PDA

View Full Version : Immediate impressions of the draft



G_Money
04-28-2012, 04:23 PM
Immediate impressions really don't mean shit, but what the hell else are we gonna talk about today? Here's how I feel after watching 3 days of the draft. Keep in mind guys like Lancane and CoachChaz are far more serious about this than I am - these are just my feelings on the matter. Grades are based on what I felt we accomplished with the pick and how I think they rate compared to the players available around them at the time.

2) Wolfe: We got the DT we wanted, with several choices available, and I have no problem with him. I liked him better than Still, not as much as Worthy, but he's a viable second rounder. If we feel like he wouldn't have been there later (or that we HAD TO TAKE OSWEILER) then we needed him at this pick. Great motor, very strong, collapses a pocket, and will make the job of a pass-blocking RB very painful when Doom is coming from one side, Von from the other, and Wolfe right up the middle seam.

Motor is one of my key indicators on a DT and Wolfe has it. I look at him like a Kyle Vanden Bosch mentality - not the fastest guy but he will outwork you to the ball, and has nasty intensity. For our first real DT prospect in what feels like 40 years in the desert, I'll take him. I still wanted another run-stuffer, because that's not what Wolfe is best at, but if we figure we can score enough to take running out of the game early then I hope we can make do with Ty Warren for a season, I guess.

Grade: B

2) Osweiler: I have nothing nice to say about Osweiler. I hope that 4 years from now he's ready to take the reins from Manning, but 2nd round picks are only allowed to sign 4 year contracts now, so we'll owe him a fortune after a few snaps if we believe in him. I'm thinking of Matt Cassel and getting annoyed again. This is why I didn't want to draft a QBOTF this year. Anyway... I hope he's the right guy and not a nepotism pick, and that I'll be thrilled with this pick sometime in 2015. He won't do anything useful for us before then, most likely, so it's a no-value pick til then.

Grade: Incomplete. It's an F if looking at the current value of a raw backup to a QB with a serious injury concern - he shouldn't be our #2 guy, so we spent a 2nd round pick on a #3 roster position, which is horrible. Of course, it's an A if he can Aaron-Rodgers it later. Completely faith-based value, so to me it feels like we traded our 2nd rounder this year for some future pick.

3) Hillman: Felt like a panic pick to me, exactly like a McDaniels draft pick. LaMichael James came off the board faster than we wanted, just as may have happened with the Muscle Hamster, and in order not to get caught without addressing that position of "receiving RB/ 20 touch game-breaker" we jumped up and reached on Hillman. He's a smooth runner and his vision's good. I didn't like what I saw of him against faster defenses, I didn't think he had the extra gear that guys in his position need to display, I think he needs to work on catching passes and taking care of the ball...

He needs work. I don't like moving up for RBs who aren't 3-down guys and need work on the very skills we drafted them for. I hope to be pleasantly surprised by Knowshon's replacement, and at least he's not a first-rounder like No-Show was, but the pick doesn't thrill me. Now having said that, I expect him to turn into Marshall Faulk and give me the finger for a decade. I'll happily accept that.

Grade: C-. I'd have given a C+ for the player, but the trade up was an unnecessary expense IMO, and after all that effort to acquire very little by trading down twice, we spent most of it to get Hillman.

4) Bolden: In the fourth, Bolden is great. He's a smooth accelerator (I laughed when I heard that on a preview, but it's exactly how I'd described him to someone else, dude just starts rolling upfield at increasing speed), love his hips, and IF his knee is right, I'm glad to have him. Finally, a pick I can really appreciate. He could start for us in a year or so if circumstances go his way. Lots of upside.

Grade: B+]

4) Blake: Hardworking backup G/C who can hopefully push Beadles for a starting spot. He's big enough to play either position, and he's a good pick for the slot. We desperately needed OL depth - we had very little last year. A non-sexy but useful pick, and the draft is about addressing needs, not getting the sexiest guys around.

Grade: B-

5) Jackson: The Broncos really want pash-rushing D-linemen. I'm okay with that. Jackson's a rotational guy who could play inside on 3rd and long, outside to rush the passer earlier. Versatile. Yes, that can also be code for "not exceptional anywhere" but it's the 5th round. He's not the run-stopper we need, but I guess Joe Mays can stop all inside runners, right? He's raw, but could be a much better player in 2 years time, and most DL are 2-3 year projects in my book. Tons of upside.

Grade: B

6) Trevathan: I actually like him quite a bit, but I'm partial to UK linebackers, my boy Woodyard chief among em. Hard worker, good tackler, reads plays well and HAS to because he's not real fleet-of-foot or explosive, and he's certainly not big. Nice backup / ST guy, and we can always use LBs.

Grade: B-


Draft rating: B- / C+. Not especially feeling it. Glad to had a DT in the fold, and I like Bolden, but it feels to me like this:

- Pass-rushing DT
- backup outside CB with with #2 potential
- backup OG/C
- project DT/DE with good upside
- situational pass-catching RB, hopeful future starter
- Special teamer / backup LB
- traded 2nd round pick for hopeful 2015 starting QB (Osweiler)

Looking around at other (non-Raiders) teams, do you really feel like we smoked this draft? Would you take our draft over Cincy's, or Philly's, or Pittsburgh's, or...

Osweiler's dragging the grade down for me, since he's not Aaron Rodgers IMO and we could have had ANY of these players at that slot: DE Curry, OT Osmele, RB James or WR Randle, all of whom would help us far more in the Peyton Manning era than Osweiler. If we'd drafted a QB later I wouldn't be bothered as much, but 2nd rounders should be able to start now, and we are not a stacked team like GB was when they took Rodgers. It hurts the grade I give em - it won't some other people's.

We added players to both lines, which is good. I've been begging for more trench warriors. We added a much-needed corner and an attempt at a pass-catching runner. We did not add WR help, so those guys had better be ready to go. Our LBs are our LBs, with an extra backup thrown in. No workhorse RB.

Not a sexy draft, but a draft for depth. Okay. But with some of the great talents in this draft I would have liked to feel like we came away with at least one of em. Drafting a bunch of pro players will be a good outcome for this draft.

On a team neeeding impact guys, I guess I need to hope that Wolfe and Bolden bring the wood. And I need for Xanders and his staff's evaluation of some of these other guys to be more correct than my amateur first impressions. Hillman by himself could swing this draft to being very good if he can play a lot and make an impact, and Osweiler in a few years could make it great when he hops off the bench and leads us to the Super Bowl, Brady-style.

But for now, it's a bit of a yawner. I'm not throwing anything. It doesn't piss me off. It doesn't really move me in any significant way. Bring on training camp.

~G

pipes
04-28-2012, 04:25 PM
I'm really glad they didn't draft a TE, K, or P.
Cause those were the only positions that I thought that the Broncos were set.

SR
04-28-2012, 05:10 PM
I'm not really happy with the draft

Ziggy
04-28-2012, 05:14 PM
No WR, OT, ILB, S, TE, FB. Needs that were adressed were backup QB, interior OL, RB, DE, DT, CB, OLB. As far as filling needs, we did well.

claymore
04-28-2012, 05:19 PM
Althought it was boring, it seemed like they had a plan and stuck to it. Its better than the willy nilly shit McD did and the desperation one player away reach shit that Shanahan pulled.

Tned
04-28-2012, 05:20 PM
Whether or not they are right, I think what this draft shows is that the Broncos think their current crop of starters are enough to win this year, and this draft was about depth and situational play (Hillman). Blake could very well compete for a starting job this year or next, and Wolfe "could" see a lot of time in the DT rotation, and Bolden "could" win the nickel or dime job.

So, overall, I see this draft about creating roster depth and solidifiying roster stability for the future. There could be some short term impact from 2-3 of the guys, but I think the message here is that Elway and company see the Broncos as competitive now with their existing roster. Time (about 7 months) will tell if that is the case.

jlarsiii
04-28-2012, 05:21 PM
Just to early to tell anything. I will let you know in 3+ years if I am happy with the moves they made this particular draft. I am not worried about splashy draft picks as I would rather have consummate pros over the "flash in the pan" type. I hope that is what these players all turn out to be...

BroncoWave
04-28-2012, 05:25 PM
I'm not really happy with the draft

Well if someone who thinks we should trade up to draft Burfict thinks we had a bad draft, then I'm pretty confident we had a good one.

Lancane
04-28-2012, 05:57 PM
Well if someone who thinks we should trade up to draft Burfict thinks we had a bad draft, then I'm pretty confident we had a good one.

Now that's funny! :rofl:

SR
04-28-2012, 06:00 PM
I'm not really happy with the draft

Well if someone who thinks we should trade up to draft Burfict thinks we had a bad draft, then I'm pretty confident we had a good one.

I didn't ever say we should trade up to get him. Dipshit.

Lancane
04-28-2012, 06:06 PM
I didn't ever say we should trade up to get him. Dipshit.

Don't get angry Red, been a long weekend and there are a lot of fans that are frustrated with the overall draft...better to laugh then to be pissed about any of it!

;)

SR
04-28-2012, 06:09 PM
Don't get angry Red, been a long weekend and there are a lot of fans that are frustrated with the overall draft...better to laugh then to be pissed about any of it!

;)

I'm not mad...just can't stand when people misread shit and then start trolling posts like this punkass is doing. What I sad was I think Burfict will be a star one day but I didn't think Denver was willing to take a gamble on a player with character issues like his, but apparently BTB's fingers work better on the keyboard than his eyes do reading what's on his screen.

Lancane
04-28-2012, 06:16 PM
I'm not mad...just can't stand when people misread shit and then start trolling posts like this punkass is doing. What I sad was I think Burfict will be a star one day but I didn't think Denver was willing to take a gamble on a player with character issues like his, but apparently BTB's fingers work better on the keyboard than his eyes do reading what's on his screen.

Actually, I've been wondering if Denver having two Sun Devils in the draft might not sign Burfict as UFA if he does go undrafted, they obviously saw him at his pro-day, they've watched a ton of film that would have shown what he is capable of, as a UFA he'd be a low risk - high reward type addition.

SR
04-28-2012, 06:22 PM
Pretty much

bcbronc
04-28-2012, 07:28 PM
Not a sexy draft, that's for sure. I think if we'd traded down and got Worthy/Stills/Reyes then traded up to nab James/Pead there would be a lot more excitement around this draft.

My grades :

Wolfe: A- We took a DT and we have a HC + DC who have always had good DTs. There's also reports of other teams/experts that had Wolfe as the fourth best DT. But more than anything, we took a DT. Only an A- because all we managed to get was a 4th for going out of the 1st (there was a lot of talent available deep into the draft though, so a 4th seemed to have more value this year than most).

Osweiler: C- I'm a gentle marker. I agree with G, too early to get our QBotF this early in the draft. Developmental QB prospect was certainly a franchise need, but I would have been fine with adding a UDFA to compete with Weber and Haine this year and drafting one next year. We don't know what Elway knows though, and maybe Manning has told him he's only playing 2-3 more years. Then this timeline makes more sense. If he's "the one" for Elway I can't hate the pick, but it doesn't do much for THIS Superbowl window. Hopefully we all look back and bless JE for having the long term interests of the franchise at heart.

Hillman: B+ We need a playmaker in the backfield, a true homerun threat. If Hillman is that guy, it's a good pick. I get that people aren't happy with giving up an extra pick to get him, but I disagree. I'm in the drafting strategy camp that believes you be aggressive for guys at the top of your board. I had RB as one of our biggest needs, arguably our biggest, coming into the draft (but thought we'd be going after more of a McGahee type than a Moreno type). It looks like they wanted one of the scat back types in this draft, and when Pead went at 50 and James at 61 they were aggressive and got the guy they wanted. Biggest ??? with him is will he be durable enough at 200lbs to handle significant touches over the season.

Problem really is that they went QB with pick 2...if they don't they have their choice of James or Hillman at 57 (still might have gone Hillman, I have no idea) and keep #120. Can't compound the first mistake by missing out on a player you need though, because we really did need a RB out of this draft.

Bolden: A- Most reviews say his talent is two rounds higher, and 4th round is a good place to start taking risks on talent. Needed to get some young upside on the roster at CB. Only issue, I agree with the poster that questioned whether you want a guy who has already had two knee injuries returning kick offs.

Blake: A- Needed to add some depth (at minimal) to the interior OL. Good size (for a C), versatile, fills a need at a spot in the draft you don't need instant starters.

Jackson: B+ No real complaint with this pick, good size and athletic. Going from today, seems pretty safe assumption that we're going to be playing a penetrating defense with quick DTs, so if Jackson fits what they're doing it's a good pick this late in the draft. We got one DL early, one DL later, so I'm pleased as punch although I thought we would have tried to replace Bunkley's stoutness vs the run here.

Travathan: B At the very least, should be a contributor on special teams. If you get that out of the 6th round, it's a solid pick. Might end up costing Woodyard a roster spot in a year or two...unless one of them emerge as starting caliber.

Overall: B+ For me, the three biggest needs coming into this draft were DT, RB, and CB and all three were addressed. Also three picks used in the trenches, which gets brownie points from me--especially when 2 are DL. Imo did a good job moving around to get some additional value and still get the guys they wanted. Won't be able to tell for a few years whether they had the right guy at the top of their board or not, but at least all the picks make sense.

Biggest issue, taking a QB in RD2, but already said my piece on that. Other than that, only question how many three-down players we took. But like they say, it's not how many snaps a game you play, it's what you do with them that matters.

Superchop 7
04-28-2012, 08:38 PM
Lets see....2 Arizona State guys and Malik Jackson had his best game in college against who? (Arizona State) and Elways son goes to which college? (redundance) Wolfe...a reach but a good player......Osweiler a f~n joke (but my boy Foles went next to Philly are rock solid in QB development.....and get this....I dont see him as a west coast guy.....and they still went after him) Hillman is a Tatum Bell clone ....he can explode....but....cant run through a tackle or catch well and might fumble....Blake needs to get stronger, 22 Reps wont get it done in this league....Bolden.....if he recovers from ACL we just hit it out of the park....Jackson.....pretty average....Trevathan....18 reps isnt going to get it done but should be good on special teams.

HORSEPOWER 56
04-28-2012, 08:42 PM
After being kinda disappointed with the 1st two days this is how I feel about it:

Wolfe - C - He has the potential to be a solid starter. The fact that he seems to have a great outlook and motor means that it's more likely he'll be in this league for 10 years than for 3, but his role is yet TBD. Guys are likening him to Justin Smith and Kyle Vanden Bosch as far as his motor goes which is great, but he, like Ayers, did all of his significant work his last year of college. Kind of a one year wonder. I really hope he turns into a stud, but he's not an elite prospect by any means.

Osweiler - B - This was probably my favorite pick just because I honestly believe that with Manning being 36, coming off an injury, Tebow being traded, and the backup being Caleb Hanie, that we needed the heir apparent NOW. Manning is the present, there is NO FUTURE. Osweiler has some stuff to learn for sure, but he has everything you want physically in a QB. He went where he was supposed to go after his pro day and knowing that EFX extensively worked this kid out, I have no problem with this pick. The only thing that makes him a "B" is his lack of experience (15 game starter) and that he probably won't beat out Hanie in camp for #2 this year meaning that if Manning goes down there will be another QB controversy as Fox starts Hanie and the fans call for Oz.

Hillman - D - This pick really had me kinda fired up yesterday (in a bad way) and still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I know everyone thinks Hillman is the next Sproles, but I beg to differ. Sproles, Charles, and CJ2K are 4.3 speed RBs. They have ELITE speed. Hillman is closer to a 4.5 guy who is shifty but not overly fast. He is a carbon copy of Jeremiah Johnson. We already have an undersized RB with some wiggle - 2 actually. People think Hillman will be a STer (he never returned kicks in college) or some kind of great receiver out of the backfield (he caught 33 passes in 2 years - a little more than one per game) which he wasn't in college. Our "power/stud" RB turns 32 this year and isn't long for this league. I don't care if we have Manning and we're going to throw the ball more often, we still need a guy who can lower his damned shoulder and pick up a yard on 3rd and 1 or run over someone from the 2 yard line on his way into the endzone in a goalline set. McGahee won't last much longer. We needed a RB who can be an every-down back and we took another undersized utility guy. Hillman might be the next Faulk or Charles, but I and apparently most NFL FOs don't feel the same way.

Bolden - A (value), C (injury) - Once again, we've taken a guy that we couldn't work out because he is coming off of injury. This guy probably would've been a low 1st or high 2nd rounder had he not torn his ACL, but that's just it... he did. He's a "C" right now due to not knowing if or how he'll be the same guy post-injury which could upgrade to an "A" if he returns to form.

Blake - B - Solid pick. Not spectacular but solid and above average which means a "B". I thought it was a good pick then I realized that I was really excited about the last O-lineman we drafted from Baylor (a Center at that) only to be mostly disappointed... ;)

Jackson - B - Another solid pick based on potential and hey, it's the 5th round. Maybe he'll be great, maybe he won't. If he isn't it was only a 5th round gamble.

Travathan - C - I know little about him, but he seems like nothing more than a STer anyway. He is supposedly a good tackler but limited in most ways that would make him a pro-caliber LB (size, speed, range, coverage). Probably will end up on the PS or as camp fodder (about where you expect a 6th round LB to end up). C is average, he seems like an average 6th rounder so he gets a "C".

Based on those grades with the top picks slightly more heavily weighted, I give the draft a C overall. If Wolfe and Hillman become the guys that Fox and Elway swear they are based on their research and going against the grain, this draft could rapidly ramp up to an "A". If your top 3 picks pan out It's an "A" plain and simple. I just think most of them they've got an uphill climb to live up to their pick.

Northman
04-28-2012, 08:54 PM
Pretty fair assessments by G-Money, BcB, and HP.

BroncoStud
04-28-2012, 09:01 PM
Uninspiring draft, filled out some depth... Not crazy about Brock, just don't think he'll ever be "the guy" and sadly if Manning gets hurt we will likely suffer through Caleb Hanie because Brock won't be near ready.

SR
04-28-2012, 09:12 PM
Elway's son does not go to asu! He quit football!

G_Money
04-28-2012, 09:14 PM
Hillman is closer to a 4.5 guy who is shifty but not overly fast. He is a carbon copy of Jeremiah Johnson. We already have an undersized RB with some wiggle - 2 actually. People think Hillman will be a STer (he never returned kicks in college) or some kind of great receiver out of the backfield (he caught 33 passes in 2 years - a little more than one per game) which he wasn't in college. Our "power/stud" RB turns 32 this year and isn't long for this league. I don't care if we have Manning and we're going to throw the ball more often, we still need a guy who can lower his damned shoulder and pick up a yard on 3rd and 1 or run over someone from the 2 yard line on his way into the endzone in a goalline set. McGahee won't last much longer. We needed a RB who can be an every-down back and we took another undersized utility guy. Hillman might be the next Faulk or Charles, but I and apparently most NFL FOs don't feel the same way.

Dude, we signed a dozen UDFAs and didn't even grab one RB. The guys we've got are apparently the guys we're goin' with, and Hillman is our sole addition to the stable. I feel about him basically how you feel: asking a guy to be excellent at things he wasn't that good at in college seems like poor planning. I really hope they know something about him I don't.

We did sign THREE undrafted LBs, though, as well as our last pick. Somebody wants some special teamers. We added TA&M's Judie as a KR too, so for the 5 games he'll be healthy the Broncos won't need Hillman for that. He can understudy for a bit, I guess.

~G

BigDaddyBronco
04-28-2012, 09:21 PM
I'm afraid Brock will be a wasted pick and the Broncos will be searching for our next starting QB in the drafts to come. NBothing against the kid, but he is pretty raw and didn't have the body of work at Arizona St. to see if he is a gamer or not. I hope he proves me wrong.

Wolfe I like, seems like the high motor type with good film and a guy who can improve. Strong lower body and with some weight room work can have a strong upper body. Interior pass rush will help Von and Doom be even more impactful. Like the pick. That being said, I am concerned that we don't seem to have an effective NT on this team. Maybe they pick up another FA. Time will tell.

Like the depth at RB, LB, interior OLine, CB, etc. No big names, but hopefully guys that can provide quality depth (something this teem really lacks) and help on ST. I wish we would have picked another returner as well, seems to be a big need with no proven returners on the team.

Overall a C+, due to not getting immediate help with the Osweiler pick. Seems Dennis Dixon would have been a better backup to Manning and we could have picked another potential starter at that pick.

silkamilkamonico
04-28-2012, 09:29 PM
Hillman - D - This pick really had me kinda fired up yesterday (in a bad way) and still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I know everyone thinks Hillman is the next Sproles, but I beg to differ. Sproles, Charles, and CJ2K are 4.3 speed RBs. They have ELITE speed. Hillman is closer to a 4.5 guy who is shifty but not overly fast. He is a carbon copy of Jeremiah Johnson. We already have an undersized RB with some wiggle - 2 actually. People think Hillman will be a STer (he never returned kicks in college) or some kind of great receiver out of the backfield (he caught 33 passes in 2 years - a little more than one per game) which he wasn't in college. Our "power/stud" RB turns 32 this year and isn't long for this league. I don't care if we have Manning and we're going to throw the ball more often, we still need a guy who can lower his damned shoulder and pick up a yard on 3rd and 1 or run over someone from the 2 yard line on his way into the endzone in a goalline set. McGahee won't last much longer. We needed a RB who can be an every-down back and we took another undersized utility guy. Hillman might be the next Faulk or Charles, but I and apparently most NFL FOs don't feel the same way.


1 - Sproles ran a slower 40 time (4.48) at the combine than Hillman. I am not sure why everyone keeps thinking Sproles is some 4.3 guy. I am not going to say Hillman is as "fast" as Sproles, but he has the exact same traits as all those sparkplugs, he accelerates quickly, he's incredibly shifty, and he doesn't f around when he gets the ball, he's gone. I think he's going to be a special player in our offense.

2 - Every down RB's are overrated. Extremely. Ask CJohnson. There's only a handful of RB's in the NFL currently who can be labeled as legitimate every down RB's, and they do not come from teams with explosive offenses that move the ball quickly through the air. The fact is, we need McGahee, Moreno, and Hillman to all be productive this year if we want to have a good backfield, not just 1 RB.

G_Money
04-28-2012, 09:33 PM
We picked up Coryell Judie as a UDFA to return kicks, BDB. Dude has wheels if healthy, and he can ball. I expect him to make the team.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36zLGWXD3RM

So I'm glad we at least addressed that need today. But otherwise I share your fears. We didn't even pick up a DT as an undrafted . I hope all these DEs can stop the run up the middle until we score a bit and they can get about rushing the passer.

