the last 2 games, I say it is a result of the WR stepping up and making plays, you say the receivers did better because Tebow threw better..same basic difference.

What it boils down to is perception, other NFL teams do not perceive that Denver has a player that demands double coverage hence they can play man coverage all day and still stack the box. Until the receivers prove they are a threat teams will continue to do so the long TD pass that went through DT's hands was an attempt by Denver to not only take advantage of the man coverage, but prevent the Bears from stacking the box and going to zone. Denver failed to put up any passing game wortrh worrying about due to poor play by Tebow and the receivers through 3 quarters so the bears played man all night, once the bears started playing zone the easy short passes where there and the pass game picked up

edit: lots of 1st rounders on the list

http://www.mynfldraft.com/worst-nfl-draft-picks/149

[wayninja]

Eddie Royal came into the league and had 91 receptions and close to a thousand yards as a rookie. Being drafted in the 2nd round, I'd say he panned out, and has some good talent. Ed even to a trip to the pro bowl. If that isn't talent, I don't know what is.

Royal is hurt. Did you miss that somewhere?


D Thomas, Ran a 4.36 in the 40, and was reguarded as the best reciever in his draft year. Which is why he was a first rounder. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..

What does that have to do with anything? Where is Ryan Leaf?

Nobody is saying he's not talented, we are simply saying he's dropping passes. Is that really so hard for you to see?


Eric Decker, if anybody remembers the old tape in each of his preseasons, you will know that he looked alot like a young wayne cherbet. He is proving to be solid when he catches the ball, and just like wes welker, Decker isn't afraid to get hit. His heart is on his sleeve and a solid 3rd rounder.. If this isn't talent, I don't know what is..

Again, who said these guys didn't have talent? You don't play in the NFL without talent. Period. Quit twisting the arguments.



The Broncos have spent 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounds on these players, and even though D.Thomas hasn't had the opportunity until this year, he does look good. He is so fast, he actually has to come back to the ball. With Tebows 30 something completion rate to the sidelines, our wideouts will never get the ball.

He's had his ups and downs, but has dropped passed and killed drives. It works both ways Hammered. You can't get lots of passing attempts if you don't convert 3rd downs. You can't convert 3rd downs if you are given 1 opportunity to pass and the ball is dropped. It's simply not all Tebow no matter how you guys want to try to paint it that way. If Rodgers was throwing at a brick wall, I bet his completion percentage would suck too.

[Joel]

Joel, Fox isn't using him like a traditional 4-3 Sam. In that respect, you're right, but the over schemes and zone blitzing combinations that Allen is building into this defense are unique and dangerous.

Why would you change that. His skill set is no where near a MLB skill set.
His skill set seems very like a 3-4 OLB, which makes sense given how much he played it in college. The only difference between a 3-4 OLB and a 4-3 MLB is the latter plays more pass coverage. It's funny there were many complaints when Fox announced early we'd go back to the 4-3, because our D now most resembles a 3-4 where Doom has his hand in the dirt all the time.

NT: Bunkley two gaps over center, pushing the center of the pocket and trying to draw double teams.
DE: Ayers and Thomas take the gaps on either side, trying to push the pocket and force runs outside for the LBs.
OLB: Doom and Miller come off the edges to get sacks, break up screens and stop the outside run.
ILB: Mays and DJ/Woodyard play zone coverage over the middle, tackling runners who get past the line and occasionally blitzing.

The problem is our defensive line is undersized to play like that (Thomas is the biggest at 6-3, 316.) If our secondary (outside of Champ) weren't so awful we'd probably get blown up in the running game more than we do.

Try to be a Steve Young type. He was not that great early in his career. I would take 3/4 of what Young did.
That's exactly what we should seek from Tebow, and I think he's capable of it. A typical rushing QB as inaccurate as many insist would have more picks than TDs (e.g. Cam Newton: 15 TDs, 16 Ints,) not 5 times more TDs.

Sunday is definitely his biggest test yet, in another no win situation: If he fails critics will nod their heads and say, "I told you so;" if he pulls off another magic trick they'll shrug and say, "NE has one of the worst secondaries in the League." Nonetheless, Tebow has made huge strides and shows every sign of more, so the only reason to draft a QB is as a backup. Many clamored for him to replace Orton, not because he was a certain winner, but so we would know what we have before the draft. Well, now we know, at least as much as we know about Andrew Luck or any of next years rookies. Bottom line is you don't replace a QB who's 7-1, or even 7-4.

For all the continued McDummy hate, we're a young team that (should) win it's division. People can nitpick and gripe over this missed pick and that, but no front office ever goes 100%. Or even close.

If a magic fairy appeared and offered to give me back the Broncos team McDaniel's inherited in exchange for the team we have right now, I'd laugh in her face. At this point, who gives a shit who McDaniels drafted or didn't draft. He gave the organization the purge by fire it needed, we hit rock bottom and got Von Miller because of it.

That alone is worth every bitter second of the McDaniels era. Now let's just shut up about it and move on.

:coffee:
I'm not crying over spilt milk, only saying it's ridiculous to claim McDaniels' drafts contributed much to our current competitiveness. He got Tebow and Decker, but the former was only genius if we believe NE or someone would've taken him in the first round if we hadn't, hypothetical speculation unless you're Belichick. So McDaniels TWO drafts (and 19 picks) produced ONE proven solid player. If I had a talent scout 1/19 for picking starters I'd fire him along with most of his draft picks. We're winning now despite, not because of, McDaniels.

The Broncos current mindset on their draft needs is clearly nothing more than an honest assessment of their draft position. Denver will, and should, continue to look at QB's leading up to draft but they have won their way outta position to draft a franchise QB.

Because of this there is no longer any need for Tebow/Gator fans to panick and run to twitter on bash the FO's supposed sabatoge of Tebow's career. But don't kid yourself, QB is easily one of the weakest starting positions on this team and Tim Tebow is just as replacable as any QB in the league.......
Yes, Tebow is as replaceable as Brady or Rodgers, sure, but that sounds like conceding his merits. ;) Off the top of my head, I'd put #2 CB, C, G, #1-2 WR, FS, and #1-2 TE ahead of QB for weakest starting position. Unless Clady looks like his old self next year and Franklin is much improved, add L/RT to the list. That's about 9/22 starters weaker than QB right now, so I wouldn't call that among our weakest.

Actually I disagree with this post. D.Thomas has only started 5 games in his career. And in one of those starts, he managed 144 yards in the game with a QB who only averages 1.79 completions per quarter, per game.

Essentially, D.Thomas who we selected in the First Round, looks really good. I noticed that a ton of uncatchable balls have been called drops by the media, which I think has become the new unfair bias of Tebow's recievers. Obvously they havn't watched this kid practice, and miss on a routine basis. So I wouldn't be so quick to judge D.Thomas as a bust, but I would be looking at the guy throwing the ball, and only averaging 1.79 completions per quarter for the first 3 quarters of any game. Im guessing it would be just asmuch as a guess to the Broncos Recievers if the ball is coming there way with a pass.

I say its an unfair bias to tag D.Thomas with. The guy only started 5 games, and fought off some major injuries already.
Starting 5 games in 2 years, only playing well in 2 of them, is appalling underperformance for a first round pick; Dez Bryant (whom we could've had instead) has delivered a LOT more. As to whether his drops are on him, I can only suggest looking at the tape and all the balls bouncing off his hands or sailing through them. There's no question who's to blame for the missed deep TD last week, hence Thomas publicly owning it and Tebow encouraging him in the huddle after it.