~G

CoachChaz
04-28-2012, 09:40 PM
1 - Sproles ran a slower 40 time (4.48) at the combine than Hillman. I am not sure why everyone keeps thinking Sproles is some 4.3 guy. I am not going to say Hillman is as "fast" as Sproles, but he has the exact same traits as all those sparkplugs, he accelerates quickly, he's incredibly shifty, and he doesn't f around when he gets the ball, he's gone. I think he's going to be a special player in our offense.

2 - Every down RB's are overrated. Extremely. Ask CJohnson. There's only a handful of RB's in the NFL currently who can be labeled as legitimate every down RB's, and they do not come from teams with explosive offenses that move the ball quickly through the air. The fact is, we need McGahee, Moreno, and Hillman to all be productive this year if we want to have a good backfield, not just 1 RB.

For those that remember him...Hillman reminds me of Ronnie Harmon

G_Money
04-28-2012, 09:59 PM
Dude, if he's Ronnie Harmon then we made out like bandits. I remember Ronnie Harmon being a thicker, stronger dude, but he was a receiving machine. Did he ever lead the chargers in receptions?

If that's the kind of back Hillman turns into I'll take back every bad word I ever said about him. Receiving back with the ability to rack up several hundred a year from the LOS? Sure. That's what I would have loved from LaMichael James at about the same slot.

~G

BigDaddyBronco
04-29-2012, 06:35 AM
We picked up Coryell Judie as a UDFA to return kicks, BDB. Dude has wheels if healthy, and he can ball. I expect him to make the team.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36zLGWXD3RM

So I'm glad we at least addressed that need today. But otherwise I share your fears. We didn't even pick up a DT as an undrafted . I hope all these DEs can stop the run up the middle until we score a bit and they can get about rushing the passer.

~G

Yea, I posted that before looking at the UDFA's. Judie should make the team unless he gets hurt, again....

Simple Jaded
04-29-2012, 07:54 AM
My first impression of this draft is that the Broncos are the most underwhelming team in April and I'm starting to have serious doubts about Xanders, Russell, Kidd and the entire scouting department. I think they got their ass handed to them in trade value and imo they could have traded up a couple spots to get their guy (DeCastro) and still got the major players (Osweiler, Wolfe and Hillman).

This draft just reinforces my disdain for trading down where the idea is to accumulate picks, unfortunately that's something the Broncos didn't really bother to do. They traded down for better ammo to trade back up. They're willing to trade up to get a better 3rd rounder but not they're not motivated enough to move up and get a better 1st rounder? They're willing to trade up to get a better backup but not a better starter?

With Cleveland's recent pattern of wheelin and dealin it's conceivable that it could have taken a just 4th to move up to 22 to get DeCastro, Cleveland would still have a great chance of overdrafting Weeden at 25. You don't think the Browns knew the Steelers had OL high on the draft board? Combine that with a handfull of real reaches and it's entirely possible that the Broncos just walked away from a DeCastro/Osweiler/Wolfe/Hillman combination with the possibility of their choice of Bolden and Jackson with the remaining picks.

This is the kind of draft that could really surprise, I have no problem with the players they got just where and how they were drafted. At first glance I think it's highly reasonable to question whether or not the Broncos have a firm grasp of how the draft works and I wonder if it will take flushing Xanders down the toilet to finally exercise the Josh McDaniels Error demons.

I will feel 100% better if Wolfe not only make an instant impact but is able to start from Day 1, and I know it takes years to grade a draft, but right now it appears that this scouting department is best at collecting backups.......

MOtorboat
04-29-2012, 08:33 AM
Our scouting department didn't spend much time east of the Mississippi.

Simple Jaded
04-29-2012, 08:57 AM
Our scouting department didn't spend much time east of the Mississippi.

Spent a lot of time in Arizona, l think.......

HORSEPOWER 56
04-29-2012, 10:25 AM
1 - Sproles ran a slower 40 time (4.48) at the combine than Hillman. I am not sure why everyone keeps thinking Sproles is some 4.3 guy. I am not going to say Hillman is as "fast" as Sproles, but he has the exact same traits as all those sparkplugs, he accelerates quickly, he's incredibly shifty, and he doesn't f around when he gets the ball, he's gone. I think he's going to be a special player in our offense.

2 - Every down RB's are overrated. Extremely. Ask CJohnson. There's only a handful of RB's in the NFL currently who can be labeled as legitimate every down RB's, and they do not come from teams with explosive offenses that move the ball quickly through the air. The fact is, we need McGahee, Moreno, and Hillman to all be productive this year if we want to have a good backfield, not just 1 RB.

Sproles is 5' 6" tall and 190 lbs. MJD is 5' 6" (they list him at 5' 7" but he's closer to 5' 5") and 208 lbs. Ronnie Hillman is 5' 10" and 200 lbs. Jeremiah Johnson is 5' 10" and 200 lbs. In short, Hillman is 4" taller than the small "sparkplug" guys you're comparing him to and not any faster or any stronger. He doesn'y have elite speed like Charles or CJ2K nor does he have that "hide behind blockers then explode and make guys miss in the open field" thing like Sproles or MJD. Hillman is below average in size and strength and only average for a guy his size in speed and quickness. Hillman also has had fumbling issues before and isn't some great receiver out of the backfield like everyone makes him out to be (33 catches in 2 years as the only real weapon in the SDSU offense.

Hillman is much closer to Moreno and Johnson than he is to the guys you want him to be. If he really was an MJD, Jamal Charles, CJ2K, Sproles type of player he would've gone earlier in the draft. In today's passing NFL, everyone wants that guy these days. I think EFX thinks he's that type of player, I just don't think he really is. He has a ton of rushing yards and TDs playing in the MWC, that's it.

All I'm saying is, I don't think anyone should expect much from him. Everybody thinks he's Darren Sproles, he's not, he's Jeremiah Johnson.

Northman
04-29-2012, 10:29 AM
If he really was an MJD, Jamal Charles, CJ2K, Sproles type of player he would've gone earlier in the draft.

Sproles- 4th rounder
Drew- 2nd rounder
Charles- 3rd rounder

Johnson was the only 1st rounder taken in your little list there mate.

BORDERLINE
04-29-2012, 10:50 AM
Did not like the QB pick so early. I'm sure there would be a QB of the future in the next 2 years coming out and this team is set to WIN NOW so we needed that second round pick to play right away. I would have rather traded up to pick RB James because of the little college ball I watch I seen him the most and was impressed by his play.

I hope the rest of the players turn out to be contributers and help this team by adding depth.

Northman
04-29-2012, 10:58 AM
Did not like the QB pick so early. I'm sure there would be a QB of the future in the next 2 years coming out and this team is set to WIN NOW so we needed that second round pick to play right away. I would have rather traded up to pick RB James because of the little college ball I watch I seen him the most and was impressed by his play.

I hope the rest of the players turn out to be contributers and help this team by adding depth.

You do understand that "win now" isnt only subjected to this year right? They got Manning with the hopes of a championship (or more) within a 3-5 year time frame. If they felt comfortable taking Osweiler to groom and can still draft/sign free agents in the next couple of years we can still be "winning now". Dont understand why everyone thinks it only applies to this year.

Jsteve01
04-29-2012, 10:58 AM
Lost in this whole conversation is the fact that hillman is 20 years old. Dunno about anyone else on here but I gained almost 40 pounds of good weight between the ages of 20 and 23. An I didnt have access to an nfl nutrition or strength program. Kid ran for over 1700 yards as a sophomore. I'm willing to give him a couple yearsyears

MOtorboat
04-29-2012, 11:26 AM
Who was the 4.3-speed back Denver was supposed to draft this year?

Simple Jaded
04-29-2012, 11:55 AM
Who was the 4.3-speed back Denver was supposed to draft this year?

Lamar Miller?.......

Northman
04-29-2012, 11:56 AM
Lamar Miller?.......

Miller ran a 4.40.

Cugel
04-29-2012, 12:36 PM
This entire draft was screwed up by the Osweiler pick.

I won't rate Wolfe. Who knows what he will become? They believed in him more than in Reyes, Still or Worthy. But, they could have drafted him at #57 and taken an impact player at #36.

But, they wanted Osweiler at #57 and that forced their entire draft. They had to take Wolfe too early because they wanted Osweiler. They passed on a BUNCH of guys at #36 like DE Andre Branch who had a first round grade on most boards, CB Janoris Jenkins (top 15 talent who fell due to character concerns), OT Jonathan Martin, WR Steven Hill, RB Isaiah Pead, etc., etc.

Don't tell me the Broncos couldn't have used ANY of those players. If you're going to take a DE, would you rather have Andre Branch or Malik Jackson? Would an additional WR like Hill possibly be a help?

I'm not suggesting they should have taken any of these guys INSTEAD of Wolfe, if they liked him so much, I'm saying they should have drafted one of them IN ADDITION to Wolfe, and then taken Wolfe at #57. They could even have moved up a bit in the 2nd round to get Wolfe if they were concerned he might fall between #36 and #57.

They gave up ALL those possibilities because they had to take a backup QB who is going to sit on the bench for at least 2 years and will probably NEVER become an elite NFL QB.

Sure, Elway loves Osweiler. His son Jack is a great friend of his. Great character, strong arm, Blah, blah, blah. :rolleyes:

Just answer this. How many elite QBs are found at #57 or later? It's been the same two for the last 15 years -- Tom Brady, 6th round and Kurt Warner, un-drafted. Everybody thinks they are going to find the next Tom Brady in a later round. And they're always wrong.

Somebody has to eventually win the $100 million power-ball lotto, but it's sure as hell not going to be you. :coffee:

THERE IS NO PLAN B! There's get Manning a bunch of weapons and win the SB over the next 3 years. PERIOD.

After that, they are going to "Suck For Luck" just like every OTHER team does who loses a Hall of Fame QB. Your chances of Osweiler being Aaron Rogers? Perhaps 1 in 100? Maybe less.

As time passes and more teams try and find Aaron Rogers in the 2nd round it will become ever more clear that it's just another lucky lotto winner. Don't count on it happening to you because it's not going to happen.

The almost certainty is that Osweiler is going to do nothing for 3 seasons, then Manning is going to retire and then Osweiler will prove to be mediocre to good.

And a "good" QB isn't going to win the SB. Not anymore.

And after a few more years they're going to give up on Osweiler and the team will use a top 10 pick to select a franchise QB. And with luck that guy will be the next Elway, Manning, Drew Brees, or maybe RGIII.

That's not easy to do of course. But, in today's NFL it's the ONLY way. The owners have seen to that by changing the rules.

REALITY NFL 2012. There are about 8 teams that have a chance of winning the SB in 2012. Because of Manning, Denver is one of them. But, if you're the Cowboys with Romo, or the Jets with Sanchez/Tebow, or the Bears with Cutler, or the 49ers with Alex Smith, or the Ravens with Flacco, etc. "No Soup For You!" :coffee:

CoachChaz
04-29-2012, 12:42 PM
I just dont ever find myself ever having the patience, time or desire to read the full dialogue of a Cugel post. Maybe its just me.


I look at it this way. What if we decided to wait a year to get a QB and Osweiler decided to stay in school and we ended up drafting him next year. Would that make people feel better? All we gain from it is another year of tuteledge under 2 of the best QB's ever. I'll give up a potential bust for that. Just my opinion

Northman
04-29-2012, 12:53 PM
This entire draft was screwed up by the Osweiler pick.

I won't rate Wolfe. Who knows what he will become? They believed in him more than in Reyes, Still or Worthy. But, they could have drafted him at #57 and taken an impact player at #36.

But, they wanted Osweiler at #57 and that forced their entire draft. They had to take Wolfe too early because they wanted Osweiler. They passed on a BUNCH of guys at #36 like DE Andre Branch who had a first round grade on most boards, CB Janoris Jenkins (top 15 talent who fell due to character concerns), OT Jonathan Martin, WR Steven Hill, RB Isaiah Pead, etc., etc.

Don't tell me the Broncos couldn't have used ANY of those players. If you're going to take a DE, would you rather have Andre Branch or Malik Jackson? Would an additional WR like Hill possibly be a help?

I'm not suggesting they should have taken any of these guys INSTEAD of Wolfe, if they liked him so much, I'm saying they should have drafted one of them IN ADDITION to Wolfe, and then taken Wolfe at #57. They could even have moved up a bit in the 2nd round to get Wolfe if they were concerned he might fall between #36 and #57.

They gave up ALL those possibilities because they had to take a backup QB who is going to sit on the bench for at least 2 years and will probably NEVER become an elite NFL QB.

Sure, Elway loves Osweiler. His son Jack is a great friend of his. Great character, strong arm, Blah, blah, blah. :rolleyes:

Just answer this. How many elite QBs are found at #57 or later? It's been the same two for the last 15 years -- Tom Brady, 6th round and Kurt Warner, un-drafted. Everybody thinks they are going to find the next Tom Brady in a later round. And they're always wrong.

Somebody has to eventually win the $100 million power-ball lotto, but it's sure as hell not going to be you. :coffee:

THERE IS NO PLAN B! There's get Manning a bunch of weapons and win the SB over the next 3 years. PERIOD.

After that, they are going to "Suck For Luck" just like every OTHER team does who loses a Hall of Fame QB. Your chances of Osweiler being Aaron Rogers? Perhaps 1 in 100? Maybe less.

As time passes and more teams try and find Aaron Rogers in the 2nd round it will become ever more clear that it's just another lucky lotto winner. Don't count on it happening to you because it's not going to happen.

The almost certainty is that Osweiler is going to do nothing for 3 seasons, then Manning is going to retire and then Osweiler will prove to be mediocre to good.

And a "good" QB isn't going to win the SB. Not anymore.

And after a few more years they're going to give up on Osweiler and the team will use a top 10 pick to select a franchise QB. And with luck that guy will be the next Elway, Manning, Drew Brees, or maybe RGIII.

That's not easy to do of course. But, in today's NFL it's the ONLY way. The owners have seen to that by changing the rules.

REALITY NFL 2012. There are about 8 teams that have a chance of winning the SB in 2012. Because of Manning, Denver is one of them. But, if you're the Cowboys with Romo, or the Jets with Sanchez/Tebow, or the Bears with Cutler, or the 49ers with Alex Smith, or the Ravens with Flacco, etc. "No Soup For You!" :coffee:

Of course your banking your entire theory on the "hope" that Wolfe would of been there when Denver wanted him. We have no idea if he would of lasted that long. If Denver thought he was the best guy out of the bunch than they took him when they wanted too. Your conspiracy theory holds no water here.

broncosfannum24
04-29-2012, 01:14 PM
19, and 22 reps on bench is overrated, Jared Allen can only do 17 i believe, pretty sure that guy turned out good, good thing your not the gm of the team

MOtorboat
04-29-2012, 01:18 PM
I just dont ever find myself ever having the patience, time or desire to read the full dialogue of a Cugel post. Maybe its just me.


I look at it this way. What if we decided to wait a year to get a QB and Osweiler decided to stay in school and we ended up drafting him next year. Would that make people feel better? All we gain from it is another year of tuteledge under 2 of the best QB's ever. I'll give up a potential bust for that. Just my opinion

Edit: Nevermind, he thinks there shouldn't be a backup quarterback on the team with potential of starting...read it wrong...

broncosfannum24
04-29-2012, 01:24 PM
@cugel, you come off as a very miserable person, how your bashing your team left and right, Andy dalton did pretty well this year for a 2nd rounder, tj Yates did pretty well for a guy not drafted in the 2nd round, jake Plummer was a pretty good qb for being a 2nd rounder, not to mention drew brees, just because you don't like where there drafted doesn't mean they can't play.

Cugel
04-29-2012, 02:52 PM
@cugel, you come off as a very miserable person, how your bashing your team left and right, Andy dalton did pretty well this year for a 2nd rounder, tj Yates did pretty well for a guy not drafted in the 2nd round, jake Plummer was a pretty good qb for being a 2nd rounder, not to mention drew brees, just because you don't like where there drafted doesn't mean they can't play.

I was impressed with Dalton, I was impressed with Christian Ponder and Cam Newton. Maybe Sam Bradford. Maybe one of those guys will be the next guy to break into the elite group.

But, until that happens, it's going to be the elite 6 who win all the SBs.

If someone came back in a time machine from 2025 and put a gun to your head and said "Will Joe Flacco win a SB, yes or no? If you get it wrong I pull the trigger." Would you say "yes" or "no?"

Me, I say "no" until something changes. Same thing with all the 2nd tier guys like Shaub or Ryan or Cutler, or Romo, or Rivers or Sanchez, or Alex Smith, etc.

Will any of them win a SB? Maybe, if one of them elevates his game and breaks into that elite bunch. But, there's no sign of it yet, is there? :coffee:

Of the guys you mention, either they never got to the SB (like Plummer) or they were drafted higher than the late second (Aaron Rogers and Brees were taken with the FIRST pick of the 2nd, basically they were first rounders who slipped a bit).

Osweiler is nothing like those guys.

But, I don't expect to convince you. You're the same people who kept insisting that Kyle Orton "is much better than cry-baby Cutler! We're 6-0 Baby! Whoo! Hoo!" and switched seamlessly to insisting that "Tim Tebow has revolutionized the NFL! He's great!" :rolleyes:

In short you drink the cool-aid every year and defend whatever management chooses to do right or wrong. You wear Orange Colored Glasses every April. And for the last 10 years, the homers have been WRONG, every year and I've been right. I'd love to praise every move Denver made in this draft to the skies. But, I'm a realist, not a Homer.

And if you don't like it, punt. :coffee:

MOtorboat
04-29-2012, 03:20 PM
Well, I suppose if you find every negative about every player drafted, just by shear percentages you're going to be right about more players than wrong, simply because more players flame out than succeed.

That doesn't make you a genius.

BroncoBowlby 88
04-29-2012, 03:43 PM
Oh Cugel, go back to your trash can you grouch! It's impossible to say how good or bad this draft was just yet. Denver picked high character guys who were leaders on their team and who were productive. We passed on players like Jenkins because his talent will be wasted because of all the trouble he gets in. And to think that Elway picked up Oswiler because he is friends with is son is asinine, Brock has the talent to be a very good QB in this league, he just needs time to learn the game. Look at this FO's body of work from last year, and trust the fact that they know a whole lot more about football than you will EVER know. Solid draft not flashy or filled with big names but filled with good players who will make this team better.

And dont say that you were right and everyone else was wrong without evidence supporting your claim, that's just bush league.

elsid13
04-29-2012, 04:38 PM
Elway's son does not go to asu! He quit football!

He is still in school there and close with the guys on the team. Brock O called him a close friend on the Broncos web site. I I don't think that he was drafted because he is friend with Elway's kid, but I do think the collective minds in the FO felt comfortable the knew what kinda of kid he was because of that connection and the one Elway has with Erickson.

elsid13
04-29-2012, 04:51 PM
It is solid non impact type of draft that gives the team depth. I have the strange feeling there was more panic in some of the picks then we know. I don't understand why they didn't move up for Decastro (sp) when most picks were going for 4th or 5th rounder throw in.

Magnificent Seven
04-29-2012, 04:56 PM
I'm not really happy with the draft

They are dark horses. You may be surprised. :salute:

Lancane
04-29-2012, 09:51 PM
Funny thing, Baltimore was (according to rumors) planning on taking Wolfe with the 35th pick, even the local sports casters were calling the pick. The Ravens had no idea that Courtney Upshaw would fall to them, that is the only reason we ended up with Wolfe. Had they drafted Wolfe, the same said disbelievers would be saying that "he must be good if they drafted him" and we would have likely taken Reyes or Worthy at that point and they wouldn't be bitching...it's funny and sad actually.

Northman
04-29-2012, 10:18 PM
Funny thing, Baltimore was (according to rumors) planning on taking Wolfe with the 35th pick, even the local sports casters were calling the pick. The Ravens had no idea that Courtney Upshaw would fall to them, that is the only reason we ended up with Wolfe. Had they drafted Wolfe, the same said disbelievers would be saying that "he must be good if they drafted him" and we would have likely taken Reyes or Worthy at that point and they wouldn't be bitching...it's funny and sad actually.

Lol, so F'ing true.

TXBRONC
04-29-2012, 10:22 PM
I'm fine with who drafed. No it didn't have the wow of last year's draft but that kind of hard to duplicate unless you're drafting in the top end of the draft. With all due respect to you guy who think that we should have waited to draft a quarterback until the 3rd round or later it's hard to say if Osweiler would have been their in the third. He was apparently the guy they wanted outside of Luck and Griffin III. Besides that didn't Osweiler grade out as a 2nd round pick?

TXBRONC
04-29-2012, 10:31 PM
Dude, if he's Ronnie Harmon then we made out like bandits. I remember Ronnie Harmon being a thicker, stronger dude, but he was a receiving machine. Did he ever lead the chargers in receptions?

If that's the kind of back Hillman turns into I'll take back every bad word I ever said about him. Receiving back with the ability to rack up several hundred a year from the LOS? Sure. That's what I would have loved from LaMichael James at about the same slot.

~G

Yes he did lead the Chargers in receptions 1992 with 79.

Lancane
04-29-2012, 10:32 PM
I'm fine with who drafedt. No it didn't have the wow of last year's draft but that kind of hard to duplicate unless you're drafting in the top end of the draft. With all due respect to you guy who think that we should have waited to draft a quarterback until the 3rd round or later it's hard to say if Osweiler would have been their in the third. He was apparently the guy they wanted outside of Luck and Griffin III. Besides that didn't Osweiler grade out as a 2nd round pick?

Actually Mayock after the combine stated that had Oswieler thrown and shown his throwing ability, arm strength and other intangibles he'd likely have improved his overall draft grade to be a high second maybe even a late first round pick and compete with Tannehill to be the third taken, his grade was a solid second to late second at that time. After his pro-day there were some who felt that he could be a first round pick, there was a huge debate on ESPN about it as well.

The truth about it TX is that he wasn't a fan favorite, like Luck, Griffith, Wilson or Russell, heck even Cousins had more fan fare on the boards and while I like Cousins, I believed that Osweiler is a better quarterback overall. And Cousins is from my Alma Mater, I go to several games a year, there is no way in hell that Cousins is better then Osweiler, truth be told - Cousins was far more like Orton then any other pro that comes to mind.

Shazam!
04-29-2012, 10:54 PM
With Tebow, it was 'Elway knows a thing or two about QBs' so he was doomed, but with Osweilers size and big arm he gets trashed as a pick by Elway for a team that is thin at QB. Go figure.

TXBRONC
04-29-2012, 11:07 PM
This entire draft was screwed up by the Osweiler pick.

I won't rate Wolfe. Who knows what he will become? They believed in him more than in Reyes, Still or Worthy. But, they could have drafted him at #57 and taken an impact player at #36.

But, they wanted Osweiler at #57 and that forced their entire draft. They had to take Wolfe too early because they wanted Osweiler. They passed on a BUNCH of guys at #36 like DE Andre Branch who had a first round grade on most boards, CB Janoris Jenkins (top 15 talent who fell due to character concerns), OT Jonathan Martin, WR Steven Hill, RB Isaiah Pead, etc., etc.

Don't tell me the Broncos couldn't have used ANY of those players. If you're going to take a DE, would you rather have Andre Branch or Malik Jackson? Would an additional WR like Hill possibly be a help?

I'm not suggesting they should have taken any of these guys INSTEAD of Wolfe, if they liked him so much, I'm saying they should have drafted one of them IN ADDITION to Wolfe, and then taken Wolfe at #57. They could even have moved up a bit in the 2nd round to get Wolfe if they were concerned he might fall between #36 and #57.

They gave up ALL those possibilities because they had to take a backup QB who is going to sit on the bench for at least 2 years and will probably NEVER become an elite NFL QB.

Sure, Elway loves Osweiler. His son Jack is a great friend of his. Great character, strong arm, Blah, blah, blah. :rolleyes:

Just answer this. How many elite QBs are found at #57 or later? It's been the same two for the last 15 years -- Tom Brady, 6th round and Kurt Warner, un-drafted. Everybody thinks they are going to find the next Tom Brady in a later round. And they're always wrong.

Somebody has to eventually win the $100 million power-ball lotto, but it's sure as hell not going to be you. :coffee:

THERE IS NO PLAN B! There's get Manning a bunch of weapons and win the SB over the next 3 years. PERIOD.

After that, they are going to "Suck For Luck" just like every OTHER team does who loses a Hall of Fame QB. Your chances of Osweiler being Aaron Rogers? Perhaps 1 in 100? Maybe less.

As time passes and more teams try and find Aaron Rogers in the 2nd round it will become ever more clear that it's just another lucky lotto winner. Don't count on it happening to you because it's not going to happen.

The almost certainty is that Osweiler is going to do nothing for 3 seasons, then Manning is going to retire and then Osweiler will prove to be mediocre to good.

And a "good" QB isn't going to win the SB. Not anymore.

And after a few more years they're going to give up on Osweiler and the team will use a top 10 pick to select a franchise QB. And with luck that guy will be the next Elway, Manning, Drew Brees, or maybe RGIII.

That's not easy to do of course. But, in today's NFL it's the ONLY way. The owners have seen to that by changing the rules.

REALITY NFL 2012. There are about 8 teams that have a chance of winning the SB in 2012. Because of Manning, Denver is one of them. But, if you're the Cowboys with Romo, or the Jets with Sanchez/Tebow, or the Bears with Cutler, or the 49ers with Alex Smith, or the Ravens with Flacco, etc. "No Soup For You!" :coffee:

I find it a little ironic that you already have Luck and RGIII pegged as great players without having played a down but Osweiler is already bust without having played a down. That doesn't make any sense to me.

NorCalBronco7
04-29-2012, 11:41 PM
Very happy with the draft. I liked all the positions the Broncos added to and theres a lot more competition on the roster now. Manning will be fine with the offense and the defense needs some depth. Solid approach by efx.

TimHippo
04-29-2012, 11:57 PM
This entire draft was screwed up by the Osweiler pick.

I won't rate Wolfe. Who knows what he will become? They believed in him more than in Reyes, Still or Worthy. But, they could have drafted him at #57 and taken an impact player at #36.

But, they wanted Osweiler at #57 and that forced their entire draft. They had to take Wolfe too early because they wanted Osweiler. They passed on a BUNCH of guys at #36 like DE Andre Branch who had a first round grade on most boards, CB Janoris Jenkins (top 15 talent who fell due to character concerns), OT Jonathan Martin, WR Steven Hill, RB Isaiah Pead, etc., etc.

Don't tell me the Broncos couldn't have used ANY of those players. If you're going to take a DE, would you rather have Andre Branch or Malik Jackson? Would an additional WR like Hill possibly be a help?

I'm not suggesting they should have taken any of these guys INSTEAD of Wolfe, if they liked him so much, I'm saying they should have drafted one of them IN ADDITION to Wolfe, and then taken Wolfe at #57. They could even have moved up a bit in the 2nd round to get Wolfe if they were concerned he might fall between #36 and #57.

They gave up ALL those possibilities because they had to take a backup QB who is going to sit on the bench for at least 2 years and will probably NEVER become an elite NFL QB.

Sure, Elway loves Osweiler. His son Jack is a great friend of his. Great character, strong arm, Blah, blah, blah. :rolleyes:

Just answer this. How many elite QBs are found at #57 or later? It's been the same two for the last 15 years -- Tom Brady, 6th round and Kurt Warner, un-drafted. Everybody thinks they are going to find the next Tom Brady in a later round. And they're always wrong.

Somebody has to eventually win the $100 million power-ball lotto, but it's sure as hell not going to be you. :coffee:

THERE IS NO PLAN B! There's get Manning a bunch of weapons and win the SB over the next 3 years. PERIOD.

After that, they are going to "Suck For Luck" just like every OTHER team does who loses a Hall of Fame QB. Your chances of Osweiler being Aaron Rogers? Perhaps 1 in 100? Maybe less.

As time passes and more teams try and find Aaron Rogers in the 2nd round it will become ever more clear that it's just another lucky lotto winner. Don't count on it happening to you because it's not going to happen.

The almost certainty is that Osweiler is going to do nothing for 3 seasons, then Manning is going to retire and then Osweiler will prove to be mediocre to good.

And a "good" QB isn't going to win the SB. Not anymore.

And after a few more years they're going to give up on Osweiler and the team will use a top 10 pick to select a franchise QB. And with luck that guy will be the next Elway, Manning, Drew Brees, or maybe RGIII.

That's not easy to do of course. But, in today's NFL it's the ONLY way. The owners have seen to that by changing the rules.

REALITY NFL 2012. There are about 8 teams that have a chance of winning the SB in 2012. Because of Manning, Denver is one of them. But, if you're the Cowboys with Romo, or the Jets with Sanchez/Tebow, or the Bears with Cutler, or the 49ers with Alex Smith, or the Ravens with Flacco, etc. "No Soup For You!" :coffee:

I actually agree for you for once.
They could have easily drafted Stephen Hill with pick 36 and Wolfe with the Osweiler pick. (pick 57)

First 3 rounds you need to get impact players who are going to start immediately to help Peyton Manning win the super bowl. Manning could will Hill or any of the other impact wrs to become an impact player along with DT & Decker. Instead you got John Elway's son's best friend, Osweiler who is not going to help Manning out at all while he's here. This was a monumental Larry/Moe/Curly blunder by EFX and Manning's got to be fuming "WTF, John. How does this help me reach the goal we talked about and you understand".

It really makes no sense at all.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 12:00 AM
this is the greatest broncos draft ever...the Broncos got the best tackle, qb, rb, and corner in this draft. They maneuvered unbelievably well.

There I see hyperbole looks as silly when it's coming from a positive stance as it does with those who have already written the draft off.

it seems that many of our members are still referencing the outdated point value chart and talking about Newsome's maneuvering in an attempt to bash our f.o. Let's go over this again. As a result of the new cba the old chart is completely irrelevant. a 4th was the going rate last night and that's what we were getting. Secondly, most anyone will come in second place when compared to Ozzie. He is at this point the most effective gm in the business at manipulating his board and trades to get perceived value.

At the end of the day. The broncos got value and need at every pick and then managed to sign several potentially impact udfa. I love the potential that wolfe brings as an interior rusher.

I like Osweiler long term and was very impressed of his session with gruden...the guy exudes passion.

Hillman although slightly undersized is only 20 and should be able to add 10 to 15 pounds. His body of work speaks for itself.

Bolden is a 1st/2nd round talent who had injury concerns but the 4th was the perfect place to take a flier on a player with his kind of ability.

Blake instantly upgrades our interior line depth and could potentially push for a job by midseason if not earlier.

The lber from Kentucky is a tackling machine and the type of special teams depth you expect from a 6th rounder. All in all at face value, I like this draft.

TimHippo
04-30-2012, 12:12 AM
this is the greatest broncos draft ever...the Broncos got the best tackle, qb, rb, and corner in this draft. They maneuvered unbelievably well.

There I see hyperbole looks as silly when it's coming from a positive stance as it does with those who have already written the draft off.

it seems that many of our members are still referencing the outdated point value chart and talking about Newsome's maneuvering in an attempt to bash our f.o. Let's go over this again. As a result of the new cba the old chart is completely irrelevant. a 4th was the going rate last night and that's what we were getting. Secondly, most anyone will come in second place when compared to Ozzie. He is at this point the most effective gm in the business at manipulating his board and trades to get perceived value.

At the end of the day. The broncos got value and need at every pick and then managed to sign several potentially impact udfa. I love the potential that wolfe brings as an interior rusher.

I like Osweiler long term and was very impressed of his session with gruden...the guy exudes passion.

Hillman although slightly undersized is only 20 and should be able to add 10 to 15 pounds. His body of work speaks for itself.

Bolden is a 1st/2nd round talent who had injury concerns but the 4th was the perfect place to take a flier on a player with his kind of ability.

Blake instantly upgrades our interior line depth and could potentially push for a job by midseason if not earlier.

The lber from Kentucky is a tackling machine and the type of special teams depth you expect from a 6th rounder. All in all at face value, I like this draft.

I don't think it has to do with "outdated" value chart at all. Nationally the Broncos draft is getting trashed as one of the worst drafts of any team this year so one can choose to put the blinders on but if you look at it objectively it's true.

The main reason is actually the Osweiler pick. I like him, he seems like a nice kid, but Broncos are supposed to be all in for Peyton Manning & the Super Bowl in the next 1-3 years and Osweiler does not help that out at all. They actually gave up an opportunity to get an impact player for Manning for someone who is not going to help Manning. The Cousins pick with the Redskins is also getting trashed nationally but at least that was a 4th round pick and the Redskins are a couple years a way from even possibly contending for a superbowl.

People are trying really, really hard to rationalize the Osweiler pick as a positive thing but it's not. It's falling into the Redskins mediocrity trap philosophy that's plagued them for the last 20 years.

topscribe
04-30-2012, 12:16 AM
Sproles is 5' 6" tall and 190 lbs. MJD is 5' 6" (they list him at 5' 7" but he's closer to 5' 5") and 208 lbs. Ronnie Hillman is 5' 10" and 200 lbs. Jeremiah Johnson is 5' 10" and 200 lbs. In short, Hillman is 4" taller than the small "sparkplug" guys you're comparing him to and not any faster or any stronger. He doesn'y have elite speed like Charles or CJ2K nor does he have that "hide behind blockers then explode and make guys miss in the open field" thing like Sproles or MJD. Hillman is below average in size and strength and only average for a guy his size in speed and quickness. Hillman also has had fumbling issues before and isn't some great receiver out of the backfield like everyone makes him out to be (33 catches in 2 years as the only real weapon in the SDSU offense.

Hillman is much closer to Moreno and Johnson than he is to the guys you want him to be. If he really was an MJD, Jamal Charles, CJ2K, Sproles type of player he would've gone earlier in the draft. In today's passing NFL, everyone wants that guy these days. I think EFX thinks he's that type of player, I just don't think he really is. He has a ton of rushing yards and TDs playing in the MWC, that's it.

All I'm saying is, I don't think anyone should expect much from him. Everybody thinks he's Darren Sproles, he's not, he's Jeremiah Johnson.
Makes sense. If Terrell Davis was a good running back, he would have been
selected much earlier. Same with Tom Brady as a quarterback. And how could
you figure Rod Smith could be even a starter, let alone a star? He wasn't even
drafted! And I think they ought to cut Chris Harris . . . free agent trash.

In a recent presser, Hillman was asked whether he had ever been caught from
behind. He said yes, once when he was playing on a sprained ankle. In the
same presser, it was pointed out that Hillman had success running between
the tackles, and he was asked how he did that at his size. Hillman responded
that a small guy can play small, or he can play big. That was the difference,
he implied. Oh, and Hillman is known for his quickness and his vision.

You really ought to watch some tape on him. You might be surprised . . .

Lancane
04-30-2012, 12:19 AM
I don't think it has to do with "outdated" value chart at all. Nationally the Broncos draft is getting trashed as one of the worst drafts of any team this year so one can choose to put the blinders on but if you look at it objectively it's true.

The main reason is actually the Osweiler pick. I like him, he seems like a nice kid, but Broncos are supposed to be all in for Peyton Manning & the Super Bowl in the next 1-3 years and Osweiler does not help that out at all. They actually gave up an opportunity to get an impact player for Manning for someone who is not going to help Manning. The Cousins pick with the Redskins is also getting trashed nationally but at least that was a 4th round pick and the Redskins are a couple years a way from even possibly contending for a superbowl.

People are trying really, really hard to rationalize the Osweiler pick as a positive thing but it's not. It's falling into the Redskins mediocrity trap philosophy that's plagued them for the last 20 years.

No need to rationalize with the irrational to begin with. How about this, Denver had Osweiler as their third rated quarterback after Luck and Griffith, even above Tannehill. While they are all in with Manning, he did just return from having multiple neck surgeries and even told the Broncos that they should get a legit quarterback as a backup plan, the deal the Broncos and Manning worked out favors both sides in case of something unforeseeable happens. Even if Manning does return to form and is alright, he's likely to only play three to four years of his current contract and the Broncos knew that all too well, they still didn't mind giving him that type of money. Osweiler who they are high on but is raw gets to come in for what they hope is three or four years and learn, then be ready to take over as the starter when Manning is done. It makes sense from every perspective give that he isn't an immediate impact and that's fan bias and impatience more then a front office mistake.

TimHippo
04-30-2012, 12:23 AM
No need to rationalize with the irrational to begin with. How about this, Denver had Osweiler as their third rated quarterback after Luck and Griffith, even above Tannehill. While they are all in with Manning, he did just return from having multiple neck surgeries and even told the Broncos that they should get a legit quarterback as a backup plan, the deal the Broncos and Manning worked out favors both sides in case of something unforeseeable happens. Even if Manning does return to form is alright, he's likely to only play three to four years of his current contract and the Broncos knew that all too well, they still didn't mind giving him that type of money. Osweiler who they are high on but is raw gets to come in for what they hope is three or four years and learn, then be ready to take over as the starter when Manning is done. It makes sense from every perspective give that he isn't an immediate impact and that's fan stupidity more then a front office mistake.

That's just regurgitating the Osweiler Candidate rationalization.

Manning came here because he thought and was assured by Elway that the Broncos would give him the best chance for him to win a super bowl. (honestly I think the 49ers would have given him a much better chance talent wise but whatever, that's what Manning thought) Osweiler does not help Manning at all in that quest and even your own rationalization admits that.

topscribe
04-30-2012, 12:28 AM
No need to rationalize with the irrational to begin with. How about this, Denver had Osweiler as their third rated quarterback after Luck and Griffith, even above Tannehill. While they are all in with Manning, he did just return from having multiple neck surgeries and even told the Broncos that they should get a legit quarterback as a backup plan, the deal the Broncos and Manning worked out favors both sides in case of something unforeseeable happens. Even if Manning does return to form and is alright, he's likely to only play three to four years of his current contract and the Broncos knew that all too well, they still didn't mind giving him that type of money. Osweiler who they are high on but is raw gets to come in for what they hope is three or four years and learn, then be ready to take over as the starter when Manning is done. It makes sense from every perspective give that he isn't an immediate impact and that's fan bias and impatience more then a front office mistake.
You know what I think of your argument? :deadhorse:

Oh, I agree with you entirely. It's just that some people have a difficult time
conceptualizing preparing for the future . . .

NorCalBronco7
04-30-2012, 12:46 AM
I don't think it has to do with "outdated" value chart at all. Nationally the Broncos draft is getting trashed as one of the worst drafts of any team this year so one can choose to put the blinders on but if you look at it objectively it's true.

The main reason is actually the Osweiler pick. I like him, he seems like a nice kid, but Broncos are supposed to be all in for Peyton Manning & the Super Bowl in the next 1-3 years and Osweiler does not help that out at all. They actually gave up an opportunity to get an impact player for Manning for someone who is not going to help Manning. The Cousins pick with the Redskins is also getting trashed nationally but at least that was a 4th round pick and the Redskins are a couple years a way from even possibly contending for a superbowl.

People are trying really, really hard to rationalize the Osweiler pick as a positive thing but it's not. It's falling into the Redskins mediocrity trap philosophy that's plagued them for the last 20 years.

Osweiler wont be an "impact" player anytime soon. But the timing of the pick is fine with Manning being 36 and the Broncos need of his successor. Every year a young, frachise player isnt studying under Manning is a major opportunity pissed down the drain.

Lancane
04-30-2012, 12:46 AM
That's just regurgitating the Osweiler Candidate rationalization.

Manning came here because he thought and was assured by Elway that the Broncos would give him the best chance for him to win a super bowl. (honestly I think the 49ers would have given him a much better chance talent wise but whatever, that's what Manning thought) Osweiler does not help Manning at all in that quest and even your own rationalization admits that.

Hippo, you need to seek help - seriously, the Broncos don't give a damn about your rationalization or lack thereof. And I don't have to rationalize the move, I understand it from various different aspects. Manning came here because he wants to win a Super Bowl but also because he liked the organization and the area just as much (Per his own damn words). The contract that he signed allows him and the Broncos to part should certain issues arise, such as re-agitating his injury and not one analyst believes that Manning will play out all five years of the contract. Denver also believes they got a franchise capable quarterback who can sit and learn, be a backup to Manning and eventually take over. So what that, that doesn't help Manning, how f***ing dare they think about the team, especially the long-term aspect. Of course should Manning get injured, even if not serious...how dare they draft a quarterback that could help the team win despite the starter being out!

Is there something in the water?

bcbronc
04-30-2012, 12:50 AM
The Cousins pick was way dumber than the Big Os pick.

NorCalBronco7
04-30-2012, 12:52 AM
But I want an umpa lumpa NOW!

Lancane
04-30-2012, 12:54 AM
But I want an umpa lumpa NOW!

Exactly! :rofl:

TimHippo
04-30-2012, 12:59 AM
The Cousins pick was way dumber than the Big Os pick.

Well of course. He went to Michigan State.

Lancane
04-30-2012, 01:04 AM
Well of course. He went to Michigan State.

Hey, I don't mind you bitching about draft picks...but talking shit about my Alma Mater is fighting words!

HORSEPOWER 56
04-30-2012, 07:06 AM
Makes sense. If Terrell Davis was a good running back, he would have been
selected much earlier. Same with Tom Brady as a quarterback. And how could
you figure Rod Smith could be even a starter, let alone a star? He wasn't even
drafted! And I think they ought to cut Chris Harris . . . free agent trash.

In a recent presser, Hillman was asked whether he had ever been caught from
behind. He said yes, once when he was playing on a sprained ankle. In the
same presser, it was pointed out that Hillman had success running between
the tackles, and he was asked how he did that at his size. Hillman responded
that a small guy can play small, or he can play big. That was the difference,
he implied. Oh, and Hillman is known for his quickness and his vision.

You really ought to watch some tape on him. You might be surprised . . .

The only "tape" you speak of to watch are youtube highlights. Of course he's going to look good in a "highlight" reel. In watching pretty much any youtube video I could find on him, it confirms everything I thought. He's undersized, quicker than he is fast, bounces a lot of stuff outside, never played STs, rarely caught passes or stayed in pass protection, and was the best offensive player on a bad team in a bad conference. He had huge games against bad teams but when he had to play teams with better defenses, his performance dropped significantly.

It would be fantastic if Hillman turns out to be a good player for us and even maybe a one day starter. Maybe he will and maybe he won't. We won't know until he laces them up for us. From what I've seen, he seems to be another Jeremiah Johnson or Knowshon Moreno. Maybe he'll be great, maybe he won't but the fact is, we traded way up to take him.

Consider this, it was widely rumored that the Panthers would've traded Jonathan Stewart for a 3rd and 4th round pick. We used a 4th and packaged it with a 3rd to trade up for Hillman. Hillman is 5' 10", 200 lbs, and runs 4.45 (best time) 40. Jonathan Stewart is 5' 11", 235 lbs, and runs 4.35, and is proven in this league. I'm not saying we must compare Hillman to Stewart for their careers, but I just can't believe that Hillman, who will be buried on the depth chart with McGahee, Moreno (if healthy), Ball, Johnson, and maybe Fannin will really be a guy we expect anything from any time soon is just not logical. He's not any bigger, stronger, or in all actuality faster than any of them and they know the playbook already. The biggest thing we needed was a replacement for McGahee, Hillman is not it. Hillman is an attempt to replace Moreno.

Keep beating that drum on TD, Brady, Sharpe, Rod Smith, and any other players that were drafted late or undrafted. That's the reason they were "steals". Hillman was rated to go some time in the 4th or 5th round in this draft. He wasn't an unrated player. Teams knew who he was and several worked him out (I don't know if Denver ever did although he didn't imply that he knew Denver was interested). Using the TD/Brady argument just shows that you're grasping at straws trying as hard as you can to defend the FO. Nobody is saying Hillman sucks, I'm saying he was overrated and thus overdrafted by us and he isn't the guy everyone is trying to make him out to be to justify taking him as high as we did. It's a simple opinion. We'll see, my friend, we'll see.

Northman
04-30-2012, 07:52 AM
The only "tape" you speak of to watch are youtube highlights. Of course he's going to look good in a "highlight" reel. In watching pretty much any youtube video I could find on him, it confirms everything I thought. He's undersized, quicker than he is fast, bounces a lot of stuff outside, never played STs, rarely caught passes or stayed in pass protection, and was the best offensive player on a bad team in a bad conference. He had huge games against bad teams but when he had to play teams with better defenses, his performance dropped significantly.

It would be fantastic if Hillman turns out to be a good player for us and even maybe a one day starter. Maybe he will and maybe he won't. We won't know until he laces them up for us. From what I've seen, he seems to be another Jeremiah Johnson or Knowshon Moreno. Maybe he'll be great, maybe he won't but the fact is, we traded way up to take him.

Consider this, it was widely rumored that the Panthers would've traded Jonathan Stewart for a 3rd and 4th round pick. We used a 4th and packaged it with a 3rd to trade up for Hillman. Hillman is 5' 10", 200 lbs, and runs 4.45 (best time) 40. Jonathan Stewart is 5' 11", 235 lbs, and runs 4.35, and is proven in this league. I'm not saying we must compare Hillman to Stewart for their careers, but I just can't believe that Hillman, who will be buried on the depth chart with McGahee, Moreno (if healthy), Ball, Johnson, and maybe Fannin will really be a guy we expect anything from any time soon is just not logical. He's not any bigger, stronger, or in all actuality faster than any of them and they know the playbook already. The biggest thing we needed was a replacement for McGahee, Hillman is not it. Hillman is an attempt to replace Moreno.