Thomas' two year career echoes the NFLs combine analysis of him:

Thomas has rare measurables for the wide receiver position and will be a very attractive gamble for some team after the first round. He shows excellent vertical speed, especially for someone his size, and can be intimidating to a cornerback when isolated on the perimeter. He has the size of a tight end with the speed, agility and ball skills of a wide receiver. He needs a lot of work on his route running skills as he tends to round off his breaks and will telegraph his routes with too much upper body movement. He can make acrobatic type catches but will drop some very catchable passes due to lapses in concentration. He is not a very physical blocker on the edge in spite of his massive size advantage. In a recent workout, Thomas broke his foot and will be unable to participate in combine drills.
http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/demaryius-thomas?id=497328
He has many drops and 3 major injuries in a 2 year career, none of which is Tebows fault. I can't help noting the League called McDumbass' 22nd overall pick "a very attractive gamble for some team after the first round."

This is essentially the same crew of recievers that Kyle Orton had, when he was third in the league in yards per game in the air at 281. So I disagree, the recievers are to blame. Now we average 95 yards a game in the air.
Are you serious? In 2009 (when he averaged 281 yds/game) Orton had Marshall, Lloyd, Scheffler and Gaffney. 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 solid starters are the same as what Tebow has now? When you were checking Ortons stats, did you notice he DROPPED nearly 100 yds/game in 2010 when Marshall and Scheff got booted out of town? Considering Lloyd and Gaffney are gone now, too, and Eddie Royal has a concussion, I think Tebows 117 yds/game stacks up pretty well against Ortons 195/game last year. Orton's been in the League 3 times as long, and put up his numbers when NONE of Tebows starting receivers could even get on the field.

On the subject of various players' Combine numbers and training camp performance: There's a reason the Super Bowl's in February rather than August.

[wayninja]

Are you serious? In 2009 (when he averaged 281 yds/game) Orton had Marshall, Lloyd, Scheffler and Gaffney. 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 solid starters are the same as what Tebow has now? When you were checking Ortons stats, did you notice he DROPPED nearly 100 yds/game DROPPED in 2010 when Marshall and Scheff got booted out of town? Considering Lloyd and Gaffney are gone now, too, and Eddie Royal has a concussion, I think Tebows 117 yds/game stacks up pretty well against Ortons 195/game last year. Orton's been in the League 3 times as long, and put up his numbers when NONE of Tebows starting receivers could even get on the field.

On the subject of various players' Combine numbers and training camp performance: There's a reason the Super Bowl's in February rather than August.

I agree with everything you said, just want to note that the 117 yards per game stat is misleading. This stat is only true if you include 3 games Tebow didn't start in (and 2 of those he didn't even throw a pass). If you only count games in which Tebow actually started, his average is 151 yards in the air.

[BroncoJoe]

Jeez! Look guys, it's pretty simple. We all know Tebow isn't the most accurate passer in the league. He's not the best, not the worst. Anyone catch Gabbert last night? Good Lord.

Just like so much related to Tebow, it's either black or white with most people. There is a happy medium in this case. Some throws are off the mark, some were clearly on target and dropped. Missing 11 in a row can happen because of both - not just one or the other.

[Joel]

I agree with everything you said, just want to note that the 117 yards per game stat is misleading. This stat is only true if you include 3 games Tebow didn't start in (and 2 of those he didn't even throw a pass). If you only count games in which Tebow actually started, his average is 151 yards in the air.
Since I don't feel like digging up those stats myself (and since they conform to my expectations,) I'll take your word, and note 151 yds/game vs. 195 yds/game is reasonable when a team loses its 2 best WRs.

Jeez! Look guys, it's pretty simple. We all know Tebow isn't the most accurate passer in the league. He's not the best, not the worst. Anyone catch Gabbert last night? Good Lord.

Just like so much related to Tebow, it's either black or white with most people. There is a happy medium in this case. Some throws are off the mark, some were clearly on target and dropped. Missing 11 in a row can happen because of both - not just one or the other.
Makes sense to me; my only quibble (a small but important one) is I don't think Tebow is off the mark significantly more than any but the best QBs. He's not always perfect, but neither is Manning, Brady or Rodgers. The last two actually have a worse Int%, and while comparing totals is pointless when Tebow has half the attempts, percentages are QUITE relevant (e.g. Tebows TD% beat Bradys coming into last week.)

[wayninja]

Since I don't feel like digging up those stats myself (and since they conform to my expectations,) I'll take your word for that, and note that 151 yds/game vs. 195 yds/game is DEFINITELY reasonable when a team loses its 2 best WRs (Lloyd and Gaffney.)

I know you aren't calling me out or anything just want to show my source:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13200/tim-tebow


You'll notice 1290 total passing yards over 11 games in that list. You could choose to either simply remove the passing yards for the charger game or adjust it by calling it a 1/2 game or doubling his yardage in that game. I chose to omit those yards completely.

That means 8 games started for 1211 yards. 1211/8 = 151

[HammeredOut]

Yes, Tebow is as replaceable as Brady or Rodgers, sure, but that sounds like conceding his merits. ;) Off the top of my head

Starting 5 games in 2 years, only playing well in 2 of them, is appalling underperformance for a first round pick; Dez Bryant (whom we could've had instead) has delivered a LOT more. As to whether his drops are on him, I can only suggest looking at the tape and all the balls bouncing off his hands or sailing through them. There's no question who's to blame for the missed deep TD last week, hence Thomas publicly owning it and Tebow encouraging him in the huddle after it.

Thomas' two year career echoes the NFLs combine analysis of him:

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/demaryius-thomas?id=497328
He has many drops and 3 major injuries in a 2 year career, none of which is Tebows fault. I can't help noting the League called McDumbass' 22nd overall pick "a very attractive gamble for some team after the first round."

Are you serious? In 2009 (when he averaged 281 yds/game) Orton had Marshall, Lloyd, Scheffler and Gaffney. 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 solid starters are the same as what Tebow has now? When you were checking Ortons stats, did you notice he DROPPED nearly 100 yds/game in 2010 when Marshall and Scheff got booted out of town? Considering Lloyd and Gaffney are gone now, too, and Eddie Royal has a concussion, I think Tebows 117 yds/game stacks up pretty well against Ortons 195/game last year. Orton's been in the League 3 times as long, and put up his numbers when NONE of Tebows starting receivers could even get on the field.

On the subject of various players' Combine numbers and training camp performance: There's a reason the Super Bowl's in February rather than August.


My orton stats was from last season 2010'. Marshall and Scheffler were on different teams. So thats 281 yards a game in the air on average just to clear that up, which I think was good for third in the league.

The Defense was giving up an average of 29.3 points a game which was good for last in the league. I assume, the entire non football thinking person with half logic, wouldn't think to pass blame on Kyle Orton for that one.

So according to these numbers, you are saying Kyle Orton was averaging 381 yards a game with Marshall, and Scheffler?? Because in all retrospect, If you watched the air show last season, Orton threw the ball up for 295 yards or more in 9 games out of his season in 2010'.


A big variance you may notice is that the Denver Defense has only averaged 10 points a game given up per game in 6 out of 7 wins. If you noticed from last year, they are given up about 3 less touchdowns a game which is huge in factoring why we are winning. Our defense is playing so good our QB only has to average 1.79 completions a game for the first 3 quarters of any game. So if we put a QB in the game who would score us 2 touchdowns in the first half, we could just sit on the defense, and run the ball with Tebow in company in the second half.

D.Thomas last season didn't have the chances to play because Llyod was playing so well, Thomas had a few token passes thrown his way. As for Dez Bryant, 64% of his catches were WR bubble screen passes. If you watch his first game, Bryant I believe gets about 4 in a row off the hop. Bryant only runs 2 routes, the other is the go-route. I would call Bryant a limited talent, since he doesn't have Randy Moss type of speed or being blowout or deceptive.

Tim Tebow averages about 200 yards less a game then Kyle Orton did as a Bronco. Orton was 281 yards a game vs Tim Tebow at 95 yards a game in the air.. So the stats don't add up, and im not doing 09 Stats.