Keep beating that drum on TD, Brady, Sharpe, Rod Smith, and any other players that were drafted late or undrafted. That's the reason they were "steals". Hillman was rated to go some time in the 4th or 5th round in this draft. He wasn't an unrated player. Teams knew who he was and several worked him out (I don't know if Denver ever did although he didn't imply that he knew Denver was interested). Using the TD/Brady argument just shows that you're grasping at straws trying as hard as you can to defend the FO. Nobody is saying Hillman sucks, I'm saying he was overrated and thus overdrafted by us and he isn't the guy everyone is trying to make him out to be to justify taking him as high as we did. It's a simple opinion. We'll see, my friend, we'll see.


Lmao, such hogwash HP. You claim no one is saying his sucks but then in the same breathe say he is overrated. Thats bullshit man, you dont know if he is overrated or not. Just a ******* opinion on your part. Like i said before, let the shit play out before jump off the cliff man.

HORSEPOWER 56
04-30-2012, 08:00 AM
Lmao, such hogwash HP. You claim no one is saying his sucks but then in the same breathe say he is overrated. Thats bullshit man, you dont know if he is overrated or not. Just a ******* opinion on your part. Like i said before, let the shit play out before jump off the cliff man.

I said he was overrated by our FO and hence overdrafted by us. How am I wrong on this? We obviously had him rated higher than Polk, Miller, Pierce, etc when most others didn't. That's not my opinion. Nobody though Hillman was worth a high 3rd rounder except us. That's the point.

Northman
04-30-2012, 08:03 AM
I said he was overrated by our FO and hence overdrafted by us. How am I wrong on this? We obviously had him rated higher than Polk, Miller, Pierce, etc when most others didn't. That's not my opinion. Nobody though Hillman was worth a high 3rd rounder except us. That's the point.

Draft is a crapshoot. Ratings mean very little in the grand scheme of things. Miller dropped A LOT and not just by the Broncos so apparently he was VASTLY overrated going by your logic.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 08:16 AM
My overall biggest concern is the lack of depth acquired at CB. We are obviously preparing our defense to be in a situation to play more pass defense based on the assumption our offense will provide leads. But...our secondary is a little frightening.

Porter has never played a full season in his brief career. His 14 games last year are a career high...Bailey is 33 and has recently had his share of nagging injuries that required some missed games...our draft pick Bolden has star potential, but also has his own history of knee issues.

If any of them go down, we are left with the likes of Harris, Squid, Vaughn and a handful of nothing. Really hope we can add a player or too for depth when roster cuts start taking place.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 08:35 AM
Yeah bolden and Judie both have phenomenal physical ability but huge injury red flags.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 08:43 AM
Yeah bolden and Judie both have phenomenal physical ability but huge injury red flags.

Agreed...but if both pan out...they could be HUGE steals.

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 08:54 AM
sorry to say elways recent familiarity with ASU is all over this draft.
too great an influence, in my opinion.
"no in-game adjustment"
EFX were fixated on the guys they wanted and FAILED to take advantage of what the process offered thru-out the draft.
how was our play at safety last year?
who just retired/
how did we address that in the draft?
Our second pick overall is a guy we hope to never use for 3 yearsminimum?
high priced insurance p[olicy, with no guarantee of a pay-off, hello?
Hoiw werre we at stopping the run last year?
do ya think some teams might be trying to run the ball THIS year to keep manning off the field?
who did we draft as a run stopper/
another FAILURE to adress an obvious NEED !
sorry, my friends, I am not happy with this draft at all !
I hope every guy we drafted can contribute, but i still see my broncos as a team without a safety,
a defense that is miserable against the run
and a front office that seems more focused on pinching penniesthan aquiring talent, mannings contract notwithstanding, but perhaps standing in the way.
WOLFE and HILLMAN, these two are posterchildren for the draft fixation that dominated the bronco draft philosophy. if they make top end contributions this draft could be a b.
but for now it is at best incomplete, and a D+ at best when you consider we pissed away 2 chances to draft in round one, losing out on top talent this team could have used, and we then pissed away our second pick overall on a headscratching insurance policy.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 09:00 AM
sorry to say elways recent familiarity with ASU is all over this draft.
too great an influence, in my opinion.
"no in-game adjustment"
EFX were fixated on the guys they wanted and FAILED to take advantage of what the process offered thru-out the draft.
how was our play at safety last year?
who just retired/
how did we address that in the draft?
Our second pick overall is a guy we hope to never use for 3 yearsminimum?
high priced insurance p[olicy, with no guarantee of a pay-off, hello?
Hoiw werre we at stopping the run last year?
do ya think some teams might be trying to run the ball THIS year to keep manning off the field?
who did we draft as a run stopper/
another FAILURE to adress an obvious NEED !
sorry, my friends, I am not happy with this draft at all !
I hope every guy we drafted can contribute, but i still see my broncos as a team without a safety,
a defense that is miserable against the run
and a front office that seems more focused on pinching penniesthan aquiring talent, mannings contract notwithstanding, but perhaps standing in the way.
WOLFE and HILLMAN, these two are posterchildren for the draft fixation that dominated the bronco draft philosophy. if they make top end contributions this draft could be a b.
but for now it is at best incomplete, and a D+ at best when you consider we pissed away 2 chances to draft in round one, losing out on top talent this team could have used, and we then pissed away our second pick overall on a headscratching insurance policy.

Cant disagree with this too much. I think Wolfe will help and Hillman will contribute...but the rest are "hopes". We hope Osweiler pans out in 3 years, we hope Blake is better than his predecessor, we hope Jackson is the amazing pass rusher he is portrayed to be by some, we hope Bolden's knees are healthy.

I agree, we could have brought in better players that would be more of an immediate help to the team. And let's face it...with a 36 year old QB coming off of multiple neck surgeries...immediate help is what we need.

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 09:09 AM
No need to rationalize with the irrational to begin with. How about this, Denver had Osweiler as their third rated quarterback after Luck and Griffith, even above Tannehill. While they are all in with Manning, he did just return from having multiple neck surgeries and even told the Broncos that they should get a legit quarterback as a backup plan, the deal the Broncos and Manning worked out favors both sides in case of something unforeseeable happens. Even if Manning does return to form and is alright, he's likely to only play three to four years of his current contract and the Broncos knew that all too well, they still didn't mind giving him that type of money. Osweiler who they are high on but is raw gets to come in for what they hope is three or four years and learn, then be ready to take over as the starter when Manning is done. It makes sense from every perspective give that he isn't an immediate impact and that's fan bias and impatience more then a front office mistake.your 100% correct.
the broncos were fixated on osweiler from the start. they wanted him, they got him, they didnt care at what draft spot they accomplished that.
they got the guy they wanted.
they ignored other possabilities, they allowed iot to drive their entire draft in one closed minded direction, and they essentially employed the same philosophy in targeting players and ignoring opportunities.
hightower: we flat out pissed this guy away, gave him to the pats with a beautiful ribbon and bow.
HILLMAN: I hope he-s great, we pissed away a chance to take the second best RB in the draft because our EFX had their eyes on hillman all along.
osweiler, I guess this QB rich draft offerd no alternatives to EFX, and they dont see anyonme else in the next 3-5 years worthy of drafting to fill the role they just used our #2 pick over-all on?
whats the name of the SAFETY we drafted, perhaps the WEAKEST position on our defense?
thats what I thought.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 09:16 AM
your 100% correct.
the broncos were fixated on osweiler from the start. they wanted him, they got him, they didnt care at what draft spot they accomplished that.
they got the guy they wanted.
they ignored other possabilities, they allowed iot to drive their entire draft in one closed minded direction, and they essentially employed the same philosophy in targeting players and ignoring opportunities.
hightower: we flat out pissed this guy away, gave him to the pats with a beautiful ribbon and bow.
HILLMAN: I hope he-s great, we pissed away a chance to take the second best RB in the draft because our EFX had their eyes on hillman all along.
osweiler, I guess this QB rich draft offerd no alternatives to EFX, and they dont see anyonme else in the next 3-5 years worthy of drafting to fill the role they just used our #2 pick over-all on?
whats the name of the SAFETY we drafted, perhaps the WEAKEST position on our defense?
thats what I thought.

I like Adams at FS. I think he'll be just fine. All we can do is hope our young guys figure it out. Problem is...we have too many positions of need to fill them all. My biggest issue is that we missed on some of the important ones

silkamilkamonico
04-30-2012, 09:25 AM
your 100% correct.
the broncos were fixated on osweiler from the start. they wanted him, they got him, they didnt care at what draft spot they accomplished that.
they got the guy they wanted.
they ignored other possabilities, they allowed iot to drive their entire draft in one closed minded direction, and they essentially employed the same philosophy in targeting players and ignoring opportunities.
hightower: we flat out pissed this guy away, gave him to the pats with a beautiful ribbon and bow.
HILLMAN: I hope he-s great, we pissed away a chance to take the second best RB in the draft because our EFX had their eyes on hillman all along.
osweiler, I guess this QB rich draft offerd no alternatives to EFX, and they dont see anyonme else in the next 3-5 years worthy of drafting to fill the role they just used our #2 pick over-all on?
whats the name of the SAFETY we drafted, perhaps the WEAKEST position on our defense?
thats what I thought.

Our Safety's are both rookies. If you're going to go and replace rookies because they don't pan out in their first year you're never going to get anywhere as an organization.

I really liked the Osweiler pick but I can't disagree with someone not liking it for obvious reasons of not immediately helping the team.

I don't agree with the RB argument at all. Richardson is the only RB in this class that has the opportunity to be special leading up to the draft. The other;s are good players that will be mixed in with a plethora of good players in a position that is a dime a dozen in the NFL. I see passing on a RB that doesn't look to be anything close to the next AP not a big deal....at all.

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 10:15 AM
Our Safety's are both rookies. If you're going to go and replace rookies because they don't pan out in their first year you're never going to get anywhere as an organization.

I really liked the Osweiler pick but I can't disagree with someone not liking it for obvious reasons of not immediately helping the team.

I don't agree with the RB argument at all. Richardson is the only RB in this class that has the opportunity to be special leading up to the draft. The other;s are good players that will be mixed in with a plethora of good players in a position that is a dime a dozen in the NFL. I see passing on a RB that doesn't look to be anything close to the next AP not a big deal....at all.... and what about passing on hightower?
you think hillman adequaTLY ADDRESSES OUR rB NEEDS?
YES OUR SAFETIES WERE ROOKIES, DID WE AQUIRE A VETERAN SAFETY THIS OFF SEASON/
isnt the draft about adressing the needs of the team?
we liked NOBODY in the first round of the draft?
the second best thing we could do to help our team was draft a guy we hope to never see for 3 years?
its not like we have been tearing it up in free agency and therefore have the luxury to draft for the not so near future.

when our defense is once again one of the 5 worst teams against the run and manning spends 40 minutes of every game on the sidelines, we can revisit why I am so dissapointed with this draft !

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:18 AM
I guess I just wasnt as high on Hightower as some others were. If NE uses him as an edge rusher, then he has value, but he never showed me much as an ILB outside the tackles. Doesnt upset me we passed on him

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 10:19 AM
regarding safety...
we should hire dawkins as a position coach to get these kids in line !

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:20 AM
regarding safety...
we should hire dawkins as a position coach to get these kids in line !

I agree, but he said he committed to helping coach his son's high school team this year.

chazoe60
04-30-2012, 10:23 AM
...with a 36 year old QB coming off of multiple neck surgeries...immediate help is what we need.

And a long term plan at the most important position on the field.

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 10:27 AM
I guess I just wasnt as high on Hightower as some others were. If NE uses him as an edge rusher, then he has value, but he never showed me much as an ILB outside the tackles. Doesnt upset me we passed on him.. and yet BB moved UP to the first round, for the FIRST TIME in 8 years to grab hightower!
I guess BB doesnt know squat about defense or the value of defensive players.
My vguess is hightower starts emmediatly and his versatility adds to the offensive confusion and HE, HIGHTOWER leads the pats in TACKLES this year and becomes a perrenial pro-bowler.
yep i can understand why the broncos were not interested.
should we now discuss the BRONCO that the tampa bucs stole from us too?
WOLFE has to outperform the other 5 DTs taken in his round, and be the RUN stopper that WE NEED!
what are the chances?
OSWEILER has to be the next aaron rogers, what are the chances?
HILLMAN, primarily because we had the chance to take a handful of otherRBs before him, better be the next sproles.
what are the chances?

Chef Zambini
04-30-2012, 10:33 AM
And a long term plan at the most important position on the field.
like colt mccoy?
Im betting kellen moore wins more games that osweiller over the length of their entire careers!
the only thing MOORE is missing is opportunity!
if the detroit QB goes down, he is injury prone, MOORE will win games THIS year !

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:36 AM
Yeah...because BB's recent defensive draftees have turned into such irreplaceable gems. It's a travesty that guys like Ras-I Dowling, Ron Brace, Devin McCourty, Jermaine Cunningham, Darius Butler, etc...arent perennial pro-bowler. Especially eveidenced by their top 32 defense.

Let's not pretend that he's been a wizard of defensive personnel assessment recently.

Nomad
04-30-2012, 10:39 AM
like colt mccoy?
Im betting kellen moore wins more games that osweiller over the length of their entire careers!
the only thing MOORE is missing is opportunity!
if the detroit QB goes down, he is injury prone, MOORE will win games THIS year !


Moore better bulk up playing those defenses in the NFC North.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:41 AM
like colt mccoy?
Im betting kellen moore wins more games that osweiller over the length of their entire careers!
the only thing MOORE is missing is opportunity!
if the detroit QB goes down, he is injury prone, MOORE will win games THIS year !

Now you've lost your mind. A UDFA the size of my wife is going to win games in the NFC North. Good luck.


And please dont compare him to Brees. It's ridiculous

topscribe
04-30-2012, 10:42 AM
The only "tape" you speak of to watch are youtube highlights. Of course he's going to look good in a "highlight" reel.
The tape I watched was game film, not highlights.

FYI.

You're talking to someone with 50+ years of football behind him. I might have
been born on Sunday, but it wasn't last Sunday. ;)

BORDERLINE
04-30-2012, 11:08 AM
You do understand that "win now" isnt only subjected to this year right? They got Manning with the hopes of a championship (or more) within a 3-5 year time frame. If they felt comfortable taking Osweiler to groom and can still draft/sign free agents in the next couple of years we can still be "winning now". Dont understand why everyone thinks it only applies to this year.

NO i'm aware that we have a chance to win *in a lebron james voice* not 1 not 2 not 3...in all seriousness though. If Manning is here for 3-4 more years than what was the rush to find him his successor?

I admit I don't watch much college ball but I do watch the Broncos and since we picked up Manning and signed Hannie as his back-up plus have Adam Weber who by some reports was 3rd string last year in TC. WE DID NOT NEED TO DRAFT A QB.

Like you said a 3-5 year time frame to win and with manning I doubt Brock will help us at all holding a clipboard. I'm all for picking a QB in the 2nd or even the first just not in 2012 more like 2015

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 11:08 AM
.. and yet BB moved UP to the first round, for the FIRST TIME in 8 years to grab hightower!
I guess BB doesnt know squat about defense or the value of defensive players.
My vguess is hightower starts emmediatly and his versatility adds to the offensive confusion and HE, HIGHTOWER leads the pats in TACKLES this year and becomes a perrenial pro-bowler.
yep i can understand why the broncos were not interested.
should we now discuss the BRONCO that the tampa bucs stole from us too?
WOLFE has to outperform the other 5 DTs taken in his round, and be the RUN stopper that WE NEED!
what are the chances?
OSWEILER has to be the next aaron rogers, what are the chances?
HILLMAN, primarily because we had the chance to take a handful of otherRBs before him, better be the next sproles.
what are the chances?

bb Knew hightower fit their system. Zam he's not a 4-3 MLB. He has limited range and poor change of direction. I like him for the pats, ravens or steelers.

silkamilkamonico
04-30-2012, 11:12 AM
... and what about passing on hightower?
you think hillman adequaTLY ADDRESSES OUR rB NEEDS?
YES OUR SAFETIES WERE ROOKIES, DID WE AQUIRE A VETERAN SAFETY THIS OFF SEASON/
isnt the draft about adressing the needs of the team?
we liked NOBODY in the first round of the draft?
the second best thing we could do to help our team was draft a guy we hope to never see for 3 years?
its not like we have been tearing it up in free agency and therefore have the luxury to draft for the not so near future.

when our defense is once again one of the 5 worst teams against the run and manning spends 40 minutes of every game on the sidelines, we can revisit why I am so dissapointed with this draft !


Hightower might be a strong and productive player who I don't think will be anything special.

Who other than Richardson would have addressed our Rb needs? I didn't see anyone else at the position. What are our needs? We have a pounder and workhorse in McGahee, we have a good change of pace back in Moreno who is also a good receiving back, and now a player who can be special out of the backfield. What do you see our needs at the RB position? An every down RB? Who was the last team to win a SuperBowl with that type of back? Jamal Lewis and the Ravens?

We've had veteran Safeties the last few years....and that didn't work out very well for us with the exception of Dawkins who was injured and did give up some huge plays. Time to start culturing what we have instead of patchworking it.

Why are you so wrapped up in the late part of the first round?

The Osweiler wasn't to help the team in the next 3 years. It was to help the organization over the course of the next 15-20 years. Like what has been stated, He is just as intriguing with just as much upside as any QB who will come out of the draft next year.

I understand someone not likeing the Osweiler pick. For myself, I don' want to go through the same garbage of no QB potential at all in the next 3-5 years. Manning ain't playing much longer

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:12 AM
bb Knew hightower fit their system. Zam he's not a 4-3 MLB. He has limited range and poor change of direction. I like him for the pats, ravens or steelers.

Except...the Pats have been running more of a 4-3 lately. If they are going back to more of a 3-4, then Jones is a wasted pick to play 3-4 DE and they already have Spikes and Mayo inside. So, they slide Hightower to OLB, but I dont see the burst or the "play to the whistle" in him to survive out there. If they stick to some 4-3 stuff, does Hightower play DE? I definitely dont see that, but apparently NE does. I just think they drafted 2 players that they already had.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 11:19 AM
NO i'm aware that we have a chance to win *in a lebron james voice* not 1 not 2 not 3...in all seriousness though. If Manning is here for 3-4 more years than what was the rush to find him his successor?

I admit I don't watch much college ball but I do watch the Broncos and since we picked up Manning and signed Hannie as his back-up plus have Adam Weber who by some reports was 3rd string last year in TC. WE DID NOT NEED TO DRAFT A QB.

Like you said a 3-5 year time frame to win and with manning I doubt Brock will help us at all holding a clipboard. I'm all for picking a QB in the 2nd or even the first just not in 2012 more like 2015

right so we draft a rookie and throw him to the wolves? I'll take he Rodgers/Rivers approach over the alternative all day long.

jlarsiii
04-30-2012, 11:40 AM
Except...the Pats have been running more of a 4-3 lately. If they are going back to more of a 3-4, then Jones is a wasted pick to play 3-4 DE and they already have Spikes and Mayo inside. So, they slide Hightower to OLB, but I dont see the burst or the "play to the whistle" in him to survive out there. If they stick to some 4-3 stuff, does Hightower play DE? I definitely dont see that, but apparently NE does. I just think they drafted 2 players that they already had.

There is already speculation that BB will put Hightower at one OLB spot and Jones at the other while sliding Mayo inside with Spikes so that they can go back to a 34 look with lots of outside rush potential. It would appear that neither pick was made to be slotted into a traditional 43 look. If we could take Doom and try to turn him into an OLB I don't see why it would be so hard to train Hightower in that role considering his previous LB experience.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:49 AM
There is already speculation that BB will put Hightower at one OLB spot and Jones at the other while sliding Mayo inside with Spikes so that they can go back to a 34 look with lots of outside rush potential. It would appear that neither pick was made to be slotted into a traditional 43 look. If we could take Doom and try to turn him into an OLB I don't see why it would be so hard to train Hightower in that role considering his previous LB experience.

I mention it because Hightower isnt exactly known for his quickness or his pursuit skills. Taking a true DE and an ILB and turning both into successful OLB's would be a feat of excellence. Odds are slim it works to perfection, but...I guess we'll have to wait and see.

MOtorboat
04-30-2012, 12:26 PM
There is already speculation that BB will put Hightower at one OLB spot and Jones at the other while sliding Mayo inside with Spikes so that they can go back to a 34 look with lots of outside rush potential. It would appear that neither pick was made to be slotted into a traditional 43 look. If we could take Doom and try to turn him into an OLB I don't see why it would be so hard to train Hightower in that role considering his previous LB experience.

What are they going to do with Mathis? Belichek's draft is confusing.

BORDERLINE
04-30-2012, 11:32 PM
right so we draft a rookie and throw him to the wolves? I'll take he Rodgers/Rivers approach over the alternative all day long.

rodgers had a 5-11 season as a full time starter with a team that was a couple of plays away from the SB the previous year so immidiate success was not there. And Rivers was in a stacked team and if i'm correct the guy he replaced has a RING and he is still looking for a SB appearance.

This team had other NEEDS on a TEAM that is ready to COMPETE NOW and last time I checked when Peyton is healthy the back up does not see the field so HE does not help us in anyway

BORDERLINE
04-30-2012, 11:33 PM
Right now

MOtorboat
04-30-2012, 11:43 PM
rodgers had a 5-11 season as a full time starter with a team that was a couple of plays away from the SB the previous year so immidiate success was not there. And Rivers was in a stacked team and if i'm correct the guy he replaced has a RING and he is still looking for a SB appearance.

This team had other NEEDS on a TEAM that is ready to COMPETE NOW and last time I checked when Peyton is healthy the back up does not see the field so HE does not help us in anyway

Sometimes you have to hedge your bets, even if they are expensive bets.

Weren't you one of the one's complaining about the Manning signing because of the possibility of injury?

Well, here's the backup.

Northman
04-30-2012, 11:48 PM
NO i'm aware that we have a chance to win *in a lebron james voice* not 1 not 2 not 3...in all seriousness though. If Manning is here for 3-4 more years than what was the rush to find him his successor?

Who said they rushed? Did it ever occur to you they just like the kid and had a shot to take him?


I admit I don't watch much college ball but I do watch the Broncos and since we picked up Manning and signed Hannie as his back-up plus have Adam Weber who by some reports was 3rd string last year in TC. WE DID NOT NEED TO DRAFT A QB.

Weber couldnt beat out Tebow, Quinn or Orton. Who says he will even be on the roster when all is said and done? And frankly man, your not running the show up there so what Denver does or does not need isnt dependent on you or anyone else on the interwebz.


Like you said a 3-5 year time frame to win and with manning I doubt Brock will help us at all holding a clipboard. I'm all for picking a QB in the 2nd or even the first just not in 2012 more like 2015

What good is it too pick up a QB in 2015? Lmao, are you mental? How is a young QB supposed to learn anything after a veteran QB retires? When it takes at least 3 years for a QB to actually hit his stride? Fact is, yea. They could of waited and tried to go after a QB next year. But... who's to say they would like or have a chance at one next year? As i said, Elway and company liked the kid enough to take him and figured now was the a good time to do it. If the Broncos win a championship in the next 3 years are you still going to complain that they took one? Really?

TXBRONC
05-01-2012, 07:32 AM
NO i'm aware that we have a chance to win *in a lebron james voice* not 1 not 2 not 3...in all seriousness though. If Manning is here for 3-4 more years than what was the rush to find him his successor?

I admit I don't watch much college ball but I do watch the Broncos and since we picked up Manning and signed Hannie as his back-up plus have Adam Weber who by some reports was 3rd string last year in TC. WE DID NOT NEED TO DRAFT A QB.

Like you said a 3-5 year time frame to win and with manning I doubt Brock will help us at all holding a clipboard. I'm all for picking a QB in the 2nd or even the first just not in 2012 more like 2015


Let me get this right Denver shouldn't have taken a quarterback that will need development this year instead we should wait until Manning retires then go and get a quarterback that will need time to develop? I don't think that would be wise.

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 08:11 AM
I'll say it again...Osweiler will learn as much as he commits to learning on his own when it comes to "mentorship". I dont see Manning playing babysitter. Especially this year

silkamilkamonico
05-01-2012, 08:43 AM
I'll say it again...Osweiler will learn as much as he commits to learning on his own when it comes to "mentorship". I dont see Manning playing babysitter. Especially this year

I hope the front office sees that too. Manning's here too win, and if Osweiler wants to take over when Manning is in fact done he better make sure he's paying attention now.

TXBRONC
05-01-2012, 09:26 AM
I'll say it again...Osweiler will learn as much as he commits to learning on his own when it comes to "mentorship". I dont see Manning playing babysitter. Especially this year

I agree Osweiler will need to take initiative. It will be up to him to pay attention to how Manning conducts his business and it will be up to him to go Manning to ask him questions.

Northman
05-01-2012, 09:29 AM
I'll say it again...Osweiler will learn as much as he commits to learning on his own when it comes to "mentorship". I dont see Manning playing babysitter. Especially this year

Exactly. Which is why i mentioned that he will learn the most by watching Manning. I dont expect Manning to babysit him neither this year or the next. Most of what Brock learns will be from observation.

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 09:35 AM
So basically we are betting that a 21 year old kid is good at paying attention and learning through film and maybe osmosis.

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 09:37 AM
bb Knew hightower fit their system. Zam he's not a 4-3 MLB. He has limited range and poor change of direction. I like him for the pats, ravens or steelers.to say he is NOT a 4-3 LB contradicts the very reason why BB moved up for the first time in EIGHT YEARS to select a guy in the first round!
HIGHTOWER HAS VERSATILITY, he can be used ANYWHERE !
4-3... 3-4, all teams, including the broncos morph from their standard front 7, they have to adjust to the offense and disguise their own deployment !
HIGHTOWER will be the prototytpe for ALL MLBs in the NFL!
SABAN BUILT HIS DEFENSE AROUND HIGHTOWERS SKILLS, bb IS going to do the same !
he can blitz, cover, stop the run, and drop into zone. he can do it all, he will be a pro-bowler and play all downs, unlike WOLFE who will probably be coming off the field , and is more of a pass rush specialist than a run stopper.
passing on hightower was stoopid!
and unless hillman is the next SPROLES, passing on miller from boise was equally stoopid !
....and osweiler and elway is exactly like JMCD and tebow.
one mans fixation on another.

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 09:42 AM
I'll agree Hightower can play many places...but the "prototype for all MLB"? Not likely. Just because he can play multiple places, doesnt mean he can do them all well. They can let him rush off the edge...but until he proves he has a motor than runs longer than 2-3 seconds on any given play and that he has the quickness and moves to beat an NFL tackle...I'm not betting on him to be anything special.

Northman
05-01-2012, 10:26 AM
So basically we are betting that a 21 year old kid is good at paying attention and learning through film and maybe osmosis.


Thats how it is with all QB's who need a little more time with the rare, very rare exception. Maybe Brock will be that kind of guy, maybe not.

Ravage!!!
05-01-2012, 10:40 AM
Just watching how Manning practices, how he demands perfection in practices, how he conducts his tape study, and how he LEADS are HUGE benefits for a young QB. We all know that Manning didn't share a lot of reps back in Indy, but we now have the benefit of seeing the results of that formula. THings DO change after having the opportunity to see the results.

I don't expect Oz to get much work in this year, since this is Manning's first season in Denver and the first with everyone here. But so what?

Jsteve01
05-01-2012, 10:46 AM
to say he is NOT a 4-3 LB contradicts the very reason why BB moved up for the first time in EIGHT YEARS to select a guy in the first round!
HIGHTOWER HAS VERSATILITY, he can be used ANYWHERE !
4-3... 3-4, all teams, including the broncos morph from their standard front 7, they have to adjust to the offense and disguise their own deployment !
HIGHTOWER will be the prototytpe for ALL MLBs in the NFL!
SABAN BUILT HIS DEFENSE AROUND HIGHTOWERS SKILLS, bb IS going to do the same !
he can blitz, cover, stop the run, and drop into zone. he can do it all, he will be a pro-bowler and play all downs, unlike WOLFE who will probably be coming off the field , and is more of a pass rush specialist than a run stopper.
passing on hightower was stoopid!
and unless hillman is the next SPROLES, passing on miller from boise was equally stoopid !
....and osweiler and elway is exactly like JMCD and tebow.
one mans fixation on another.


lol let's put it this way. Who drafts better backers? the Pats or the Steelers, and who passed on him with their pick?

Jsteve01
05-01-2012, 10:47 AM
zam your obsession with Bama players when you've admitted to watching very little college fb is baffling. Last year Dareus, this year Hightower lol

G_Money
05-01-2012, 11:26 AM
I don't understand people saying, "we needed to draft Osweiler because Manning could get injured and we need the QBOTF on the roster this season" and then following it up with, "Osweiler is really raw and will need a bunch of time to learn."

He can't back up Manning this year if he has a bunch to learn. He REALLY can't back Manning up off the bat in the offense that Manning will be running here, because it's not gonna be a 10-play offense, and it won't be McCoy's offense. He'll have to learn it from Manning just like the other players and coaches will.

*shrugs* I'm willing to give Osweiler the benefit of the doubt. We hopefully won't see him on the field in a real game for a couple of years at least. And drafting the QBOTF this year gives me an extra pick next year that I'm not blowing / using on that.

But I also don't understand people rubbing this draft in the face of doubters and crowing about how anybody who didn't like it is a blind and stupid hater. :huh: If most of these picks work out to be more than depth and backups it'll be a large surprise. We drafted two DL who can't stop the run, a smaller RB who with iffy hands and a fumbling problem, a cornerback with a blown knee, a third-string QB who had to rework his throwing motion (the same thing we mock Tebow for) in order to get drafted in the 2nd, and an OG/C in the middle rounds who might become a starter only because our LG and C are the weakest links on the line.

Could they all turn up gold? Sure.

But this isn't "Look at Brandon Marshall's freakish talent! Look at Dumervil's ridonkulous sack production! Look at the mismatches we can get with Scheffler in the system we run!" It's not really a boom-or-bust draft like the Felon Draft of 2012 by St. Louis. If those guys work out they're gonna be awesome. If they all smoke crack and rob banks together...less awesome.

This is a, "patch holes with usable players" draft, or at least it appears that way to me. If they're more than "usable" then that's terrific, and props will go to Xanders and his scouts. But I don't see any transcendant talents here, and I like several of the picks just fine. Hopefully they're good scheme fits for us - that's hard to tell as outsiders since we don't know exactly what sort of offensive or defensive schemes we'll actually be running, with essentially 2 new coordinators.

The teams that rock the draft tend to have identifiable systems that they can plug-and-play draftpicks in. Coincidentally the Eagles and Steelers etc look to have torn up this draft, because there were several of most types of players and they knew exactly what would work for them. We don't know that. We've been through the following coordinators in the last 4 years:

Shannahan (or Dennison if you prefer), Slowik, McDaniels, Nolan, Martindale, McCoy, Allen, Manning and Del Rio.

That's 9 coordinators since 2008. We don't have a system. We barely have time to put up the "S" to start to SPELL system before we have to take it down and start again.

So it's almost impossible to judge the draft based on scheme fit. All that leaves us with is character and talent level. They have good character. Of course, so did Shanny's last class in 2008. Larsen, Woodyard (FA), Torain, etc were all team guys, team leaders. The only player left from that actual draft class is the first-rounder Clady. Character didn't help with building blocks there.

I hope their talent level is such that we still have members of this class contributing at a high level in 2015 and beyond - but until we see how they fit with the team it's tough to even guess how many might be contributing in 2012 or 2013. I'm a Broncos fan, so I hope for the best, but I'm allowed to believe that the Broncos could have done better.

While still hoping to be pleasantly surprised in the coming year. ;)

~G

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 11:34 AM
Ahhh...the voice of reason.

I think people allow thier love of the Broncos to cloud their judgement when it comes to evaluation talent. Then there are some that hate everything the FO does. The bottom line is this draft comes with a TON of question marks. Yes, I know..."you can say that about any player". But realistically, there are just some players that have it and will do well. I'm betting some of the players we passed on have much higher odds of success than Wolfe does. That doesnt mean he wont be successful...but it also doesnt mean he'll be special.

This draft simply filled holes with bodies. Did we get a run stuffer? No...but we got a DT. Did we get a replacement for McGahee? No...but we got a RB. Did we get a replacement for CHamp? No...but we got a CB.

We drafted like we just won the Super Bowl...not like we're trying to get there

claymore
05-01-2012, 11:39 AM
Ahhh...the voice of reason.

I think people allow thier love of the Broncos to cloud their judgement when it comes to evaluation talent. Then there are some that hate everything the FO does. The bottom line is this draft comes with a TON of question marks. Yes, I know..."you can say that about any player". But realistically, there are just some players that have it and will do well. I'm betting some of the players we passed on have much higher odds of success than Wolfe does. That doesnt mean he wont be successful...but it also doesnt mean he'll be special.

This draft simply filled holes with bodies. Did we get a run stuffer? No...but we got a DT. Did we get a replacement for McGahee? No...but we got a RB. Did we get a replacement for CHamp? No...but we got a CB.

We drafted like we just won the Super Bowl...not like we're trying to get there

Could we have drafted better? Most likely.

The main "like" i came away from this draft with was that EFX showed discipline. They didnt see anyone at 25 they coveted so they moved back. If we fail with the picks, I blame the talent evaluators.

I think EFX did their part well. Hopefully they had good information to base their decisions off of.

SpringsBroncoFan
05-01-2012, 11:51 AM
Could we have drafted better? Most likely.

The main "like" i came away from this draft with was that EFX showed discipline. They didnt see anyone at 25 they coveted so they moved back. If we fail with the picks, I blame the talent evaluators.

I think EFX did their part well. Hopefully they had good information to base their decisions off of.

If any of the talent evaluators want to leave now, there is an opening in Oakland... just sayin...

G_Money
05-01-2012, 11:53 AM
It's all about how they evaluated talent, absolutely. Because we didn't really go "safe" on several picks either. We moved up for the RB. We took the raw QB. We took a talented pass-rushing DT and trusted we could get him to play the run correctly. We grabbed this cornerback with the bad knee, believing he can fully recover more than a guy like Minnifield who had a different type of knee injury. Incomplete recovery = wasted pick.

*shrugs* I like Wolfe and Bolden. I'm a doubter on the brilliance of Hillman and Osweiler, which is basically the centerpiece of our draft. Jackson and Blake could be good parts of their respective lines with a little seasoning, and Trevathan is the sort of player who can hang around for years in the right role - or get cut in camp.

But if their talent evaluators are right on Hillman and Osweiler this draft could be tremendous. I hope to be blinded by brilliance. Until then, though, I hope these bodies can plug some of our holes successfully and be ready to contribute at a high level in case of injury. The last two drafts are good test cases for how we evaluate talent. I've been of the opinion that Xanders is on a three year test, and Von doesn't count. We'll see how his body of work stacks up as we go forward.

~G

claymore
05-01-2012, 11:59 AM
If any of the talent evaluators want to leave now, there is an opening in Oakland... just sayin...

Scary thing is it looks like Reggie McKenzie is cleaning house. I hope the rayturds arent on the rise...

claymore
05-01-2012, 12:01 PM
It's all about how they evaluated talent, absolutely. Because we didn't really go "safe" on several picks either. We moved up for the RB. We took the raw QB. We took a talented pass-rushing DT and trusted we could get him to play the run correctly. We grabbed this cornerback with the bad knee, believing he can fully recover more than a guy like Minnifield who had a different type of knee injury. Incomplete recovery = wasted pick.

*shrugs* I like Wolfe and Bolden. I'm a doubter on the brilliance of Hillman and Osweiler, which is basically the centerpiece of our draft. Jackson and Blake could be good parts of their respective lines with a little seasoning, and Trevathan is the sort of player who can hang around for years in the right role - or get cut in camp.

But if their talent evaluators are right on Hillman and Osweiler this draft could be tremendous. I hope to be blinded by brilliance. Until then, though, I hope these bodies can plug some of our holes successfully and be ready to contribute at a high level in case of injury. The last two drafts are good test cases for how we evaluate talent. I've been of the opinion that Xanders is on a three year test, and Von doesn't count. We'll see how his body of work stacks up as we go forward.

~G

We havent been blinded by brilliance in a long time. We are due!

Northman
05-01-2012, 12:25 PM
But I also don't understand people rubbing this draft in the face of doubters and crowing about how anybody who didn't like it is a blind and stupid hater. :huh:

~G

Because its kind of moronic to already call it a failure without seeing how it plays out.

G_Money
05-01-2012, 01:57 PM
Isn't it kind of moronic to call it a success then too? :huh: We might as well just say, "who cares, see you in three years to bitch/cheer about this draft as warranted." Codifying first impressions helps make sense of the team we're looking at 3 years from now and the people running that team - it serves a useful purpose. "I believe these picks were wasted - flag these and let's see how my hypothesis shakes out." Isn't that how we determined the Shanahan/Sundquist combo SUCKED at drafting? Because everybody on this board could pick a better draft class after having played a "MSM Tebow reference" drinking game?

I liked your analysis of Tebow Day when we drafted Tim, and agreed with basically everything you wrote (we could probably compare draft posts that year and come up basically even).


...But, we give up 3 draft picks to move up again to get a QB. A position that we pretty much addressed in FA by aquiring Quinn who really hasnt had a legitimate shot with a real organization. Does it mean Quinn would be the answer? No. Orton is obviously not the long term answer either but i really cant understand McD's logic right now. He himself said that the draft was very deep yet for the second straight year in the row it seems like he is shitting himself to only get a couple of players.

Again, this isnt about Tebow's character for me, nor his ability to play in the NFL (although i dont see him succeeding personally). But the position was not one of big need unless McD has just been lying to Orton about having a decent QB. And even then, why not go for a guy like Clausen who i think is rated much higher than Tebow. Is this about using the "wildcat". Really? Are we getting that desperate now that we have to use sillyness like that?

... Im not real excited about Tebow as i really think that was a wasted pick in many ways.

Is that not calling the pick a failure, or at least the approach to use that pick in that manner? That's all most of us are saying about Osweiler and Hillman - the approach to trade around only to make sure we locked in THOSE specific picks seems like a waste - or at least not a maximized use - of opportunities.

If you just want to call out people who are screaming for heads after this draft, I guess I get it. I haven't seen a ton of those, certainly nothing like Tebow Day.

But criticizing draft tactics and disagreeing with talent evaluation is like the whole point of the month, isn't it? What else are we supposed to do until OTAs pick up in earnest? :D

~G

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:15 PM
Now you've lost your mind. A UDFA the size of my wife is going to win games in the NFC North. Good luck.


And please dont compare him to Brees. It's ridiculous... and your comparison to your WIFE is not rediculous?
the guy won 50 games in college! no other QB in the ncaa can make that claim, NONE!
and he only lost 3 games, again, I ask what NCAA QB won 30 games and went undefeted?
he won some bowl games and beat some top ten teams along the way.
How many games did your WIFE win playing QB in the NCAA ?
spare me the rediculous.
we will see what MOORE brings to the field.


care to comment on HIGHTOWER and moores running mate at boise stae while you are at it?
any family members they remind you of?

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:23 PM
Could we have drafted better? Most likely.

The main "like" i came away from this draft with was that EFX showed discipline. They didnt see anyone at 25 they coveted so they moved back. If we fail with the picks, I blame the talent evaluators.

I think EFX did their part well. Hopefully they had good information to base their decisions off of.it was exactly that "head downmentality" that compeklled them to ignore the talent available whern they haD TWO chances to pick in the first round!
The guys they fixated on, wolfe and osweiler have to justify that blind eye mentality! wolfe NOW, and Brock when manning isnt taking snaps !
without regard to the actual PLAYERS, because nob ody knows for sure how they will turn out, I am dissapointed with the process the EFX group employed in making their selections.
They got the guys they wanted, I will applaud that mentality if those same guys end up being contributers because they ignored any and all other pocibilities in the process !
... again, I am not passing judgement on our draftees, I am dismayed at our draft methodology.
if hioghtower sucks and the RB from boise turns out to be a drunken wife beater, then i will retract my concern and recognize that EFX know what they are doing.
for now, i remain sceptical. sorry.

MOtorboat
05-01-2012, 02:25 PM
... and your comparison to your WIFE is not rediculous?
the guy won 50 games in college! no other QB in the ncaa can make that claim, NONE!
and he only lost 3 games, again, I ask what NCAA QB won 30 games and went undefeted?
he won some bowl games and beat some top ten teams along the way.
How many games did your WIFE win playing QB in the NCAA ?
spare me the rediculous.
we will see what MOORE brings to the field.


care to comment on HIGHTOWER and moores running mate at boise stae while you are at it?
any family members they remind you of?

How's all those college wins working out for Colt McCoy?

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:26 PM
Hightower might be a strong and productive player who I don't think will be anything special.

Who other than Richardson would have addressed our Rb needs? I didn't see anyone else at the position. What are our needs? We have a pounder and workhorse in McGahee, we have a good change of pace back in Moreno who is also a good receiving back, and now a player who can be special out of the backfield. What do you see our needs at the RB position? An every down RB? Who was the last team to win a SuperBowl with that type of back? Jamal Lewis and the Ravens?

We've had veteran Safeties the last few years....and that didn't work out very well for us with the exception of Dawkins who was injured and did give up some huge plays. Time to start culturing what we have instead of patchworking it.

Why are you so wrapped up in the late part of the first round?

The Osweiler wasn't to help the team in the next 3 years. It was to help the organization over the course of the next 15-20 years. Like what has been stated, He is just as intriguing with just as much upside as any QB who will come out of the draft next year.

I understand someone not likeing the Osweiler pick. For myself, I don' want to go through the same garbage of no QB potential at all in the next 3-5 years. Manning ain't playing much longer
I see mcgehee as OLD and moreno as incompetent !
I see MANNING as a QB that needs a RB that can block and catch passes and stay on the field so there is no indication of our intentions or limitations to what MANNING can call at the line of scrimmage!
you think hillman is that guy?
I sure as F hope so !
most say he is not !

Jsteve01
05-01-2012, 02:27 PM
I don't understand people saying, "we needed to draft Osweiler because Manning could get injured and we need the QBOTF on the roster this season" and then following it up with, "Osweiler is really raw and will need a bunch of time to learn."

He can't back up Manning this year if he has a bunch to learn. He REALLY can't back Manning up off the bat in the offense that Manning will be running here, because it's not gonna be a 10-play offense, and it won't be McCoy's offense. He'll have to learn it from Manning just like the other players and coaches will.

*shrugs* I'm willing to give Osweiler the benefit of the doubt. We hopefully won't see him on the field in a real game for a couple of years at least. And drafting the QBOTF this year gives me an extra pick next year that I'm not blowing / using on that.

But I also don't understand people rubbing this draft in the face of doubters and crowing about how anybody who didn't like it is a blind and stupid hater. :huh: If most of these picks work out to be more than depth and backups it'll be a large surprise. We drafted two DL who can't stop the run, a smaller RB who with iffy hands and a fumbling problem, a cornerback with a blown knee, a third-string QB who had to rework his throwing motion (the same thing we mock Tebow for) in order to get drafted in the 2nd, and an OG/C in the middle rounds who might become a starter only because our LG and C are the weakest links on the line.

Could they all turn up gold? Sure.

But this isn't "Look at Brandon Marshall's freakish talent! Look at Dumervil's ridonkulous sack production! Look at the mismatches we can get with Scheffler in the system we run!" It's not really a boom-or-bust draft like the Felon Draft of 2012 by St. Louis. If those guys work out they're gonna be awesome. If they all smoke crack and rob banks together...less awesome.

This is a, "patch holes with usable players" draft, or at least it appears that way to me. If they're more than "usable" then that's terrific, and props will go to Xanders and his scouts. But I don't see any transcendant talents here, and I like several of the picks just fine. Hopefully they're good scheme fits for us - that's hard to tell as outsiders since we don't know exactly what sort of offensive or defensive schemes we'll actually be running, with essentially 2 new coordinators.

The teams that rock the draft tend to have identifiable systems that they can plug-and-play draftpicks in. Coincidentally the Eagles and Steelers etc look to have torn up this draft, because there were several of most types of players and they knew exactly what would work for them. We don't know that. We've been through the following coordinators in the last 4 years:

Shannahan (or Dennison if you prefer), Slowik, McDaniels, Nolan, Martindale, McCoy, Allen, Manning and Del Rio.

That's 9 coordinators since 2008. We don't have a system. We barely have time to put up the "S" to start to SPELL system before we have to take it down and start again.

So it's almost impossible to judge the draft based on scheme fit. All that leaves us with is character and talent level. They have good character. Of course, so did Shanny's last class in 2008. Larsen, Woodyard (FA), Torain, etc were all team guys, team leaders. The only player left from that actual draft class is the first-rounder Clady. Character didn't help with building blocks there.

I hope their talent level is such that we still have members of this class contributing at a high level in 2015 and beyond - but until we see how they fit with the team it's tough to even guess how many might be contributing in 2012 or 2013. I'm a Broncos fan, so I hope for the best, but I'm allowed to believe that the Broncos could have done better.