My point about Royal, Decker, and Thomas was the fact we can't really question the talent we drafted and have on the team. We did spend a 1st, 2nd and 3rd on our top guys. So for analysis to say the Broncos have no talent at reciever is totally unfair, and untrue. I would say we have more talent then most. In 5 starts, and im not sure if people know how important a start is, but our guy D.Thomas racked up a 144 yards in one those 5 games with a QB who only averages 95 in the air, and less then 2 completions a quarter for the first 3 quarters of any game. I would say his D.Thomas talent is showing with the limited amount of starting time. He is so fast, he has to come back to the ball Tebow throws to him. And for a QB who only has about a 35% completion rate to either sideline, guys like D.Thomas must be really wondering if the ball with ever get thrown his way because of the weak arm Tebow has. Tebows weak arm, and his inability to release the ball is why his passes to the sidelines are no existent. This may be the most important play in football.

[claymore]

Jeez! Look guys, it's pretty simple. We all know Tebow isn't the most accurate passer in the league. He's not the best, not the worst. Anyone catch Gabbert last night? Good Lord.

Just like so much related to Tebow, it's either black or white with most people. There is a happy medium in this case. Some throws are off the mark, some were clearly on target and dropped. Missing 11 in a row can happen because of both - not just one or the other.

Ive said it before, his nice to haves are off the charts. His need to haves need alot of work.

Our FCQB of the future probably wont throw knuckleballs.

[BroncoJoe]

Ive said it before, his nice to haves are off the charts. His need to haves need alot of work.

Our FCQB of the future probably wont throw knuckleballs.

Agree with the first part -

As to the second, few of his throws are knuckleballs. Again, black & white with no grey.

[HammeredOut]

I know you aren't calling me out or anything just want to show my source:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13200/tim-tebow


You'll notice 1290 total passing yards over 11 games in that list. You could choose to either simply remove the passing yards for the charger game or adjust it by calling it a 1/2 game or doubling his yardage in that game. I chose to omit those yards completely.

That means 8 games started for 1211 yards. 1211/8 = 151

omiting stats from starts is unacceptable to boost stats. So just to give yourself a higher average, your taking games away to boost the average.. Most statisticians would have removed his best game, and his worst game if you removed anything.. Its actually a good stat to look at..

Just to fix that average, I still think Tebow is averaging 95 yards a game.. no matter how we look at it.. well maybe a bit more now, around 110 yards a game.. Aside from the stat you just dug up, when is the last time a QB had more rushes, then completions, like Tim Tebow??

[claymore]

Agree with the first part -

As to the second, few of his throws are knuckleballs. Again, black & white with no grey.

Id say a good percentage of them are. Jim Plunket threw an ugly ball as well. Not saying its impossible, but I cant remember uglier throws from a long term QB.

[BroncoJoe]

I'd rather have fewer passing yards and an 8-5 record than a lot of passing yards and finish 4-12.

The crap you guys argue is entertaining. I think I'll go watch a bull fight now.

[jhildebrand]

Jeez! Look guys, it's pretty simple. We all know Tebow isn't the most accurate passer in the league. He's not the best, not the worst. Anyone catch Gabbert last night? Good Lord.

Just like so much related to Tebow, it's either black or white with most people. There is a happy medium in this case. Some throws are off the mark, some were clearly on target and dropped. Missing 11 in a row can happen because of both - not just one or the other.

Holy crap some sound reasoning :eek:

The Broncos, if they aren't interested in keeping Quinn (which I hope is true), need to draft some kind of QB.

As a Tebow supporter I don't care when they do that whether it is the 1st, 3rd, 7th.

Would you rather they draft a backup or keep Quinn? :confused:

[Ravage!!!]

I'd rather have fewer passing yards and an 8-5 record than a lot of passing yards and finish 4-12.

The crap you guys argue is entertaining. I think I'll go watch a bull fight now.

Now Joe, don't be hypocritical.

You are doing the exact same thing that you are accusing people of doing. Your statement is black and white with no grey.

Why is it that those that are saying the team needs a better passer is willing to sacrifice wins to have it?

[BroncoJoe]

Now Joe, don't be hypocritical.

You are doing the exact same thing that you are accusing people of doing. Your statement is black and white with no grey.

Why is it that those that are saying the team needs a better passer is willing to sacrifice wins to have it?

Our record last year, and our record this year is clearly black and white.

[Ravage!!!]

Our record last year, and our record this year is clearly black and white.

So you think those that are talking about passing the ball proficiently are asking ofr Orton back???? :confused:

[BroncoJoe]

Holy crap some sound reasoning :eek:

The Broncos, if they aren't interested in keeping Quinn (which I hope is true), need to draft some kind of QB.

As a Tebow supporter I don't care when they do that whether it is the 1st, 3rd, 7th.

Would you rather they draft a backup or keep Quinn? :confused:

I don't care. I learned a long time ago not to fret over things I have zero control over.

[BroncoJoe]

So you think those that are talking about passing the ball proficiently are asking ofr Orton back???? :confused:

No. I just find the complaints funny. Why focus on the negative when we're currently in 1st place, and looking playoff bound?

[Ravage!!!]

No. I just find the complaints funny. Why focus on the negative when we're currently in 1st place, and looking playoff bound?

Just because you have a negative, doesn't mean its FOCUSING on the negative. There is a HUGE difference. I LOVE my car, doesn't mean there aren't some things I don't like about it, or wish were different. I'm betting most would say the same thing about their wives, and kids!

I find it funny that some only want to hear/read only fluffy, flowery, compliments all the time without acknowledging that there are negatives despite the team winning.

Even the TEAMS themselves know there is room for improvement despite pulling out these wins.

[HammeredOut]

Holy crap some sound reasoning :eek:

The Broncos, if they aren't interested in keeping Quinn (which I hope is true), need to draft some kind of QB.

As a Tebow supporter I don't care when they do that whether it is the 1st, 3rd, 7th.

Would you rather they draft a backup or keep Quinn? :confused:

What are guys like Troy Smith, and Dennis Dixon doing in the league, even a Tyrell Pryor has worth to the Broncos as a Back ups. If we are asking for some lighting to go with the Thunder, then why not take the best TebowCat Offense type of QB we can find. Nobody runs the spread option like us, so why not go with the flow, and have a QB who can get to the edge with sub 4.4 speed. Lets turn this into a Gator Offense. Its actually not that bad of an offense. We just need a 2 speed guys to the outside, and Tebow up the middle.

I didn't think much of Tebow, but we might aswell give him the best options, to make with his talent. The "TebowCat" offense is a new offense I have found a liking too. It took me about 6 games but he made me a believer in his clutch ability. Tebow has a strength in the NFL, and it is the most important. But we aren't on these forums to praise the strengths. Back to TebowCat offense. If we have teams guessing what type of run play have going, wouldn't it be nice to have another Tebow type of QB who could step in, and change up the speed, maybe bust some 50+ yarder's to the house. This is the type of dynamics our team needs to think about when they draft next season. What Denver may need, is a ROBERT GRIFFIN to hedge up our offense for next season if we are committed to Tim Tebow for another round. At 6'2, 220 and was reported as having run times between 445 and 449 for the past 2 seasons is something the Broncos may have to consider in next years draft. We are not just drafting the Heisman Winner of this year, but we are taking another RB/QB hybrid player. Our Running game might be so dominant, we could be breaking records if we had this type of running attack. It would be a true 3 headed monster out of the backfield.

[Ravage!!!]

TebowCat isn't going to catch on.... so I would stop trying.

[BroncoJoe]

Just because you have a negative, doesn't mean its FOCUSING on the negative. There is a HUGE difference. I LOVE my car, doesn't mean there aren't some things I don't like about it, or wish were different. I'm betting most would say the same thing about their wives, and kids!

I find it funny that some only want to hear/read only fluffy, flowery, compliments all the time without acknowledging that there are negatives despite the team winning.

Even the TEAMS themselves know there is room for improvement despite pulling out these wins.

MY opinion, and mine only is stated above. to bitch and moan about stuff I can't do anything about is not the type of person I am. Watching the Broncos and the NFL is for my entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less.

[jhildebrand]

I don't care. I learned a long time ago not to fret over things I have zero control over.