While still hoping to be pleasantly surprised in the coming year. ;)

~G

well said. I guess my real beef with this draft other than trading up for Hillman is seemingly not getting solid value in the trades. I think we can all agree that our F.O. needs to grow in that area. I loved that we hit at various positions and took players who are known to be workers. and they weren't subpar athletes like say the players that McD was known to draft occasionally.

I've said it before but if it were my draft, I never would have traded up for Hillman. I sand pat in the 3rd, draft Hillman/Turbin/Miller at our original slot and then in the 4th I pick Blake, Boldin and Ta'amu. That alone makes this draft unbelievable. If x doesn't get a better feel for the board then I think he has to go. Im willing to give it some time as this group is relatively inexperienced running the show.

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:30 PM
How's all those college wins working out for Colt McCoy?

I dont know mcoys college stats, please enlighten me!
how many wins, how many losses?
W/L records aside, MOORE has accuracy and intelligence in his arsenal, those are qualities I value in a QB !
when STAFFORD goes down, THIS year, MOORE will be ready willing and able to take over that offense and move the chains and win games emmediatly !
I guarantee it !
who wants to make the same guarantee about brocko ?

MOtorboat
05-01-2012, 02:40 PM
I dont know mcoys college stats, please enlighten me!
how many wins, how many losses?
W/L records aside, MOORE has accuracy and intelligence in his arsenal, those are qualities I value in a QB !
when STAFFORD goes down, THIS year, MOORE will be ready willing and able to take over that offense and move the chains and win games emmediatly !
I guarantee it !
who wants to make the same guarantee about brocko ?

Who's record do you think Moore broke?

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:45 PM
I don't understand people saying, "we needed to draft Osweiler because Manning could get injured and we need the QBOTF on the roster this season" and then following it up with, "Osweiler is really raw and will need a bunch of time to learn."

He can't back up Manning this year if he has a bunch to learn. He REALLY can't back Manning up off the bat in the offense that Manning will be running here, because it's not gonna be a 10-play offense, and it won't be McCoy's offense. He'll have to learn it from Manning just like the other players and coaches will.

*shrugs* I'm willing to give Osweiler the benefit of the doubt. We hopefully won't see him on the field in a real game for a couple of years at least. And drafting the QBOTF this year gives me an extra pick next year that I'm not blowing / using on that.

But I also don't understand people rubbing this draft in the face of doubters and crowing about how anybody who didn't like it is a blind and stupid hater. :huh: If most of these picks work out to be more than depth and backups it'll be a large surprise. We drafted two DL who can't stop the run, a smaller RB who with iffy hands and a fumbling problem, a cornerback with a blown knee, a third-string QB who had to rework his throwing motion (the same thing we mock Tebow for) in order to get drafted in the 2nd, and an OG/C in the middle rounds who might become a starter only because our LG and C are the weakest links on the line.

Could they all turn up gold? Sure.

But this isn't "Look at Brandon Marshall's freakish talent! Look at Dumervil's ridonkulous sack production! Look at the mismatches we can get with Scheffler in the system we run!" It's not really a boom-or-bust draft like the Felon Draft of 2012 by St. Louis. If those guys work out they're gonna be awesome. If they all smoke crack and rob banks together...less awesome.

This is a, "patch holes with usable players" draft, or at least it appears that way to me. If they're more than "usable" then that's terrific, and props will go to Xanders and his scouts. But I don't see any transcendant talents here, and I like several of the picks just fine. Hopefully they're good scheme fits for us - that's hard to tell as outsiders since we don't know exactly what sort of offensive or defensive schemes we'll actually be running, with essentially 2 new coordinators.

The teams that rock the draft tend to have identifiable systems that they can plug-and-play draftpicks in. Coincidentally the Eagles and Steelers etc look to have torn up this draft, because there were several of most types of players and they knew exactly what would work for them. We don't know that. We've been through the following coordinators in the last 4 years:

Shannahan (or Dennison if you prefer), Slowik, McDaniels, Nolan, Martindale, McCoy, Allen, Manning and Del Rio.

That's 9 coordinators since 2008. We don't have a system. We barely have time to put up the "S" to start to SPELL system before we have to take it down and start again.

So it's almost impossible to judge the draft based on scheme fit. All that leaves us with is character and talent level. They have good character. Of course, so did Shanny's last class in 2008. Larsen, Woodyard (FA), Torain, etc were all team guys, team leaders. The only player left from that actual draft class is the first-rounder Clady. Character didn't help with building blocks there.

I hope their talent level is such that we still have members of this class contributing at a high level in 2015 and beyond - but until we see how they fit with the team it's tough to even guess how many might be contributing in 2012 or 2013. I'm a Broncos fan, so I hope for the best, but I'm allowed to believe that the Broncos could have done better.

While still hoping to be pleasantly surprised in the coming year. ;)

~Gwell said, thats why i only question the process and not the players.
I hope they all turn out to be studs and make EFX proud and me question why i ever doubted their methods.

Jsteve01
05-01-2012, 02:48 PM
McCoy is doing so well taht the Browns just spent a first on a 28 year old qb to replace him.

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:51 PM
Who's record do you think Moore broke?I dont know or care, honestly.
I just watched him play about as many times as i watched brocko and I would take MOORE over brockO and give you moreno along with him !
MOORE, if he gets an opportunity will move chains and win games!
hes smart accurate and intelligent and he is ready to play in the NFL right NOW !
oh, wait he is only 5'11 none of that matters !

Chef Zambini
05-01-2012, 02:55 PM
ytou keep mentioning colt, he had the measurables, hes over 6 feet tall, he gets drafted in the first round, moore doesnt get a call.
its a science... like scientology !

Northman
05-01-2012, 03:05 PM
Isn't it kind of moronic to call it a success then too? :huh:

Who is saying its a success? All people have been saying is they understand the picks and understood Denver took the guys that they wanted.




I liked your analysis of Tebow Day when we drafted Tim, and agreed with basically everything you wrote (we could probably compare draft posts that year and come up basically even).

Is that not calling the pick a failure, or at least the approach to use that pick in that manner? That's all most of us are saying about Osweiler and Hillman - the approach to trade around only to make sure we locked in THOSE specific picks seems like a waste - or at least not a maximized use - of opportunities.

Not really. Tebow was projected as a 2nd-3rd rounder. Osweiler was projected exactly where he went. Wolfe you could say was taken early but than again is stock was rising drastically. Never the less, i said i wasnt excited about the pick with Tebow and giving up 3 picks to trade up for him. Not only that but we traded for Quinn who was another first round QB but he never saw the field so drafting Tebow just didnt make a lot of sense to me. But to some degree i turned out to be wrong on Tebow. At least in terms of the other intangibles that he had that made him somewhat successful in Denver. He may still very well become a good QB but as an athlete its a no brainer and from that aspect i did become excited about him. So my initial statement when he was drafted proved i jumped the gun in my assumption about him as a player which is why i think its best to let it play out before assuming once again that these players are duds.


If you just want to call out people who are screaming for heads after this draft, I guess I get it. I haven't seen a ton of those, certainly nothing like Tebow Day.

But criticizing draft tactics and disagreeing with talent evaluation is like the whole point of the month, isn't it? What else are we supposed to do until OTAs pick up in earnest? :D

~G

While it is a forum and people are free to do what they wish i guess i just dont get it. None of the picks to me seem over the top or out of place. We addressed most of the needs that we had and i just think most of the complaints are because Denver didnt draft players that some people were wanting. I mean, i wanted Hightower but im not about to have a meltdown about it because i dont know everything that goes on behind the scenes or what Denver was looking for. But, no one on here knows what those true evaluations were. Making statements like "Elway drafted Oz because he went to ASU with his son" is disingenious at best with nothing to support it. Its like you have a group of people on here who think they know better than the people who actually work for the NFL. Its one thing to not understand their thinking and wonder why they didnt take said player. Its something else entirely to try to argue that point by saying you know more than the ones who actually work for said teams.

bcbronc
05-01-2012, 03:16 PM
*shrugs* I'm willing to give Osweiler the benefit of the doubt. We hopefully won't see him on the field in a real game for a couple of years at least. And drafting the QBOTF this year gives me an extra pick next year that I'm not blowing / using on that.

This is the move's biggest redeeming factor imo. This year we see just where we are with Manning. Lots of questions on current personal that couldn't really be answered with the lackluster QBing and coaching of the past couple years. If things go well, next draft we can focus on fixing our most pressing need...and we'll have a better idea just what that is.


This is a, "patch holes with usable players" draft, or at least it appears that way to me. If they're more than "usable" then that's terrific, and props will go to Xanders and his scouts. But I don't see any transcendant talents here, and I like several of the picks just fine.

Rather than "patch holes" I look at it more like drafting for situational players. Biggest question marks on Wolfe and Hillman is whether they'll see the field on 1st and 2nd down. Some would rather draft 2 down players than 3rd down specialists, but like somebody said elsewhere, we're seeing 3 downs of "3rd down football". If the worse we say about these guys is they only make plays on 3rd down, they're good picks.


Hopefully they're good scheme fits for us - that's hard to tell as outsiders since we don't know exactly what sort of offensive or defensive schemes we'll actually be running, with essentially 2 new coordinators.

Well, if they're not good scheme fits, probably a good idea to fire everyone asap.




well said. I guess my real beef with this draft other than trading up for Hillman is seemingly not getting solid value in the trades. I think we can all agree that our F.O. needs to grow in that area. I loved that we hit at various positions and took players who are known to be workers. and they weren't subpar athletes like say the players that McD was known to draft occasionally.

The problem with trying to judge value is it assumes each draft has the same number of players in it. If a team's board has 120 players with a 3rd round grade, a 4th will be more valuable to them than in a year where they only graded 71 players worthy of a third. Value has to be determined each individual year, and it's determined by the market.

This year, JAX used the 101 pick to move up from 7 to 5. The draft value chart has 5 worth 1700, 7 worth 1500. So the 101 has a value of 200 points, despite the chart saying it's only worth 96. That means in this years draft, the 101 overall pick (5th pick of 4th RD, not incl. comp pix) has the chart value of the 78 overall pick (#14 in RD3). You have to start from there when judging value.

So we moved from 25 to 36, 720-540=180, and picked up the 101 which has already been established as worth 200 points. So as far as value goes, we ended up +20. We then invested that value into ensuring we got the RB we wanted...have to wait to judge the player evaluation, but no issue at all with the value.


I've said it before but if it were my draft, I never would have traded up for Hillman. I sand pat in the 3rd, draft Hillman/Turbin/Miller at our original slot and then in the 4th I pick Blake, Boldin and Ta'amu. That alone makes this draft unbelievable. If x doesn't get a better feel for the board then I think he has to go. Im willing to give it some time as this group is relatively inexperienced running the show.

They put some effort into scouting Turbin, very possible they had moved him down their board. It's a tough one for me, just because I felt we really needed to get a RB out of this draft. If Hillman had a higher rating than Turbin/Miller I'd rather go get the guy at the top of your board than just settle for what falls. They did a good job of that this draft, putting themselves at the front of the run on the second tier of DTs and in the middle of the 2nd tier of RBs.

G_Money
05-01-2012, 03:27 PM
Agreed. I'm on record that I'd rather have Muscle Hamster, Foles and Worthy to fill the three positions than Wolfe, Oz and Hillman. I'd have swapped in LaMichael James or Branch. There were other players I would have jumped around to fill positions with and would feel more positive about their upside.

But this is the talent evaluation of the Broncos, and now it just needs to pan out. Elway isn't trying to screw up the draft to pick his son's friend, or avoid Hightower specifically to give an opponent an advantage. For the team we are building we believed these were our best options at the time.

No one's ever right about the whole draft but we need most of these picks to be useful, and getting one or two great picks out of it would be a much-needed bonus.

If Hightower turns into Ray Lewis, that'll suck. I don't believe he will, especially in a 4-3 like we're running. But we drafted Al Wilson in that same Ray Lewis draft and that turned out pretty well for us for a half-dozen years. (edit: brain cramp, we did not draft Al in the Ray Lewis draft, it was "I won you a Super Bowl" John Mobley, but the point still stands. :lol: )

Get guys who can play and I'll forgive passing up other talents. Get washouts and the misses loom larger. These guys HAVE to contribute. We don't have enough team talent to blow drafts at this juncture and still make something significant out of the Manning era, that's all - hence the scrutiny of passing on potential immediate contributors.

~G

Northman
05-01-2012, 03:53 PM
Agreed. I'm on record that I'd rather have Muscle Hamster, Foles and Worthy to fill the three positions than Wolfe, Oz and Hillman. I'd have swapped in LaMichael James or Branch. There were other players I would have jumped around to fill positions with and would feel more positive about their upside.

But this is the talent evaluation of the Broncos, and now it just needs to pan out. Elway isn't trying to screw up the draft to pick his son's friend, or avoid Hightower specifically to give an opponent an advantage. For the team we are building we believed these were our best options at the time.

No one's ever right about the whole draft but we need most of these picks to be useful, and getting one or two great picks out of it would be a much-needed bonus.

If Hightower turns into Ray Lewis, that'll suck. I don't believe he will, especially in a 4-3 like we're running. But we drafted Al Wilson in that same Ray Lewis draft and that turned out pretty well for us for a half-dozen years. (edit: brain cramp, we did not draft Al in the Ray Lewis draft, it was "I won you a Super Bowl" John Mobley, but the point still stands. :lol: )

Get guys who can play and I'll forgive passing up other talents. Get washouts and the misses loom larger. These guys HAVE to contribute. We don't have enough team talent to blow drafts at this juncture and still make something significant out of the Manning era, that's all - hence the scrutiny of passing on potential immediate contributors.

~G

Totally agree.

BORDERLINE
05-01-2012, 08:44 PM
Who said they rushed? Did it ever occur to you they just like the kid and had a shot to take him?



Weber couldnt beat out Tebow, Quinn or Orton. Who says he will even be on the roster when all is said and done? And frankly man, your not running the show up there so what Denver does or does not need isnt dependent on you or anyone else on the interwebz.



What good is it too pick up a QB in 2015? Lmao, are you mental? How is a young QB supposed to learn anything after a veteran QB retires? When it takes at least 3 years for a QB to actually hit his stride? Fact is, yea. They could of waited and tried to go after a QB next year. But... who's to say they would like or have a chance at one next year? As i said, Elway and company liked the kid enough to take him and figured now was the a good time to do it. If the Broncos win a championship in the next 3 years are you still going to complain that they took one? Really?


Really North? LOOK I want this guy to be the FQB at a point in time when Manning retires and the team does not miss a beat. But All this talk about HE can learn behind Manning and he will BE GREAT because of it talk is BS. Tell me how Jim Sorgi left Indy and set the NFL on fire. Or how Curtis Painter led the COLTS to the wonderful season they had last year.

Damn man I'm not calling it a FAILURE i'm saying taking Qb this year or even next year in these early rounds was not needed. But I guess since my words hold no weight in Denver and I don't have a direct line to Elway I should just keep quiet then. SMH

I understand the draft is a crap schute. You may HIT it BIG or end up with Lemons. My take is take a shot at a position that might HELP you NOW. Save the project picks for later rounds.

BORDERLINE
05-01-2012, 08:48 PM
Sometimes you have to hedge your bets, even if they are expensive bets.

Weren't you one of the one's complaining about the Manning signing because of the possibility of injury?

Well, here's the backup.

expensive bets pay off IF you do you homework so I hope it Works out for us.

I was complaining about Mannings injury 4 neck surgeries and a year off of football is something to be worried about.

But Brock from what I read is a raw QB who needs time to develop. Reminds me of how people described a QB we just traded and HE at least had NFL game/post season experience.

BORDERLINE
05-01-2012, 08:54 PM
Let me get this right Denver shouldn't have taken a quarterback that will need development this year instead we should wait until Manning retires then go and get a quarterback that will need time to develop? I don't think that would be wise.

So it's wise to draft a Qb in the early rounds right after we signed the most coveted FA in NFL history so WE can COMPETE for the SB. Instead of using the pick to Help us in areas we are lacking in so we can get this team at full force when WE make our SB run.

TimHippo
05-01-2012, 11:21 PM
So it's wise to draft a Qb in the early rounds right after we signed the most coveted FA in NFL history so WE can COMPETE for the SB. Instead of using the pick to Help us in areas we are lacking in so we can get this team at full force when WE make our SB run.

I agree with you. EFX dropped the ball big time. They fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never draft a project QB in the 2nd round when a Super Bowl is on the line"!

Alot of people seem to have their head in the sand like an Ostrich but the majority of the national media, NFL scouts, and executives, who get paid to do this and spend hours on it have graded the Broncos as having a very bad draft.

Northman
05-01-2012, 11:29 PM
Really North? LOOK I want this guy to be the FQB at a point in time when Manning retires and the team does not miss a beat. But All this talk about HE can learn behind Manning and he will BE GREAT because of it talk is BS. Tell me how Jim Sorgi left Indy and set the NFL on fire. Or how Curtis Painter led the COLTS to the wonderful season they had last year.

Lmao, damn Border. Come on man. Its not like EVERY QB who sits behind a HOF'r is going to be great. Kubiak was a very average QB and he sat behind Elway for YEARS. If it was THAT easy than every team with a backup would never have a problem. To pretend that Oz cant learn ANYTHING from Manning is disingenious. Will Oz be a great QB? Who knows, but the FO thinks he is their guy so they took him. Im willing to wait and see before i call it a bust. What say you?

Northman
05-01-2012, 11:30 PM
So it's wise to draft a Qb in the early rounds right after we signed the most coveted FA in NFL history so WE can COMPETE for the SB. Instead of using the pick to Help us in areas we are lacking in so we can get this team at full force when WE make our SB run.

So for shits and giggles who would you have taken Border? According to you who was a CANT MISS that Denver should of taken?

G_Money
05-01-2012, 11:59 PM
Um... If you're talking about who could contribute more than Osweiler will this year or next, then Osmele, James, Curry, Randle, and Tru Johnson could all be on the field for a significant percentage of plays for us. If you need as much talent on the field NOW to win it all, then Osweiler doesn't help you with that at all.

He might actually be the right choice for the post-Manning Broncos, or to save some games for us if Manning gets injured in his last year or so. But it's pretty hard to argue that for the 2012 Broncos we might as well just not have made a pick, for all the good Osweiler will do that iteration of this team. Which is why I understand if his selection frustrates some people. Especially if James becomes the weapon we drafted Hillman to be.

But the Broncos are trying to be good stewards and not subject us to any more Sims / Orton / Tebow / Quinn scenarios. I can understand and appreciate that in time - as long as Osweiler isn't just like those guys anyway.

~G

TXBRONC
05-02-2012, 07:09 AM
So it's wise to draft a Qb in the early rounds right after we signed the most coveted FA in NFL history so WE can COMPETE for the SB. Instead of using the pick to Help us in areas we are lacking in so we can get this team at full force when WE make our SB run.

It doesn't look like EFX agrees with your interpretation. Maybe I'm mistake but it also looks like you're assuming that in three or four years from now that EFX will be able to find a quarterback they like as much as Osweiler. Imo it would be very unwise to assume something that is that far in the future.

Jsteve01
05-02-2012, 08:34 AM
This is the move's biggest redeeming factor imo. This year we see just where we are with Manning. Lots of questions on current personal that couldn't really be answered with the lackluster QBing and coaching of the past couple years. If things go well, next draft we can focus on fixing our most pressing need...and we'll have a better idea just what that is.



Rather than "patch holes" I look at it more like drafting for situational players. Biggest question marks on Wolfe and Hillman is whether they'll see the field on 1st and 2nd down. Some would rather draft 2 down players than 3rd down specialists, but like somebody said elsewhere, we're seeing 3 downs of "3rd down football". If the worse we say about these guys is they only make plays on 3rd down, they're good picks.



Well, if they're not good scheme fits, probably a good idea to fire everyone asap.





The problem with trying to judge value is it assumes each draft has the same number of players in it. If a team's board has 120 players with a 3rd round grade, a 4th will be more valuable to them than in a year where they only graded 71 players worthy of a third. Value has to be determined each individual year, and it's determined by the market.

This year, JAX used the 101 pick to move up from 7 to 5. The draft value chart has 5 worth 1700, 7 worth 1500. So the 101 has a value of 200 points, despite the chart saying it's only worth 96. That means in this years draft, the 101 overall pick (5th pick of 4th RD, not incl. comp pix) has the chart value of the 78 overall pick (#14 in RD3). You have to start from there when judging value.

So we moved from 25 to 36, 720-540=180, and picked up the 101 which has already been established as worth 200 points. So as far as value goes, we ended up +20. We then invested that value into ensuring we got the RB we wanted...have to wait to judge the player evaluation, but no issue at all with the value.



They put some effort into scouting Turbin, very possible they had moved him down their board. It's a tough one for me, just because I felt we really needed to get a RB out of this draft. If Hillman had a higher rating than Turbin/Miller I'd rather go get the guy at the top of your board than just settle for what falls. They did a good job of that this draft, putting themselves at the front of the run on the second tier of DTs and in the middle of the 2nd tier of RBs.


I completely understand what you're saying. Im not trying to base evaluation off of an antiquated draft value chart. My real problems with this draft hinged on the trade up for Hillman. Im not saying he would have been there when we selected at the end of the third. I am saying that there was still value at our original slot with Turbin, Hillman and Miller on the board. My gut tells me that the run on guys like Pead and James forced the Broncos to make the move.

I understand it but I would have rather taken the patient tack we employed in the first because there was tons of value through the fifth. I liked Ta'amu as a late second or early third pick . If we retain the 3rd of our 4th rounders we have the ability to select him as well as rb, Blake and Bolden. I'm nitpicking at this point and I have no idea what they're hearing in the war room but I think it's valid. Kind of the same feeling I had last year when we selected Irving at the top of the third and then traded up for Thomas. Anyone here rather have taken Jurell Casey, waited on the best TE to fall to us in the 5th and then selected Sturdivant? plus had another pick in the 6th for say a Powe?

BORDERLINE
05-02-2012, 09:38 AM
So for shits and giggles who would you have taken Border? According to you who was a CANT MISS that Denver should of taken?

No one is can't miss. The draft is a crap schute. You just gotta make sure you DO your homework on all the players and put them in a position to succeed.


I already stated that I don't watch much college ball so for me to throw a name out would be pretty dumb. I'm sure the EFX likes all the guys they drafted or else they would not have selected them. I'm not bashing OZ i'm not saying he won't learn. I think it's BS to say that just by watching Manning it will HELP him because Manning's Indy back-ups have proven that to be FALSE. It all depends on OZ and how he prepares and approaches the game.

My gripe is we could have drafted a B.P.A at a position of need that could have contributed to the team. I'm sure there will be a standout defensive player taken after OZ that we could have had. Now the chances of us picking up that guy is minimal but at least you try to bolster a position of need. Assuming if you did your homework you can select a guy you know can play and compete.

All you talking about throwing a QB "into the fire" and how He needs time to learn behind MANNING need to be reminded Elway himself said it was BETTER for HIM to play early in his career for the Experience. Tell me how Dalton did last year or how Yates did very well to keep his team in the playoffs.

Again I like the pick. It's good to see us getting a QB for when Manning is on his way out JUST NOT THIS YEAR OR EVEN NEXT YEAR when it could go to a POSITION OF NEED a guy that can actually HELP us RIGHT NOW

Also every year there is endless QB's who come out. Next year i'm sure there will be Qb's in the 2nd and 3rd that are comparable to OZ.

BORDERLINE
05-02-2012, 09:43 AM
It doesn't look like EFX agrees with your interpretation. Maybe I'm mistake but it also looks like you're assuming that in three or four years from now that EFX will be able to find a quarterback they like as much as Osweiler. Imo it would be very unwise to assume something that is that far in the future.

Of course they don't agree it's my view point. I'm saying what I believed should have been done. How many times have fans questioned a move by the F.O? I bet i'm not the first.

I'm sure next year and the year after that and the year after that there will be a whole stable of QB's for EFX to look at. Plenty of FISH in the SEA.

Again not against the PICK just against the timing. A good selection for 2-3 years from NOW

TXBRONC
05-02-2012, 09:45 AM
No one is can't miss. The draft is a crap schute. You just gotta make sure you DO your homework on all the players and put them in a position to succeed.


I already stated that I don't watch much college ball so for me to throw a name out would be pretty dumb. I'm sure the EFX likes all the guys they drafted or else they would not have selected them. I'm not bashing OZ i'm not saying he won't learn. I think it's BS to say that just by watching Manning it will HELP him because Manning's Indy back-ups have proven that to be FALSE. It all depends on OZ and how he prepares and approaches the game.

My gripe is we could have drafted a B.P.A at a position of need that could have contributed to the team. I'm sure there will be a standout defensive player taken after OZ that we could have had. Now the chances of us picking up that guy is minimal but at least you try to bolster a position of need. Assuming if you did your homework you can select a guy you know can play and compete.

All you talking about throwing a QB "into the fire" and how He needs time to learn behind MANNING need to be reminded Elway himself said it was BETTER for HIM to play early in his career for the Experience. Tell me how Dalton did last year or how Yates did very well to keep his team in the playoffs.

Again I like the pick. It's good to see us getting a QB for when Manning is on his way out JUST NOT THIS YEAR OR EVEN NEXT YEAR when it could go to a POSITION OF NEED a guy that can actually HELP us RIGHT NOW

Also every year there is endless QB's who come out. Next year i'm sure there will be Qb's in the 2nd and 3rd that are comparable to OZ.

Hillman was need, Wolfe was a need. And maybe EFX thought those were the b.p.as.

BORDERLINE
05-02-2012, 09:49 AM
Um... If you're talking about who could contribute more than Osweiler will this year or next, then Osmele, James, Curry, Randle, and Tru Johnson could all be on the field for a significant percentage of plays for us. If you need as much talent on the field NOW to win it all, then Osweiler doesn't help you with that at all.

He might actually be the right choice for the post-Manning Broncos, or to save some games for us if Manning gets injured in his last year or so. But it's pretty hard to argue that for the 2012 Broncos we might as well just not have made a pick, for all the good Osweiler will do that iteration of this team. Which is why I understand if his selection frustrates some people. Especially if James becomes the weapon we drafted Hillman to be.

But the Broncos are trying to be good stewards and not subject us to any more Sims / Orton / Tebow / Quinn scenarios. I can understand and appreciate that in time - as long as Osweiler isn't just like those guys anyway.

~G

Hit the NAIL on the HEAD!!!

This is exactly my thinking except the players you mentioned. Not a avid College Football watcher so i defer to you.

BORDERLINE
05-02-2012, 09:51 AM
Hillman was need, Wolfe was a need. And maybe EFX thought those were the b.p.as.

Nothing wrong with those picks. I understand we need a DT and we got one a speedy RB to complement Willis it appears we got one.

Slick
05-02-2012, 10:15 AM
My two biggest beefs with this years draft is taking a QB at all, and drafting Blake instead of Ta'amu.

Alameda's going to anchor that Steeler defensive line for the next 10 years ala Casey Hampton.

But I'm just a whiny bitch and a pouter.

jlarsiii
05-02-2012, 10:52 AM
My two biggest beefs with this years draft is taking a QB at all, and drafting Blake instead of Ta'amu.

Alameda's going to anchor that Steeler defensive line for the next 10 years ala Casey Hampton.

But I'm just a whiny bitch and a pouter.

That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. What I don't understand is how fans can question the longevity of Manning, or hedge their bets and state he is one hit away from being done for the season or longer, but then get mad for drafting a QB to be the backup. I am not directing this at you specifically, but I can't help but wonder about that.

As far as the draft is concerned, I read an excellent article at IAOFM: http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/you-got-served-draft-groupthink

It is worth a read, and goes a long way into explaining why fans get upset by the drafted players and why they are usually very, very misguided in doing so. No fan should base their expectations of draft results on a bunch of mock drafts and hypothesizing done by folks who have no football acumen, no true ability to evaluate players, and no insight into scheme, need, and fit of players for each team.

For example, there is a reason both Worthy and Still were available well past where the "draftniks" had them going. That is because the actual teams evaluated them and neither graded out as 1st round talent. It wasn't just the Broncos, it was all of the teams. They were poor scheme fit or they didn't have the prerequisite skills to garner being drafted higher.

It is like Ta'amu. Really, if teams thought he was really going to be a stud NT for a 34 front right out of the gate then there is no way he lasts until the 4th round. For the Broncos I don't think he fit the scheme they are going to run, and to that their focus was on filling other positions that fit scheme and need. Hence, we didn't draft Ta'amu. Sure, it could burn us but that is the crapshoot which is the NFL draft.

Edit: after posting this I see that there is a thread devoted to the article I linked to so just disregard it...

Ravage!!!
05-02-2012, 11:01 AM
Every player on the field is "one hit away" from not playing. Manning isn't going to be more fragile than anyone else.

Slick
05-02-2012, 12:00 PM
If I was that worried about Manning's neck, I wouldn't have signed him at all. We could have signed 5 players for that price, still drafted Osweiler and I wouldn't have a gripe at all. I'm happy as hell we got Peyton and I just wanted to see us field the best team we can while he's still got gas left in the tank.

I'm wrong more than I'm right and I have no problem admitting that, but I still like posting my opinion and reading everyone else's.

Northman
05-02-2012, 12:19 PM
It is like Ta'amu. Really, if teams thought he was really going to be a stud NT for a 34 front right out of the gate then there is no way he lasts until the 4th round. For the Broncos I don't think he fit the scheme they are going to run, and to that their focus was on filling other positions that fit scheme and need. Hence, we didn't draft Ta'amu. Sure, it could burn us but that is the crapshoot which is the NFL draft.



This has been my contention as well. Why people try to state that Ta'mu will be a definite force is hilarious to me. No one knows how he will turn out just like the guys we have we wont know until all is said and done. For those who say that Ta'mu, Miller, whatever are going to be impact players what happens when they fail? Sounds like it will be a lot of mud on some faces.

Chef Zambini
05-02-2012, 12:24 PM
I find it ironic that MANY of the same people whp proclaim the best method is to select the BPA are also the same people who justify passing on a palyer because "he doesnt fit the scheme", a direct contradiction to BPA and far less productive than drafting a talented guy who fills a NEED.

ah, the draft, its like rocket surgery.

Chef Zambini
05-02-2012, 12:25 PM
If I was that worried about Manning's neck, I wouldn't have signed him at all. We could have signed 5 players for that price, still drafted Osweiler and I wouldn't have a gripe at all. I'm happy as hell we got Peyton and I just wanted to see us field the best team we can while he's still got gas left in the tank.

I'm wrong more than I'm right and I have no problem admitting that, but I still like posting my opinion and reading everyone else's.we signed one potential pain in the neck to justify getting rid of another.

Ravage!!!
05-02-2012, 12:25 PM
As far as the draft is concerned, I read an excellent article at IAOFM: http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/you-got-served-draft-groupthink

It is worth a read, and goes a long way into explaining why fans get upset by the drafted players and why they are usually very, very misguided in doing so. No fan should base their expectations of draft results on a bunch of mock drafts and hypothesizing done by folks who have no football acumen, no true ability to evaluate players, and no insight into scheme, need, and fit of players for each team.



I haven't seen the thread dedicated to the article, but I find the read very good and spot on. Everyone should read it.


I don’t care that nobody in the media had Ronnie Hillman in their top 100. The Broncos valued him highly enough to take him 67th, and if you watch his tape, you’ll see why. They traded up 20 spots to get their guy, and have been criticized for doing so. Why not stay at #87, because Hillman probably gets there? If he doesn’t, you just take Lamar Miller.

There are two bad assumptions at play there. The first is that all 32 teams value all players equally, and that the media consensus accurately reflects that relative valuation. The second is that Hillman and Miller (or whoever) are interchangeable, vis-à-vis the specific role that the Broncos want them to fill. Both of these assumptions are flat-out wrong.

Chef Zambini
05-02-2012, 12:33 PM
It doesn't look like EFX agrees with your interpretation. Maybe I'm mistake but it also looks like you're assuming that in three or four years from now that EFX will be able to find a quarterback they like as much as Osweiler. Imo it would be very unwise to assume something that is that far in the future.no quite the contrary, my friend. by drafting OSWEILER NOW and using the second pick of OUR draft to do so, the broncos are saying it is unlikely that the ENTIRE NCAA wont provide another single candidate at the QB position,
OVER THE NEXT 3-4 YEARS
that will be as good as brock !

which is more far fetched?
which has lesser odds?
In this years draft there was NO debate about who the top 2 QBs were and their potential to be franchise QBs.
the rest/
a bag of marbles or as gump would say, "a box of chocolates"
me?
I would rather have hightower or martin to help MANNING and our broncos over the next 3 seasons, than brocko holding a clip-board over the same time period, but i am old, and may die soon and would like to see the broncos take home one more lombardi before i do so.

MOtorboat
05-02-2012, 12:46 PM
no quite the contrary, my friend. by drafting OSWEILER NOW and using the second pick of OUR draft to do so, the broncos are saying it is unlikely that the ENTIRE NCAA wont provide another single candidate at the QB position,
OVER THE NEXT 3-4 YEARS
that will be as good as brock !

which is more far fetched?
which has lesser odds?
In this years draft there was NO debate about who the top 2 QBs were and their potential to be franchise QBs.
the rest/
a bag of marbles or as gump would say, "a box of chocolates"
me?
I would rather have hightower or martin to help MANNING and our broncos over the next 3 seasons, than brocko holding a clip-board over the same time period, but i am old, and may die soon and would like to see the broncos take home one more lombardi before i do so.

1406

Ravage!!!
05-02-2012, 12:50 PM
I find it ironic that MANY of the same people whp proclaim the best method is to select the BPA are also the same people who justify passing on a palyer because "he doesnt fit the scheme", a direct contradiction to BPA and far less productive than drafting a talented guy who fills a NEED.

ah, the draft, its like rocket surgery.

Actually Zam, drafting a player that doesn't fit whta you are trying to do, scheme wise, is FAR less productive and intelligent than purely drafting a player because of their name. If a player doesn't fit what you are trying to do, and he doesn't fit a role, then why draft him at all? There is much more to just a player's position than the two letter designation label that is placed in the position column.

Chef Zambini
05-02-2012, 01:05 PM
Actually Zam, drafting a player that doesn't fit whta you are trying to do, scheme wise, is FAR less productive and intelligent than purely drafting a player because of their name. If a player doesn't fit what you are trying to do, and he doesn't fit a role, then why draft him at all? There is much more to just a player's position than the two letter designation label that is placed in the position column.BPA
guy that fits the scheme
guy we NEED.
which is it, and why cant one guy fulfill all categories?
isnt that the ideaL CANDIDATE?
and sorry, fits the scheme, when scheme is about as regimented as raw eggs seems like the least rational way to select a pl;ayer!
'didnt fit our "is exactly what head coaches and GMs end up saying when they pass on a sure fire talent!
its NOT a methodology,
its a pathetic hindsight excuse, JMHO !
... or a polite way to say, we think the kid will suck !
so...
either EFX think that Hightower and Martin will suck, or its just a lame excuse, again, jmho !

Ravage!!!
05-02-2012, 01:07 PM
yes... for sure just your opinion.

MOtorboat
05-02-2012, 01:08 PM
BPA
guy that fits the scheme
guy we NEED.
which is it, and why cant one guy fulfill all categories?
isnt that the ideaL CANDIDATE?
and sorry, fits the scheme, when scheme is about as regimented as raw eggs seems like the least rational way to select a pl;ayer!
'didnt fit our "is exactly what head coaches and GMs end up saying when they pass on a sure fire talent!
its NOT a methodology,
its a pathetic hindsight excuse, JMHO !
... or a polite way to say, we think the kid will suck !
so...
either EFX think that Hightower and Martin will suck, or its just a lame excuse, again, jmho !

HIGHTOWER DOESN'T FIT THE SCHEME!

Or, maybe we should write it like this:
highTOWER dosnt FIT tHe SCHeme!

Chef Zambini
05-02-2012, 01:09 PM
Actually Zam, drafting a player that doesn't fit whta you are trying to do, scheme wise, is FAR less productive and intelligent than purely drafting a player because of their name. If a player doesn't fit what you are trying to do, and he doesn't fit a role, then why draft him at all? There is much more to just a player's position than the two letter designation label that is placed in the position column.
like TEBOW ?

Slick
05-02-2012, 01:11 PM
This has been my contention as well. Why people try to state that Ta'mu will be a definite force is hilarious to me. No one knows how he will turn out just like the guys we have we wont know until all is said and done. For those who say that Ta'mu, Miller, whatever are going to be impact players what happens when they fail? Sounds like it will be a lot of mud on some faces.

I think Ta'amu will be a better player than Phillip Blake. I think Alameda fills a big need on the roster, and would have loved to see him paired with the penetrating DT we got (jsteve commented on this somewhere else I think) I'd rather see us bust with a 4th round pick than either one of our first two... If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I can live with that. I'm glad you find that hilarious.

Also, if I remember correctly you were part of a group of many of us who didn't want a QB this year. What changed your mind? You have been posting snide comments at anyone who disagrees with any of this year picks.

WTF Northman!?!

jlarsiii
05-02-2012, 01:58 PM
HIGHTOWER DOESN'T FIT THE SCHEME!

Or, maybe we should write it like this:
highTOWER dosnt FIT tHe SCHeme!

At least we know why Zam is looking so butt hurt. We didn't draft the player he wanted. So he rants about the QB, and in doing so looks more and more confused.

To Zam, I don't know how you can argue that in 3-4yrs a rookie QB with no experience with the pro-offense scheme and at reading pro-defenses will somehow be better than Brock especially with 3-4yrs of grooming behind him specific to what we do and how we do it. Your statement about no more QB candidates coming out of the NCAA is really quite dumb. Kind of makes reading your post akin to listening to a madman rambling...

BORDERLINE
05-02-2012, 07:00 PM
You have been posting snide comments at anyone who disagrees with any of this year picks.

WTF Northman!?!

tell me about it he's LMAO at every post I have thrown up and asked me if I was "Mental". North is one of the nicest dudes on here i'm like WTF as well.

NightTerror218
05-02-2012, 07:05 PM
Zam, EFX loved Osweiler and they needed to get a rookie now or next year. They needed replacement and with not knowing how much time they have with Manning they choose to go with the QB they loved. They were very high on him. If there was a chance a team was looking at him in the first I bet they would have moved for him there. They were that high on him from the sounds of it.

Simple Jaded
05-02-2012, 10:20 PM
Would you rather draft a project QB in the 2nd round or trade three #1's and a #2 to move up five spots to draft a project QB?.......

Jsteve01
05-02-2012, 11:03 PM
Would you rather draft a project QB in the 2nd round or trade three #1's and a #2 to move up five spots to draft a project QB?.......

Zam wanted us to make that trade lollol

Northman
05-03-2012, 08:11 AM
I think Ta'amu will be a better player than Phillip Blake. I think Alameda fills a big need on the roster, and would have loved to see him paired with the penetrating DT we got (jsteve commented on this somewhere else I think) I'd rather see us bust with a 4th round pick than either one of our first two... If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I can live with that. I'm glad you find that hilarious.

Personally i would of wanted Ta'amu over Blake as well. However, i dont know what it was the brass wanted out of this draft. Elway stated he thought we were pretty good at DT whether or not i disagreed or not. He's the guy that would know more than i so i have to give him the benefit of the doubt.


Also, if I remember correctly you were part of a group of many of us who didn't want a QB this year. What changed your mind? You have been posting snide comments at anyone who disagrees with any of this year picks.

WTF Northman!?!

Actually, my contention (as well as my mock drafts) was i would of rathered taken a QB in the 3rd or later. But, if we took a guy i hoped it was Osweiler as outside of Luck or RGIII he was the only QB i really liked. I could of lived with not taking a QB this year had they chose to go that route but again, the FO saw something in Oz that they liked and took him. And what snide comments? All ive been saying is that people shouldnt jump off cliffs until they see what these guys can do.

Northman
05-03-2012, 08:12 AM
tell me about it he's LMAO at every post I have thrown up and asked me if I was "Mental". North is one of the nicest dudes on here i'm like WTF as well.

Im not nice, who told you that? They need to be castrated. :D

BeefStew25
05-03-2012, 08:18 AM
Beware of Anal Bus.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 08:57 AM
Personally i would of wanted Ta'amu over Blake as well. However, i dont know what it was the brass wanted out of this draft. Elway stated he thought we were pretty good at DT whether or not i disagreed or not. He's the guy that would know more than i so i have to give him the benefit of the doubt.



Actually, my contention (as well as my mock drafts) was i would of rathered taken a QB in the 3rd or later. But, if we took a guy i hoped it was Osweiler as outside of Luck or RGIII he was the only QB i really liked. I could of lived with not taking a QB this year had they chose to go that route but again, the FO saw something in Oz that they liked and took him. And what snide comments? All ive been saying is that people shouldnt jump off cliffs until they see what these guys can do.


I don't have to be a personnel guru or even know dick about football to know that Ty Warren hasn't been healthy in 4 years and Vickerson is coming off injury. I'd rather hedge my bets because if you're hopes for tackle are hinging on those two and a bunch of UDFA scrubs your delusional.

I love Wolfe but we needed to add more than one tackle to the roster after losing two of the top 10 tackles in the league vs the run in the offseason (yes believe it or not Thomas was also top 10 according to PFF)

Northman
05-03-2012, 09:06 AM
I don't have to be a personnel guru or even know dick about football to know that Ty Warren hasn't been healthy in 4 years and Vickerson is coming off injury. I'd rather hedge my bets because if you're hopes for tackle are hinging on those two and a bunch of UDFA scrubs your delusional.

I love Wolfe but we needed to add more than one tackle to the roster after losing two of the top 10 tackles in the league vs the run in the offseason (yes believe it or not Thomas was also top 10 according to PFF)

Again, doesnt matter what we think. If the FO believe they will be ok than thats what we got for the time being. Perhaps their bigger thinking is that with Manning the offense will be forcing opponents to play catchup which means less running. We saw that first hand when playing that Patriots.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 09:23 AM
Again, doesnt matter what we think. If the FO believe they will be ok than thats what we got for the time being. Perhaps their bigger thinking is that with Manning the offense will be forcing opponents to play catchup which means less running. We saw that first hand when playing that Patriots.

The FO believed Warren and Vickerson would be ok when they signed them to multiyear deals. You know I've been supportive of this draft but it doesn't mean I have to agree with everything the F.O. is trying to sell at this point. DT is still a position of worry for us. Ta'amu is just coming into his own this year after dropping weight by changing his diet. I think he's a disruptive force at the line who holds POA and would help a team that no longer has that type of player

BORDERLINE
05-03-2012, 09:30 AM
We know it doesn't matter what we think to EFX I get we have no influence on them. I have not read anywhere in this thread someone saying Brock will suck no one is jumping cliffs dude. All I'm saying is I dont like the pick this year.

Northman
05-03-2012, 09:36 AM
The FO believed Warren and Vickerson would be ok when they signed them to multiyear deals. You know I've been supportive of this draft but it doesn't mean I have to agree with everything the F.O. is trying to sell at this point. DT is still a position of worry for us. Ta'amu is just coming into his own this year after dropping weight by changing his diet. I think he's a disruptive force at the line who holds POA and would help a team that no longer has that type of player

But again, thats just speculation on your part. He could very well become a complete waste. As ive said, lets wait and see, maybe we will be pleasantly surprised.

Northman
05-03-2012, 09:40 AM
We know it doesn't matter what we think to EFX I get we have no influence on them. I have not read anywhere in this thread someone saying Brock will suck no one is jumping cliffs dude. All I'm saying is I dont like the pick this year.

There are some who are already writing him off and there are some who are already claiming Ta'mu to be a HOF'r. Thats where my problem lies. While i have zero problem with people saying its their "opinion" i do have a problem when people try and proclaim it too be a fact one way or another. You can hate the pick all you want, all im saying is at least give the players a chance to prove themselves.

TXBRONC
05-03-2012, 09:46 AM
I find it ironic that MANY of the same people whp proclaim the best method is to select the BPA are also the same people who justify passing on a palyer because "he doesnt fit the scheme", a direct contradiction to BPA and far less productive than drafting a talented guy who fills a NEED.

ah, the draft, its like rocket surgery.

No that's not necessarily true.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 09:55 AM
But again, thats just speculation on your part. He could very well become a complete waste. As ive said, lets wait and see, maybe we will be pleasantly surprised.

lol I'm not saying hall of famer. I think he provided huge value in the 5th at a position of glaring need. Pittsburgh obviously did as well as they gave up a 4th and 6th to take him there.

Ravage!!!
05-03-2012, 10:01 AM
There are some who are already writing him off and there are some who are already claiming Ta'mu to be a HOF'r. Thats where my problem lies. While i have zero problem with people saying its their "opinion" i do have a problem when people try and proclaim it too be a fact one way or another. You can hate the pick all you want, all im saying is at least give the players a chance to prove themselves.