I wasn't aware I was asking you to fret over something. I was asking a pretty simple question given the thread title and all :coffee:

If you don't fret over things you can't control why are you fretting over people being black and white as you say? :confused: You cant control them!

Why are you fretting over the posters who choose to take a more critical look at the team "in spite of making a playoff run" when you have no control over the other poster or whether this team actually makes the playoffs (which isn't a lock).

FCOL!

[BroncoJoe]

I wasn't aware I was asking you to fret over something. I was asking a pretty simple question given the thread title and all :coffee:

If you don't fret over things you can't control why are you fretting over people being black and white as you say? :confused: You cant control them!

Why are you fretting over the posters who choose to take a more critical look at the team "in spite of making a playoff run" when you have no control over the other poster or whether this team actually makes the playoffs (which isn't a lock).

FCOL!

No need to be a dick. I didn't say anything to provoke you. You asked a question and I answered.

EDIT: To further clarify, this is a message board of which I participate. In that respect, I do have some control, and perhaps can "control" or at least influence others and their behaviors.

The Broncos? Where who and how they decide on a QB? Not so much.

[jhildebrand]

What are guys like Troy Smith, and Dennis Dixon doing in the league, even a Tyrell Pryor has worth to the Broncos as a Back ups. If we are asking for some lighting to go with the Thunder, then why not take the best TebowCat Offense type of QB we can find. Nobody runs the spread option like us, so why not go with the flow, and have a QB who can get to the edge with sub 4.4 speed. Lets turn this into a Gator Offense. Its actually not that bad of an offense. We just need a 2 speed guys to the outside, and Tebow up the middle.

I would be ok with a Dennis Dixon back up. But I don't believe this team has to find a guy similar to Tebow (not that any exist) to have as a back up. This team is going between offensive schemes and given that, I think it is probably easier to go from the Tebow style to a more conventional .



I didn't think much of Tebow, but we might aswell give him the best options, to make with his talent. The "TebowCat" offense is a new offense I have found a liking too. It took me about 6 games but he made me a believer in his clutch ability. Tebow has a strength in the NFL, and it is the most important. But we aren't on these forums to praise the strengths. Back to TebowCat offense. If we have teams guessing what type of run play have going, wouldn't it be nice to have another Tebow type of QB who could step in, and change up the speed, maybe bust some 50+ yarder's to the house. This is the type of dynamics our team needs to think about when they draft next season. What Denver may need, is a ROBERT GRIFFIN to hedge up our offense for next season if we are committed to Tim Tebow for another round. At 6'2, 220 and was reported as having run times between 445 and 449 for the past 2 seasons is something the Broncos may have to consider in next years draft. We are not just drafting the Heisman Winner of this year, but we are taking another RB/QB hybrid player. Our Running game might be so dominant, we could be breaking records if we had this type of running attack. It would be a true 3 headed monster out of the backfield.

RGIII won't be anywhere close to available for the Broncos. There is nothing new with this offense. It just hasn't been seen in 60 years :D

For me, the problem, is the massive amount of adjustments this causes the team to have to make! Also the fact that the coaches aren't sure how the other team will gameplan them. Finally, the WC Mimai ran got them to the PO's for a season. Fine. It was the next season....

For me, EFX need to keep building this team as they would have. Build and build and if Tebow continues to prove he can improve then keep the kid. If not, then the team is built and inserting a rookie, traditional/pocket passer a la Rivers, Big Ben, Eli, etc....

[jhildebrand]

No need to be a dick. I didn't say anything to provoke you. You asked a question and I answered.

EDIT: To further clarify, this is a message board of which I participate. In that respect, I do have some control, and perhaps can "control" or at least influence others and their behaviors.

The Broncos? Where who and how they decide on a QB? Not so much.

Not being a dick. I just didn't see the point of replying to my posting of a direct question just to simply tell me you didn't care. Not responding would have said as much without the effort.

[catfish]

omiting stats from starts is unacceptable to boost stats. So just to give yourself a higher average, your taking games away to boost the average.. Most statisticians would have removed his best game, and his worst game if you removed anything.. Its actually a good stat to look at..

Just to fix that average, I still think Tebow is averaging 95 yards a game.. no matter how we look at it.. well maybe a bit more now, around 110 yards a game.. Aside from the stat you just dug up, when is the last time a QB had more rushes, then completions, like Tim Tebow??

he isn't omitting stats from starts, he is omitting the games in which tebow participated(as a runner or WR) but did not throw, or did not play the full game. He is only taking starts for this year


edit:

also tebow no longer has more rushes than completions, and
if you look at all his starts vs just this years his avg yds per game goes up...so lets just focus on this year

[BroncoJoe]

Not being a dick. I just didn't see the point of replying to my posting of a direct question just to simply tell me you didn't care. Not responding would have said as much without the effort.

The simple fact is, I don't care whether we keep Quinn, or not. It is pretty clear we need to either keep him, or draft one. We also have Weber, who's been around the squad all year. I answered I don't care, because I truly don't. Maybe you are the type of person to ignore a direct question to you. I typically don't.

[HammeredOut]

I would be ok with a Dennis Dixon back up. But I don't believe this team has to find a guy similar to Tebow (not that any exist) to have as a back up. This team is going between offensive schemes and given that, I think it is probably easier to go from the Tebow style to a more conventional .



RGIII won't be anywhere close to available for the Broncos. There is nothing new with this offense. It just hasn't been seen in 60 years :D

For me, the problem, is the massive amount of adjustments this causes the team to have to make! Also the fact that the coaches aren't sure how the other team will gameplan them. Finally, the WC Mimai ran got them to the PO's for a season. Fine. It was the next season....

For me, EFX need to keep building this team as they would have. Build and build and if Tebow continues to prove he can improve then keep the kid. If not, then the team is built and inserting a rookie, traditional/pocket passer a la Rivers, Big Ben, Eli, etc....

What if I told you RG3 will be the 4th QB taken in the draft, behind Andrew Luck, Landry Jones, Matt Berkley. After the Scouting Combine the gap between Ryan Tannehill and RG3 will be shrunken down to very small, no doubt about it. Which might leave RG3 sitting in the 20's, in all likely hood, if he makes it that far, RG3 could find himself in the 2nd round. So I do say we have a chance to select Griff. Either way, I believe the Broncos should take either Griff or Tannehill in the draft.

Teams selecting a QB in the first would be Indy, Washington, Miami. I don't see RG3 on any of those teams. Luck to Indy, Landry Jones to Washington, Matt Berkley to Miami.

The team needs to select the next best running threat, and that would be RG3 in the draft for the Broncos. RG3 has a great ability to throw the ball deep.

[chazoe60]

RG3 lasting to the 20s? :laugh::laugh::laugh:


Do you even watch football?

[HammeredOut]

RG3 lasting to the 20s? :laugh::laugh::laugh:


Do you even watch football?

In America we call that soccer.

I know you don't like stats or anything.

[jhildebrand]

What if I told you RG3 will be the 4th QB taken in the draft, behind Andrew Luck, Landry Jones, Matt Berkley. After the Scouting Combine the gap between Ryan Tannehill and RG3 will be shrunken down to very small, no doubt about it. Which might leave RG3 sitting in the 20's, in all likely hood, if he makes it that far, RG3 could find himself in the 2nd round. So I do say we have a chance to select Griff. Either way, I believe the Broncos should take either Griff or Tannehill in the draft.

Teams selecting a QB in the first would be Indy, Washington, Miami. I don't see RG3 on any of those teams. Luck to Indy, Landry Jones to Washington, Matt Berkley to Miami.

The team needs to select the next best running threat, and that would be RG3 in the draft for the Broncos. RG3 has a great ability to throw the ball deep.

Hey, if RGIII is there, Denver has no choice but to draft the kid. Why not? :confused: Even if it means another Tebow circus for another year. You can't let go of that kind of value.


RG3 lasting to the 20s? :laugh::laugh::laugh:


Do you even watch football?

Crazier things have happened. Aaron Rodgers was a top pick but slipped due to non football things ie the Tedford talk etc...

Someone will have a crazy combine performance and drive their stock up.

Locker was a sure shot high 1st rounder.

I think the only part I question on Hammered's post is Barkley. I don't think he comes out.

Anything can happen.

[Ravage!!!]

OMG.. if we draft RG3, I will ******************************* scream and beat my tv to a PULP!!!!!!!!!!!

[chazoe60]

OMG.. if we draft RG3, I will ******************************* scream and beat my tv to a PULP!!!!!!!!!!!

You really don't like spread QBs do you Rav?

[Ravage!!!]

Yes.. I think RG3 lasts until the 20s. A QB heavy class with several of the bottom teams already having their furture QB drafted. He should be a 2nd or so draft choice.

[Ravage!!!]

You really don't like spread QBs do you Rav?

RG3 is NOT going to be a good NFL QB because of several factors.

[chazoe60]

Someone is going to fall in love with RG3 and I don't think he makes it out of the top ten.

[wayninja]

OMG.. if we draft RG3, I will ******************************* scream and beat my tv to a PULP!!!!!!!!!!!

I've spent a long time trying to figure out what the curse filter caught here and for the life of me I'm stumped.

[HammeredOut]

Someone is going to fall in love with RG3 and I don't think he makes it out of the top ten.

Who knows how the order goes, but I think the top 10 are:

Matt Kylil
Jon Martin Both OTs
Andrew Luck
Landry Jones
Matt Berkley All QBs
Quint Coples a DE
Alameda Ta'amu DT
Justin Blackmon WR
Morris Claiborne CB
Zack Brown OLB because of his 4.28, 40 speed, and is reguarded as the top in his class.

I might have missed on Alameda, but DTs traditionally, no matter what the draft class, have always made it to the top 10.

[wayninja]

omiting stats from starts is unacceptable to boost stats. So just to give yourself a higher average, your taking games away to boost the average.. Most statisticians would have removed his best game, and his worst game if you removed anything.. Its actually a good stat to look at..

Are you really advocating including games where he didn't even take a snap in his passing yards per game average? Really?

If that's the case, Matt Flynn flat out sucks as a QB and shouldn't be allowed in the NFL. He's averaging 12 yards per game!


Just to fix that average, I still think Tebow is averaging 95 yards a game.. no matter how we look at it.. well maybe a bit more now, around 110 yards a game.. Aside from the stat you just dug up, when is the last time a QB had more rushes, then completions, like Tim Tebow??

There is no way you can get, no matter how you manipulate it, 95 yards per game. Where is that even coming from? 110 isn't right either. This isn't high level math we are talking about.

Also, he doesn't have more rushes than completions. You keep making stuff up. I'm not sure why I'm even arguing... I just provided you proof and your answer was tantamount to putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "LA LA LA LA LA LA".

[claymore]

I'd rather have fewer passing yards and an 8-5 record than a lot of passing yards and finish 4-12.

The crap you guys argue is entertaining. I think I'll go watch a bull fight now.

You guys said the same thing about Orton. "All he does is win". At some point reality will set in.

We cannot continue to win like this. If we do, its divine intervention.

[HammeredOut]

Are you really advocating including games where he didn't even take a snap in his passing yards per game average? Really?

If that's the case, Matt Flynn flat out sucks as a QB and shouldn't be allowed in the NFL. He's averaging 12 yards per game!



There is no way you can get, no matter how you manipulate it, 95 yards per game. Where is that even coming from? 110 isn't right either. This isn't high level math we are talking about.

Also, he doesn't have more rushes than completions. You keep making stuff up.

Oh, I see what your point is, the stats indicated he wasn't even at the QB position. Well thats fair.

Matt Flynn does flat out suck and should be allowed on beer league teams.

When i ran TT numbers last week he was around 95 yards a game.

[catfish]

Oh, I see what your point is, the stats indicated he wasn't even at the QB position. Well thats fair.

Matt Flynn does flat out suck and should be allowed on beer league teams.

When i ran TT numbers last week he was around 95 yards a game.

in his 8 full starts this year he has 1211 passing yards, actually lower than last years average

[SOCALORADO.]

OMG.. if we draft RG3, I will ******************************* scream and beat my tv to a PULP!!!!!!!!!!!

RG3 will be drafted by the WASHINGTON REDSKINS with their top pick.
Book it. Write that down. Etch it in concrete out in front of Fed Ex field.

Mike Shanahan LOVES and ADORES mobile QBs.

Oh, and no way RG3 makes it outta the top 15.
Luck and Barkley will go 1-2. ;)

[HammeredOut]

RG3 will be drafted by the WASHINGTON REDSKINS with their top pick.
Book it. Write that down. Etch it in concrete out in front of Fed Ex field.

Mike Shanahan LOVES and ADORES mobile QBs.

Oh, and no way RG3 makes it outta the top 15.
Luck and Barkley will go 1-2. ;)

Anything is possible.

I believe that Landry Jones, Berkley, and Luck are the top 3 QBs. I actually like Landry Jones a bit more then MB. I think LJ has more intangibles in his reads. 99% of the NFL is all about the 3-5-7 step drops. I like RG3, but the first 3 QBs are NFL ready. That always plays a huge factor into drafting.

[BroncoJoe]

in his 8 full starts this year he has 1211 passing yards, actually lower than last years average

he also has 7 wins to 1 loss.

[wayninja]

Oh, I see what your point is, the stats indicated he wasn't even at the QB position. Well thats fair.

Matt Flynn does flat out suck and should be allowed on beer league teams.

When i ran TT numbers last week he was around 95 yards a game.

Fair enough, but your numbers must be including games where he didn't take a snap. That's the only way you can get to that number.

[Joel]

I know you aren't calling me out or anything just want to show my source:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13200/tim-tebow

You'll notice 1290 total passing yards over 11 games in that list. You could choose to either simply remove the passing yards for the charger game or adjust it by calling it a 1/2 game or doubling his yardage in that game. I chose to omit those yards completely.

That means 8 games started for 1211 yards. 1211/8 = 151
Yeah, throwing them out seems like the wisest course; not only is it just a partial game (which tends to skew averages) but the Chargers spent most of that week preparing for Orton rather than Tebow, which surely inflated his numbers. Interesting thing about those numbers is that if you throw out the SD game his PR (for whatever that's worth) is still >90 in 5/8 games, and THE most important stat for PR is completion percentage.

My orton stats was from last season 2010'. Marshall and Scheffler were on different teams. So thats 281 yards a game in the air on average just to clear that up, which I think was good for third in the league.
My bad, I was thrown off by Pro Football Refence listing both his 2011 stats AND his stats SO FAR this year:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/O/OrtoKy00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TeboTi00.htm

Funny thing though, 2010 was the best year of Ortons career, 50 yds/game better than 2009 (when he had another Pro Bowl WR and another starting quality TE) as well as almost 100 yds/game better than 2011. It looks a lot like the thing people like claiming about Tebows performances: A statistical anomaly. Comparing yds/game when Orton had ~30 att/game and Tebow has ~25 probably isn't a good metric regardless; per attempt comparisons are a lot more illuminating. With the same receivers (i.e. 2011) those numbers look like this:

Orton: 51.6% completions 6.3 YPA 5.1% TDs 4.5% Ints
Tebow: 48.5% completions 6.5 YPA 6.1% TDs 1.5% Ints

Apples to apples, Tebow blows the doors off Orton unless you're willing to trade 3% more completions for 0.2 less YPA 1% less TDs and THREE TIMES more Ints. Considering completions don't mean jack unless they translate into yards and points, that doesn't seem like a great trade. The only place the comparison really favors Orton is sacks; believe it or not, Orton only has half as many sacks per attempt. That IS an area that needs improvement: Tebow needs to find checkdowns, and faster, as well as recognize when on one's open and throw the ball away sooner (not pull it down to run; teams have done better recently at spying him and getting the sack when he does that.)

The Defense was giving up an average of 29.3 points a game which was good for last in the league. I assume, the entire non football thinking person with half logic, wouldn't think to pass blame on Kyle Orton for that one.
No, Orton only gets blamed for what he was doing with the ball, which wasn't much when they had the same receivers.

So according to these numbers, you are saying Kyle Orton was averaging 381 yards a game with Marshall, and Scheffler?? Because in all retrospect, If you watched the air show last season, Orton threw the ball up for 295 yards or more in 9 games out of his season in 2010'.
No, you were right and I was wrong on when Orton had the best season of his career: It was 2010 (without Marshall and Scheffler) not 2009. That he had 50 yds/game more that year than 2009 (with Marshall and Scheff) and nearly 100 yds/game less this year (with a much better D) suggests that was a statistical outlier. Generally speaking, the best statistical year of a QBs career is not representative of its entirety.

A big variance you may notice is that the Denver Defense has only averaged 10 points a game given up per game in 6 out of 7 wins. If you noticed from last year, they are given up about 3 less touchdowns a game which is huge in factoring why we are winning. Our defense is playing so good our QB only has to average 1.79 completions a game for the first 3 quarters of any game. So if we put a QB in the game who would score us 2 touchdowns in the first half, we could just sit on the defense, and run the ball with Tebow in company in the second half.
Were it that simple, the 2011 Broncos would not be 1-4 with Orton. For that matter, if you REALLY want to compare apples to apples, try the only game this season BOTH QBs played:

Chargers 23
Broncos (Orton) 10

Chargers 6
Broncos (Tebow) 14

There's a reason that was Orton's last start.

D.Thomas last season didn't have the chances to play because Llyod was playing so well, Thomas had a few token passes thrown his way.
But now that he and Gaffney are gone Thomas is starting. Just one more reason Ortons 2010 can't be compared to Tebows 2011.
As for Dez Bryant, 64% of his catches were WR bubble screen passes. If you watch his first game, Bryant I believe gets about 4 in a row off the hop. Bryant only runs 2 routes, the other is the go-route. I would call Bryant a limited talent, since he doesn't have Randy Moss type of speed or being blowout or deceptive.
Since I lived in TX until about this time last year I've seen a fair number of Bryants games, and that he's got so much production off those go routes belies the statement he doesn't have Randy Moss type speed (incidentally, Moss had unremarkable speed and size, but an exceptional COMBINATION of both.) Regardless, he's had more than two good games separated by a year and a half of NOTHING, and based on production so far I'd much rather have Bryant (though I'd prefer Laurent Robinson to both; THAT guy is the Cowboy WR most comparable to Moss, sans attitude.)

Tim Tebow averages about 200 yards less a game then Kyle Orton did as a Bronco. Orton was 281 yards a game vs Tim Tebow at 95 yards a game in the air.. So the stats don't add up, and im not doing 09 Stats.
Tebow also averages far less attempts/game than Orton; a QB with a lot more attempts/game will have a lot more yards/game. In YPA Tebow had 8.0 to Ortons 7.3 last year, and 6.5 to his 6.3 this year (Orton did have better completion, TD and Int percentages in the best year of his career, but only leads Tebow in completion percentage this year, and not by much.)

My point about Royal, Decker, and Thomas was the fact we can't really question the talent we drafted and have on the team. We did spend a 1st, 2nd and 3rd on our top guys. So for analysis to say the Broncos have no talent at reciever is totally unfair, and untrue. I would say we have more talent then most. In 5 starts, and im not sure if people know how important a start is, but our guy D.Thomas racked up a 144 yards in one those 5 games with a QB who only averages 95 in the air, and less then 2 completions a quarter for the first 3 quarters of any game. I would say his D.Thomas talent is showing with the limited amount of starting time. He is so fast, he has to come back to the ball Tebow throws to him. And for a QB who only has about a 35% completion rate to either sideline, guys like D.Thomas must be really wondering if the ball with ever get thrown his way because of the weak arm Tebow has. Tebows weak arm, and his inability to release the ball is why his passes to the sidelines are no existent. This may be the most important play in football.
I appreciate your point, I just strongly disagree with it. Better receiver talent than most? I don't see how; it certainly doesn't show up on the field, especially when they're dropping balls left and right when they aren't missing games or whole seasons with injury. If you want to see a talented receiving corps, check out the Pats, or Cowboys, or Texans, or Packers or... gosh, I could go on all day listing teams with FAR better receiving corps than ours.

Tebows arm is many things, but "weak" is not one of them. His accuracy can be questioned (though not nearly as much as even a month ago) but not his arm strength. Just a week ago Moose Johnston observed during the Bears game that Tebows sideline route is one of his best throws; I'll take the opinion of the guy with the 3 Super Bowl rings, thanks just the same. Tebow needs work as a QB, no doubt, but probably far less than our receivers, whose production with Orton is 2011 was worse than it has been with Tebow. If our receivers are so great, and Orton was such a fine passer, why have our yards, TDs and Ints/attempt ALL gone up with Tebow, DESPITE a (slightly) lower completion percentage?

[Joel]

omiting stats from starts is unacceptable to boost stats. So just to give yourself a higher average, your taking games away to boost the average.. Most statisticians would have removed his best game, and his worst game if you removed anything.. Its actually a good stat to look at..

Just to fix that average, I still think Tebow is averaging 95 yards a game.. no matter how we look at it.. well maybe a bit more now, around 110 yards a game.. Aside from the stat you just dug up, when is the last time a QB had more rushes, then completions, like Tim Tebow??
Tebow didn't start the first game against SD, Orton did, and THAT'S why wayninja threw it out: He's only counting starts, not relief efforts that inflate Tebows numbers. Don't accuse someone of bad faith when they ignore stats that support their argument but aren't reliable. Make no mistake there: Counting the SD game Orton started and Tebow finished does NOT make Orton look better. Orton was outscored 23 to 10, compared to Tebow outscoring SD 14 to 6. Still want to count that game? On the subject of most statisticians dropping the best and worst numbers, guess what happens to Ortons 2010 season if we do that. :wave:

[catfish]

he also has 7 wins to 1 loss.

I'm not arguing that...just making the statement that last year he averaged over 200 yds per game for those that didn't know

[wayninja]

I'm not arguing that...just making the statement that last year he averaged over 200 yds per game for those that didn't know

I'm not surprised by that, they threw him last year and expected him to run the exact same pass happy offense. So he passed a lot more. Seems simple enough for me.

[Joel]

As far as drafting Tebows backup, I'm fine with doing that, but think he'll take time to find. We need a guy who can throw deep and accurately plus has both the intelligence and work ethic to learn defensive reads and offensive progressions. In other words, we need a guy who can run nearly as well as Tebow AND shares the ability and commitment to becoming a bona fide NFL passer.

There just aren't many guys out there who can start at FB OR QB, and even finding one, much less at #20+, will be hard. The idea is NOT to find a great rushing QB who MIGHT--ULTIMATELY--not be a disaster passing. Tebow will only keep the starting job if he becomes a consistently effective passer, and anyone backing him up must do the same, IN ADDITION TO having good legs.

Any backup for Tebow will have to pass AND run well enough to keep the whole playbook viable, because a QB who ONLY does one or the other invites defences to shut down the one and only thing we do well, then beat the tar out of us. If this team were good enough to win with an immobile but precise pocket passer we'd all be cheering Brian Griese to another Super Bowl win instead of booing Orton out of town.

However, when we're talking about a guy who can step in for an injured Tebow we're talking about a guy who can lead rather than just manage a fairly complex play book. Right now, that means a veteran; we do NOT need the coaches to split time between developing two young hybrid QBs into reliably consistent passers. Sign a veteran hybrid who's already made the transition to the pro passing game and spend the time between now and his retirement combing multiple draft classes for Tebows backup. By the time we find him and the vet's drawing his pension we'll have a finished product in Tebow and the coaches can focus on developing the backup.

Meanwhile, we still have plenty of other urgent glaring needs (CB, WR and G most prominently) preventing a Super Bowl run even if Tebow develops into some other worldly cross between Johnny U and Jim Brown. Our best bet, as others have noted, is to address those myriad other problems so we'll have a solid team whether the Tebow Experiment pays off in the long run or not. The worst thing we could do is turn into one of those perennial losers who drafts a different QB messiah every year to rescue a team that will remain hopeless until he has more help.

[HammeredOut]

As far as drafting Tebows backup, I'm fine with doing that, but think he'll take time to find. We need a guy who can throw deep and accurately plus has both the intelligence and work ethic to learn defensive reads and offensive progressions. In other words, we need a guy who can run nearly as well as Tebow AND shares the ability and commitment to becoming a bona fide NFL passer.

There just aren't many guys out there who can start at FB OR QB, and even finding one, much less at #20+, will be hard. The idea is NOT to find a great rushing QB who MIGHT--ULTIMATELY--not be a disaster passing. Tebow will only keep the starting job if he becomes a consistently effective passer, and anyone backing him up must do the same, IN ADDITION TO having good legs.

Any backup for Tebow will have to pass AND run well enough to keep the whole playbook viable, because a QB who ONLY does one or the other invites defences to shut down the one and only thing we do well, then beat the tar out of us. If this team were good enough to win with an immobile but precise pocket passer we'd all be cheering Brian Griese to another Super Bowl win instead of booing Orton out of town.

However, when we're talking about a guy who can step in for an injured Tebow we're talking about a guy who can lead rather than just manage a fairly complex play book. Right now, that means a veteran; we do NOT need the coaches to split time between developing two young hybrid QBs into reliably consistent passers. Sign a veteran hybrid who's already made the transition to the pro passing game and spend the time between now and his retirement combing multiple draft classes for Tebows backup. By the time we find him and the vet's drawing his pension we'll have a finished product in Tebow and the coaches can focus on developing the backup.

Meanwhile, we still have plenty of other urgent glaring needs (CB, WR and G most prominently) preventing a Super Bowl run even if Tebow develops into some other worldly cross between Johnny U and Jim Brown. Our best bet, as others have noted, is to address those myriad other problems so we'll have a solid team whether the Tebow Experiment pays off in the long run or not. The worst thing we could do is turn into one of those perennial losers who drafts a different QB messiah every year to rescue a team that will remain hopeless until he has more help.

If you see the tape of Tebow when he makes contact 3 games into the league, and look at the last 5 games. Defenders the last 5 games are shying away from contact and are looking for the wrap up instead of being old school about it. In other words, Defenders are scared to make contact I believe. Tebow power and running ability is first round ability. I'd say he is one of the most powerful runners in the league, even go out on a limp and say only behind L.Blount, Tebow ranks in power as a runner. We have young Payton Hillis with fresh legs.

Tebow was never a read and react QB in college, and was never asked to do some of the things that traditional NFL offenses do. I believe the Broncos are just tailoring an Offense to Tebow's strength's and its working. People have to love the running game, almost 200 yards a game on average. Insane numbers for the ground. So I don't expect Tebow to be doing the same things as Phil Rivers or Eli Manning. If Tebow had as many attempts as Aaron Rodgers at over 400, TT would have been sacked 50 times already this season, and closing in on 60 before the seasons end. So I don't believe that TT is near ready to be a true threat passing the ball. The team just needs to keep doing what is doing, and thats controlling the ball with good a good running game.

[TT15Superman]

Tebow was never a read and react QB in college, and was never asked to do some of the things that traditional NFL offenses do. I believe the Broncos are just tailoring an Offense to Tebow's strength's and its working. People have to love the running game, almost 200 yards a game on average. Insane numbers for the ground. So I don't expect Tebow to be doing the same things as Phil Rivers or Eli Manning. If Tebow had as many attempts as Aaron Rodgers at over 400, TT would have been sacked 50 times already this season, and closing in on 60 before the seasons end. So I don't believe that TT is near ready to be a true threat passing the ball. The team just needs to keep doing what is doing, and thats controlling the ball with good a good running game.Tebow DID read and react in college...read-option and run. However, he was never expected to be an anticipation QB, therefore, his weakness is throwing to where the WR is going to be.

According to Belichick, Tebow (after his pro-day showing) was able to make ALL the NFL throws. Therefore, throwing is not an issue - anticipation is ... and so is his footwork for more consistent accuracy.

And if Tebow is throwing as much as Rodgers, he'd have more INTs.
This offensive scheme is PERFECT against 90% of NFL teams. The 10% that can put up crazy numbers requires an "up tempo" Tebow game where he throws early and often in hopes of scoring early, so they can then go back to the ground game (keeping the opposing QB off the field), chew up clock, and keep the D fresh.

[NightTrainLayne]

Apples to apples, Tebow blows the doors off Orton unless you're willing to trade 3% more completions for 0.2 less YPA 1% less TDs and THREE TIMES more Ints. Considering completions don't mean jack unless they translate into yards and points, that doesn't seem like a great trade. The only place the comparison really favors Orton is sacks; believe it or not, Orton only has half as many sacks per attempt. That IS an area that needs improvement: Tebow needs to find checkdowns, and faster, as well as recognize when on one's open and throw the ball away sooner (not pull it down to run; teams have done better recently at spying him and getting the sack when he does that.)


Careful. Sometimes taking the sack is the best choice, rather than putting up an interception. Obviously throwing it away is the best choice, but I'll take a few more sacks in exchange for 1/3 of the interceptions any day.

[Ravage!!!]

RG3 will be drafted by the WASHINGTON REDSKINS with their top pick.
Book it. Write that down. Etch it in concrete out in front of Fed Ex field.

Mike Shanahan LOVES and ADORES mobile QBs.

Oh, and no way RG3 makes it outta the top 15.
Luck and Barkley will go 1-2. ;)

I'll make this bet in a heartbeat. NO WAY Shanahan drafts this guy. Its not his type of QB in the least. Shanahan prefers the strong armed pocket passer over the mobile runner... hands down.

Barkley isn't going at #2 to either the Rams nor the Vikings. Of the top 15 worst teams in the NFL, I see that 6 already have their young QB on the roster. Of the remaining 8 teams; Jags, Browns, Chiefs, Cardinals, and Chiefs... are "Maybe take a QB in first" because of recent uses of 1st round picks.. OR..because of large contracts to their current QB.

Thats just 8 out of the top 15 that don't wants one of the other positions, OR, one of the other top QBs in the draft ahead of BG3.

The team I see taking BG3 in the first round... the Eagles. Fits perfectly.

[TimHippo]

I'll make this bet in a heartbeat. NO WAY Shanahan drafts this guy. Its not his type of QB in the least. Shanahan prefers the strong armed pocket passer over the mobile runner... hands down.

Barkley isn't going at #2 to either the Rams nor the Vikings. Of the top 15 worst teams in the NFL, I see that 6 already have their young QB on the roster. Of the remaining 8 teams; Jags, Browns, Chiefs, Cardinals, and Chiefs... are "Maybe take a QB in first" because of recent uses of 1st round picks.. OR..because of large contracts to their current QB.

Thats just 8 out of the top 15 that don't wants one of the other positions, OR, one of the other top QBs in the draft ahead of BG3.

The team I see taking BG3 in the first round... the Eagles. Fits perfectly.

I think Luck and RG3 will go real high. Top 5. If teams already have that position filled someone will trade up to get them.

If Matt Barkley comes out, he'll also go real high assuming his measurables (especially height) are positive. If he's more 6 feet or 6-1 he probably slips.

Landry Jones it will depend on his combine and pro day.

[Joel]

If you see the tape of Tebow when he makes contact 3 games into the league, and look at the last 5 games. Defenders the last 5 games are shying away from contact and are looking for the wrap up instead of being old school about it. In other words, Defenders are scared to make contact I believe. Tebow power and running ability is first round ability. I'd say he is one of the most powerful runners in the league, even go out on a limp and say only behind L.Blount, Tebow ranks in power as a runner. We have young Payton Hillis with fresh legs.

Tebow was never a read and react QB in college, and was never asked to do some of the things that traditional NFL offenses do. I believe the Broncos are just tailoring an Offense to Tebow's strength's and its working. People have to love the running game, almost 200 yards a game on average. Insane numbers for the ground. So I don't expect Tebow to be doing the same things as Phil Rivers or Eli Manning. If Tebow had as many attempts as Aaron Rodgers at over 400, TT would have been sacked 50 times already this season, and closing in on 60 before the seasons end. So I don't believe that TT is near ready to be a true threat passing the ball. The team just needs to keep doing what is doing, and thats controlling the ball with good a good running game.
In the short term, yes, that's exactly what they're doing, because coaches and FOs know plans for three years from now do little good if they get fired next off season. In the long run, they can't expect 10+ wins and successful playoff runs each year running the option (and, really, calling it "read option" makes it sound like more of a wrinkle than it is: The option has ALWAYS been based on the QB reading whether the D goes after him or the back.) In terms of skills, they're playing to Tebows CURRENT strengths while actively developing FUTURE strengths necessary for many wins.

They can do that because he has a first round arm and first round smarts to match his first round legs and power, which is why I don't expect them to just grab the first option QB available as his backup: They need high level versatility in Tebows bacukp to avoid sequestering either the running or passing parts of the playbook. That more than anything, including durability, probably accounts for the NFL not sticking with that approach 50 years ago: As hard as it is to find an exceptional specialist, it's even harder to find an athlete who does EVERYTHING well, then find a way to get him on your team and keep him healthy. Rare as they are, Jim Browns and Johnny Unitases still come along more often than Jim Thorpes.

For that as well as tactical reasons, Tim Tebow will ultimately be as much or more dangerous passing as he is throwing, or out of a job. That might prove the biggest tragedy of his career: As good a TE or FB as he might be, if it's not already too late to transition, it soon will be. However, he's no longer far from being a great passer; just a few teachable things he's eager to learn will put him there, and I'm very optimistic about his chances.

With current rules on defenders, no team can succeed JUST running; it's too easy for teams to quickly score to pull even or ahead in close games, or just take an early three score lead and sideline your running game. Fortunately, Tebow has the arm, the smarts and the drive to win that style of football while still reliably owning teams with power running when that's an option (and it will ALWAYS be the superior option when possible.)

Tebow DID read and react in college...read-option and run. However, he was never expected to be an anticipation QB, therefore, his weakness is throwing to where the WR is going to be.

According to Belichick, Tebow (after his pro-day showing) was able to make ALL the NFL throws. Therefore, throwing is not an issue - anticipation is ... and so is his footwork for more consistent accuracy.

And if Tebow is throwing as much as Rodgers, he'd have more INTs.
This offensive scheme is PERFECT against 90% of NFL teams. The 10% that can put up crazy numbers requires an "up tempo" Tebow game where he throws early and often in hopes of scoring early, so they can then go back to the ground game (keeping the opposing QB off the field), chew up clock, and keep the D fresh.
I agree with that assessment: Anticipation would make him much better at finding checkdowns (and avoiding sacks; he has about twice as many sacks/attempt as Kyle "fainting goat" Orton) and footwork would help his accuracy. Both are eminently teachable, and Tebow's shown both the intelligence and determination to learn them, so I expect good things.

I do NOT expect to run 2/3 downs long term (55/45 or 60/40 is more likely, though that only works out to about 3 plays a game difference.) We're doing it now while Tebow works on his passing, but we're already seeing more passing as he quicky improves, and the limiting factor the past couple weeks has been his receivers more than him.

Which brings us to "up tempo against the few teams that can shut down our run." I DISAGREE that there are that few right now, because I don't think we're as good running as our totals indicate; we're first in total yardage but 6th in average. However, it's a moot point against the Pats, because their offense is good enough, with enough legit receiving threats, that it will be either a shootout or a blowout. I'd still favor NE and their much better pass blocking and receiving corps, but if Denver can even stay in a game like that it will show we are team to be reckoned with in coming years, not to mention being a great experience builder for our offense (on which Clady, in his fourth year, is our second most experienced starter.)

[Joel]

Careful. Sometimes taking the sack is the best choice, rather than putting up an interception. Obviously throwing it away is the best choice, but I'll take a few more sacks in exchange for 1/3 of the interceptions any day.
Valid point and, like the incompletions, that may be some of the explanation. However, most of the time a smart QB can get it to the LoS and out of bounds, which is all that's necessary to avoid the sack. Tebow has gotten a LOT better at not pulling it down to run when there's no need and less excuse, but retains the inclination, and occasionally gives in to temptation. Sacks are better than Ints, but both are better than sack-fumbles, and we've seen a few of those the past couple weeks when Tebow tried to make something happen instead of just dumping the ball out of bounds.

I won't argue that I prefer forcing in a pick to a sack though, no.

[TimHippo]

Looking at RG3's numbers he will be top 5 for sure. He might even continue to rise to #1 over Luck. You are probably going to have to trade up into the top 2 or 3 to assure landing him.

RG3's accuracy is off the charts. More accurate than Tebow who was one of the more accurate qbs in college. And he doesn't throw many interceptions which usually translates well into the pros as it has for Tebow.
RG3's college QB rating is off the charts. At the absolute, absolute worst he'll be an Alex Smith (phenomenal college stats), which isn't bad since Smith is still an NFL starter on a good team with the niners.

SEASON CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2011 267 369 3998 72.4 10.84 87 36 6 23 192.3
2010 304 454 3501 67.0 7.71 94 22 8 20 144.2
2009 45 69 481 65.2 6.97 42 4 0 4 142.9
2008 160 267 2091 59.9 7.83 61 15 3 28 142.0

Career numbers:
571 823 69.4 7499 9.1 9.8 58 14 165.8

[TimHippo]

This currently has RG3 going #5 to Jacksonville.
Apparently they migh be giving up on Gabbert as he is considered a bust already.
And looks like KC is going to dump Cassell so they'll be looking for a QB too.

http://walterfootball.com/draft2012.php

[SOCALORADO.]

I think Luck and RG3 will go real high. Top 5. If teams already have that position filled someone will trade up to get them.

If Matt Barkley comes out, he'll also go real high assuming his measurables (especially height) are positive. If he's more 6 feet or 6-1 he probably slips.

Landry Jones it will depend on his combine and pro day.

Ditto.
Teams will trade up to get Barkley and RG3.
Landry Jones has proven to be a terrible clutch QB who folds like a wet paper towel at the slightest hint of pressure. Orton 2.0.
Barkleys a legit 6-2. 225-230.

I could even see teams taking Tannehill over Jones when its all said and done. His measurables are off the chart.
I see MIA now firing Ireland and just completely starting over, and getting Barkley at #2.

[TimHippo]

I could even see teams taking Tannehill over Jones when its all said and done. His measurables are off the chart.
I see MIA now firing Ireland and just completely starting over, and getting Barkley at #2.

I don't know much about Tannehill.
Looking at his stats his interception percentage seems a little high (i calculated it out to 2.85 for 2011.

That number usually goes up in the NFL.

[jwmann2]

Who else could see Tebow requesting a trade if the Broncos draft a QB next season? Aside from Andrew Luck, who else is there? The dude from Houston?

[tebowtime5502]

If the Broncos take a QB high in the draft, you can pretty much compare it to drafting Bowie ahead of MJ.

[VonSackemMiller]

The Broncos wont take a QB in round one. QB is not a position we need to adress early. Maybe if theres a guy in round 6 we like to bring in and compete and develope as some insurance incase tebow starts getting whacked and having concussions. Other than that i dont see any reason why wed take a QB. Elway clearly wont get his BF andrew luck so the QB thing should be over.