I hate those that are putting down the FO as if they are incompetent, purely because they didn't pick the players the poster wanted. I get that some were hoping for different players, or was hoping for a specific player, but don't try to make it sound like THEY are incompetent purely because you didn't like the choices. We have have NO clue whats going on, what the scouting had them at, what the coaches want them for, what role they see them playing, how they fit within the scheme or how they interviewed. I find it absolutely and completely absurd when I see a poster pretend to know more tell us all on "what they should have done."

but like you said, I don't mind people expressing the opinion of dislike for a particular player....but don't give us your "facts" on what the FO was thinking, and how their thinking was wrong.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 10:09 AM
I hate those that are putting down the FO as if they are incompetent, purely because they didn't pick the players the poster wanted. I get that some were hoping for different players, or was hoping for a specific player, but don't try to make it sound like THEY are incompetent purely because you didn't like the choices. We have have NO clue whats going on, what the scouting had them at, what the coaches want them for, what role they see them playing, how they fit within the scheme or how they interviewed. I find it absolutely and completely absurd when I see a poster pretend to know more tell us all on "what they should have done."

but like you said, I don't mind people expressing the opinion of dislike for a particular player....but don't give us your "facts" on what the FO was thinking, and how their thinking was wrong.

hate's a strong word rav lol

I'm not stating anything as fact. The draft is a crap shoot. all these players we drafted could be solid contributers or not a single one from our class could pan out. What I did say was that DT especially a gap plugger at the nose is still a glaring need with the loss of Bunk and Thomas. No matter how sure the F.o. is of Warren and Vickerson's return (Greek did give them a clean bill of health before they signed their deals btw) it is a still a position of need as neither of those guys is really a POA type player. Even if they were we have two guys coming off serious injury. One of whom hasn't made any serious football contributions to a team in 3 freaking years because of injury.

Oh and I never said the F.O. was incompetent. I did say that my one beef with the draft was trading up for Hillman when the pick we used to move up could have been another DT when it is a glaring need.

Northman
05-03-2012, 10:11 AM
I hate those that are putting down the FO as if they are incompetent, purely because they didn't pick the players the poster wanted. I get that some were hoping for different players, or was hoping for a specific player, but don't try to make it sound like THEY are incompetent purely because you didn't like the choices. We have have NO clue whats going on, what the scouting had them at, what the coaches want them for, what role they see them playing, how they fit within the scheme or how they interviewed. I find it absolutely and completely absurd when I see a poster pretend to know more tell us all on "what they should have done."

but like you said, I don't mind people expressing the opinion of dislike for a particular player....but don't give us your "facts" on what the FO was thinking, and how their thinking was wrong.


At least yet. A couple years down the road if people want to gloat about how right they were than let them knock themselves out. Even though i did a lot of head scratching with McDaniels picks i still had to wait and see how it panned out. I was right on some of them and wrong on others. Its just too easy to jump to the conclusions mat without at least seeing what they can do. Ive said it before, there were players i wanted that we didnt take but at this point i dont have all the facts or information on said players to automatically state success or failure at this point.

Northman
05-03-2012, 10:14 AM
hate's a strong word rav lol

I'm not stating anything as fact. The draft is a crap shoot. all these players we drafted could be solid contributers or not a single one from our class could pan out. What I did say was that DT especially a gap plugger at the nose is still a glaring need with the loss of Bunk and Thomas. No matter how sure the F.o. is of Warren and Vickerson's return (Greek did give them a clean bill of health before they signed their deals btw) it is a still a position of need as neither of those guys is really a POA type player. Even if they were we have two guys coming off serious injury. One of whom hasn't made any serious football contributions to a team in 3 freaking years because of injury.

Oh and I never said the F.O. was incompetent. I did say that my one beef with the draft was trading up for Hillman when the pick we used to move up could have been another DT when it is a glaring need.

RB was a need too.

Slick
05-03-2012, 10:24 AM
I hate those that are putting down the FO as if they are incompetent, purely because they didn't pick the players the poster wanted. I get that some were hoping for different players, or was hoping for a specific player, but don't try to make it sound like THEY are incompetent purely because you didn't like the choices. We have have NO clue whats going on, what the scouting had them at, what the coaches want them for, what role they see them playing, how they fit within the scheme or how they interviewed. I find it absolutely and completely absurd when I see a poster pretend to know more tell us all on "what they should have done."

but like you said, I don't mind people expressing the opinion of dislike for a particular player....but don't give us your "facts" on what the FO was thinking, and how their thinking was wrong.

What posters (besides Zam) have done any of this Rav? I must have missed it.



North, I felt you were being a little condescending and snide with a few posts, maybe not in this thread but others. If I read more into what you were saying that really wasn't there then my mistake.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 10:57 AM
RB was a need too.

Do we have three rbs on our roster that contributed greatly last year? Yes. Do we have three tackles on our roster that contributed last year? No.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 11:03 AM
I'm not bashing the F.O. Like I said last year I felt the same way when we drafted Irving and Jurrell Casey was still on the board in the third. Is it a little nitpicky? yep but it's ok because overall I really like all of the picks. Im just saying that extra pick in the 4th would have been nice especially as there were still backs like Turbin, and Miller on the board at our original slot in the 3rd.

bcbronc
05-03-2012, 12:41 PM
What I did say was that DT especially a gap plugger at the nose is still a glaring need with the loss of Bunk and Thomas. No matter how sure the F.o. is of Warren and Vickerson's return (Greek did give them a clean bill of health before they signed their deals btw) it is a still a position of need as neither of those guys is really a POA type player. Even if they were we have two guys coming off serious injury. One of whom hasn't made any serious football contributions to a team in 3 freaking years because of injury.


At this point of the offseason, it's looking like our scheme won't be calling for that guy that can take on a double team and still plug his gap. We kicked the tire on a couple of NT types, Bunkley and the guy from MIA, but came away empty and didn't address it in the draft. Granted we picked up Bunkley fairly late last offseason iirc, so it's still possible we'll add a NT later, but can't really expect to strike gold two years in a row. Not every team has a stout NT they just want to give away.

Looking over the past 2 years, we've tried to add length and athleticism to our interior line rather than stout gap pluggers. Ty Warren 6'5" 300lbs, they had Vick lose weight to come in at 6'5" 290, they drafted two DL this year, both in that 6'5" 300lb range. As of now, Bannan is the heaviest listed DL we have at 312lbs. Looks like we'll be going with a true 1-gap penetrating defense where we try to stuff the run behind the LOS rather than stuffing holes and bouncing RBs outside to our LBs. For this type of defense to be successful imo we'll need strong play from our MLB and SS...Mays will need to plug the correct hole or we'll be giving up long runs every time the back gets past the first wave.

Cugel
05-03-2012, 12:43 PM
I don't think we can really judge whether players will be great or crap at this point. We can point out that certain draft picks don't SEEM to make sense or are really extreme reaches.

Taking Knowshon Moreno and Ayers instead of Brian Orakpo and Clay Matthews is a perfect example of this. Your average couch potato with a copy of Mayock and Kiper's predictions could tell you that right away.

But, extreme head scratchers aside like all of McMoron's picks, or some of Shanahan's (Darius Watts for instance), if the picks SEEM to make a general kind of sense even if they seem to be reaches, then we have to wait and see how that player develops.

Wolfe filled a need. They liked Brockers and Poe better but they weren't available. They liked Wolfe better than Still, Worthy or Reyes. Time will tell who was right there.

Osweiler. This is flat terrible drafting unless Osweiler unexpectedly becomes the next Aaron Rogers. Aaron Rogers was the #1 pick of the 2nd round, and a search of the NFL database reveals damn FEW QBs taken at or after #57 who ever amounted to anything.

Just going by the statistical odds, Osweiler will be another Brian Griese at best. A mediocre guy who never wins a championship, but who might develop enough to keep the Broncos about 500 for a while --- which will only prevent them from getting a top draft pick they need to draft a really ELITE QB.

My position is that based on history you need an elite QB to win the SB. And you can only get one in the top 10-12 picks of the draft unless you get insanely lucky. (Kurt Warner, Tom Brady and Aaron Rogers are the only QBs who come to mind over the last 12 years).

GOOD QBs just aren't going to get it done.

Frankly, if the Broncos don't win it, I'd like to see some 2nd tier QB win the SB for once (like Flacco or Matt Ryan or Matt Shaub or Jay Cutler) win it just to prove that someone OTHER than Brady, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rogers, Peyton Manning, or Ben Roethlisberger can win it. If you really need one of the top 6 QBs in the NFL to win the SB then it's virtually hopeless for every other team -- because the overwhelming majority of teams can't get a QB like that.

Eventually of course some other QB is going to break into the elite ranks. Maybe someone like Sam Bradford or Alex Smith (both of whom were after all the #1 overall pick). But, it's difficult to find hope for any late 2nd round QBs in this league. :coffee:

If you want to have hope that Osweiler is going to be the next Tom Brady because EFX believe in him, well, I can't prove you're wrong! :wave:

Vegas in insanely rich because people just love to dream that long-shot is going to pay off -- no matter what the statistical chances of it ever happening are. :coffee:

Slick
05-03-2012, 12:44 PM
Yeah, it's become painfully obvious that whatever defensive scheme we want to run doesn't include a big, run stuffing type of DT.

Cugel
05-03-2012, 12:59 PM
At this point of the offseason, it's looking like our scheme won't be calling for that guy that can take on a double team and still plug his gap. We kicked the tire on a couple of NT types, Bunkley and the guy from MIA, but came away empty and didn't address it in the draft. Granted we picked up Bunkley fairly late last offseason iirc, so it's still possible we'll add a NT later, but can't really expect to strike gold two years in a row. Not every team has a stout NT they just want to give away.

Looking over the past 2 years, we've tried to add length and athleticism to our interior line rather than stout gap pluggers. Ty Warren 6'5" 300lbs, they had Vick lose weight to come in at 6'5" 290, they drafted two DL this year, both in that 6'5" 300lb range. As of now, Bannan is the heaviest listed DL we have at 312lbs. Looks like we'll be going with a true 1-gap penetrating defense where we try to stuff the run behind the LOS rather than stuffing holes and bouncing RBs outside to our LBs. For this type of defense to be successful imo we'll need strong play from our MLB and SS...Mays will need to plug the correct hole or we'll be giving up long runs every time the back gets past the first wave.

It's obvious that they are looking to find guys who can fill multiple positions and move around on the line, rather than stout run-stuffers like Bunkley. That's probably why they didn't extend him.

Wolfe was picked because he played 5-technique (DE) as well as 3-technique (DT). Fox talks about his versatility.

It looks like they just didn't want the traditional straight 3-technique guys who were available in the 2nd round because they wanted a guy they could move around on the line.

They did this last year taking Miller over Dareus, even though it was insane to take a SLB with the #2 pick overall. If Miller were used as a traditional SLB, then it WOULD be insane. But, they moved him around and had him rushing the passer from the strong side opposite Dumervil and that was effective on passing downs.

This seems to be more of the same. They got a guy who can replace Robert Ayers at LDE and also slide inside to DT as well.

I think they will have Wolfe starting ahead of Ayers soon, while they have Warren & Vickerson start inside. Wolfe can also backup either of them. He's bigger and stronger than Ayers so he provides more versatility.

That's why they took him ahead of Worthy, Still or Reyes. It's probably also why they were interested in Brockers and Poe (who has the speed to move outside and play strong-side DE if they want him to).

Cugel
05-03-2012, 01:04 PM
You can also see why they are benching Irving and giving Mays a $4 million contract. He's a strong run defender. And if they are going to try and penetrate the line rather than stack up the blockers with the DL and have the LBs cover the ends, then Mays is going to play a key role in making sure that runners don't gash the Broncos for big gains right up the middle.

The problem is Mays is a liability covering the TE over the middle. He's not a proto-typical MLB who can do it all.

NightTerror218
05-03-2012, 01:14 PM
You can also see why they are benching Irving and giving Mays a $4 million contract. He's a strong run defender. And if they are going to try and penetrate the line rather than stack up the blockers with the DL and have the LBs cover the ends, then Mays is going to play a key role in making sure that runners don't gash the Broncos for big gains right up the middle.

The problem is Mays is a liability covering the TE over the middle. He's not a proto-typical MLB who can do it all.

Last year I also saw him taking bad angles some games and missing tackles.

CoachChaz
05-03-2012, 01:17 PM
You can also see why they are benching Irving and giving Mays a $4 million contract. He's a strong run defender. And if they are going to try and penetrate the line rather than stack up the blockers with the DL and have the LBs cover the ends, then Mays is going to play a key role in making sure that runners don't gash the Broncos for big gains right up the middle.

The problem is Mays is a liability covering the TE over the middle. He's not a proto-typical MLB who can do it all.

This is where Mike Adams enters the picture. Having a safety that can stop the run AND cover the TE's is crucial in big nickel packages on early downs

Ravage!!!
05-03-2012, 01:21 PM
Yeah, it's become painfully obvious that whatever defensive scheme we want to run doesn't include a big, run stuffing type of DT.

I dont think thats obvious at all.

Cugel
05-03-2012, 01:41 PM
This is where Mike Adams enters the picture. Having a safety that can stop the run AND cover the TE's is crucial in big nickel packages on early downs

Mike Adams is not a Brian Dawkins clone, he's a cover safety. He's 5'11", 200 Lbs, with good speed and cover skills. That's NOT a guy to come up and take on the 220 lbs. RB with great success, let alone a 300 lbs. OL.

He's going to be the deep safety covering over the top, not a force coming up in run-support. I assume he can play the run adequately well, but it's obviously not going to be one of his strengths.

You'd be better off bringing up Champ Bailey, who at least is a sure tackler.

Cugel
05-03-2012, 02:23 PM
Last year I also saw him taking bad angles some games and missing tackles.

And I saw Mays trying for the big hit and watching the RB bounce off, keep his feet and keep going. :rolleyes:

I didn't think Joe Mays was worth $4 million, but the Broncos didn't draft a LB and they did give him $4 million, so we're stuck with him at least for 1 more year.

Dont'a Hightower would have been a nice addition in that he's 6'2", 265 and would be an immediate presence in the middle of the field.

Taking him at #25 and then taking Wolfe at #57 (or possibly trading up in the 2nd to make sure of Wolfe if that's what they felt was necessary) would have made for a more immediate impact.

If we had Hightower and Wolfe I would be a lot more optimistic about strengthening the middle of the Broncos defense enough to give Peyton Manning a real chance to win a SB.

We have some weapons on offense now, with McGahee and Hillman, Thomas, Decker and Andre Caldwell, plus TEs Joel Dreessen, Jacob Tamme and (maybe if he's ever healthy) Julius Thomas who has some real promise but who has played in only 1 game last year and had 1 catch for 5 yards.

This isn't exactly the Packers offensive juggernaut, but it's not too bad, especially if Demaryius Thomas stays healthy this season. He's talked about the league as a serious #1 WR threat IF he can stay on the field, he could have a breakout year.

bcbronc
05-03-2012, 02:53 PM
I don't think we can really judge whether players will be great or crap at this point. We can point out that certain draft picks don't SEEM to make sense or are really extreme reaches.

And yet you've already said the best Os can do is be the next Griese.


Taking Knowshon Moreno and Ayers instead of Brian Orakpo and Clay Matthews is a perfect example of this. Your average couch potato with a copy of Mayock and Kiper's predictions could tell you that right away.

lol, you keep going back to this but it's ridiculous. Moreno was the consensus best RB in the draft, and Mayock predicted Ayers would be the best defensive player taken. So going by Mayock or Kiper, Moreno and Ayers make sense. Orakpo, sure, lots of people felt he would have been a good pick at the time. But Matthews was viewed by many as the third best LB coming out of his own school that year. He's also had a creative DC that used him uniquely. You can retype this another hundred times, doesn't mean the picks were as obvious as you claim.



Osweiler. This is flat terrible drafting unless Osweiler unexpectedly becomes the next Aaron Rogers. Aaron Rogers was the #1 pick of the 2nd round, and a search of the NFL database reveals damn FEW QBs taken at or after #57 who ever amounted to anything.

Just going by the statistical odds, Osweiler will be another Brian Griese at best. A mediocre guy who never wins a championship, but who might develop enough to keep the Broncos about 500 for a while --- which will only prevent them from getting a top draft pick they need to draft a really ELITE QB.

My position is that based on history you need an elite QB to win the SB. And you can only get one in the top 10-12 picks of the draft unless you get insanely lucky. (Kurt Warner, Tom Brady and Aaron Rogers are the only QBs who come to mind over the last 12 years).


Rodgers was a 1st rounder, not a second (24th overall). Brees was a 2nd rounder (32nd overall). Everyone knows the great QBs tend to come from early in the first. That doesn't mean it only happens that way though. Brees, not a first. Favre, not a first. Brady, Warner, not firsts. Andy Dalton, not a first. Matt Schaub, not a first. Simple fact is, doesn't matter where you pick a QB, you have to be insanely lucky for him to turn into a great QB. You want to go by the stats, odds are against ANY QB making it as more than a journey man back-up.

And it's not like taking a QB in the first round is any guarantee of success. Going from 2009 (enough time to get some idea on the QBs taken) here's who was taken in the first round:

2009 - Matt Stafford (1), Mark Sanchez (5), Josh Freeman (17)
2008 - Matt Ryan (3), Flacco (18)
2007 - Jamarcus Russell (1), Brady Quinn (22)
2006 - Vince Young (1), Matt Lienart (10), Jay Cutler (11)
2005 - Alex Smith (1), Aaron Rodgers (24), Jason Campbell (25)
2004 - Eli Manning (1), Phillip Rivers (4), Ben the Raper (11), JP Losnam (22)
2003 - Carson Palmer (1), Byron Leftwich (7), Kyle Boller (19), Rex Grossman (22)
etc


GOOD QBs just aren't going to get it done.

How many of those QBs are better than "good"? Maybe Stafford if he can stay healthy, Ryan and Flacco still have a chance, Palmer for a while, Rodgers and most of 2004. Point being, there's no quaranteed way to get an elite QB...and once you get one it doesn't matter at all where they came from. Not sure if Os will be one of the few that bucks the trend and becomes a great QB drafted outside RD1, but lets not pretend all we had to do was use our first pick next year or the year after and we were guaranteed a great QB.

Perhaps the best QB class in recent memory is 2004...17 QBs drafted that year, first three (Manning, Rivers, Roethlisburger) have been great, the fourth 1st rounder flamed out after a couple years...and a 3rd rounder (Matt Schaub) has been good. The rest did squat, just like every other year. It's hard finding a QB, so I understand why EFX wanted to start looking for Peyton's replacement asap.


Vegas in insanely rich because people just love to dream that long-shot is going to pay off -- no matter what the statistical chances of it ever happening are. :coffee:


Thing is, no matter where you draft your QB, statistically the chances of that player amounting to more than squat are pretty long. Giving a guy time to develop is going to give you more chance of success than just hoping the next Aaron Rodgers falls to you in the exact year you need him.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 03:21 PM
I don't think we can really judge whether players will be great or crap at this point. We can point out that certain draft picks don't SEEM to make sense or are really extreme reaches.

Taking Knowshon Moreno and Ayers instead of Brian Orakpo and Clay Matthews is a perfect example of this. Your average couch potato with a copy of Mayock and Kiper's predictions could tell you that right away.

But, extreme head scratchers aside like all of McMoron's picks, or some of Shanahan's (Darius Watts for instance), if the picks SEEM to make a general kind of sense even if they seem to be reaches, then we have to wait and see how that player develops.

Wolfe filled a need. They liked Brockers and Poe better but they weren't available. They liked Wolfe better than Still, Worthy or Reyes. Time will tell who was right there.

Osweiler. This is flat terrible drafting unless Osweiler unexpectedly becomes the next Aaron Rogers. Aaron Rogers was the #1 pick of the 2nd round, and a search of the NFL database reveals damn FEW QBs taken at or after #57 who ever amounted to anything.

Just going by the statistical odds, Osweiler will be another Brian Griese at best. A mediocre guy who never wins a championship, but who might develop enough to keep the Broncos about 500 for a while --- which will only prevent them from getting a top draft pick they need to draft a really ELITE QB.

My position is that based on history you need an elite QB to win the SB. And you can only get one in the top 10-12 picks of the draft unless you get insanely lucky. (Kurt Warner, Tom Brady and Aaron Rogers are the only QBs who come to mind over the last 12 years).

GOOD QBs just aren't going to get it done.

Frankly, if the Broncos don't win it, I'd like to see some 2nd tier QB win the SB for once (like Flacco or Matt Ryan or Matt Shaub or Jay Cutler) win it just to prove that someone OTHER than Brady, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rogers, Peyton Manning, or Ben Roethlisberger can win it. If you really need one of the top 6 QBs in the NFL to win the SB then it's virtually hopeless for every other team -- because the overwhelming majority of teams can't get a QB like that.

Eventually of course some other QB is going to break into the elite ranks. Maybe someone like Sam Bradford or Alex Smith (both of whom were after all the #1 overall pick). But, it's difficult to find hope for any late 2nd round QBs in this league. :coffee:

If you want to have hope that Osweiler is going to be the next Tom Brady because EFX believe in him, well, I can't prove you're wrong! :wave:

Vegas in insanely rich because people just love to dream that long-shot is going to pay off -- no matter what the statistical chances of it ever happening are. :coffee:

erm Mayock had Ayers as his top defensive player and Moreno as his top back in that draft...so his draft guide might not have helped you

Northman
05-03-2012, 03:25 PM
Yeah, it's become painfully obvious that whatever defensive scheme we want to run doesn't include a big, run stuffing type of DT.

From the surface it looks like we are going with speed in hopes that the offense will give us leads and force other teams to have to play catchup.

CoachChaz
05-03-2012, 03:37 PM
Mike Adams is not a Brian Dawkins clone, he's a cover safety. He's 5'11", 200 Lbs, with good speed and cover skills. That's NOT a guy to come up and take on the 220 lbs. RB with great success, let alone a 300 lbs. OL.

He's going to be the deep safety covering over the top, not a force coming up in run-support. I assume he can play the run adequately well, but it's obviously not going to be one of his strengths.

You'd be better off bringing up Champ Bailey, who at least is a sure tackler.

Ummm...the reason Adams was brought in has as much to do with his versatility as anything. Prior to the last year or so, he played mostly as a SS, but also has the ability to play as a nickel CB. He will pretty much be our big nickel on early downs BECAUSE he plays so well in run support AND in coverage. He is not just a centerfielder chasing down deep balls. He is a great open field tackler.

If we ever decided to move Bailey to FS...Mike Adams gams is exactly what we would want and expect from him.

Jsteve01
05-03-2012, 03:46 PM
Ummm...the reason Adams was brought in has as much to do with his versatility as anything. Prior to the last year or so, he played mostly as a SS, but also has the ability to play as a nickel CB. He will pretty much be our big nickel on early downs BECAUSE he plays so well in run support AND in coverage. He is not just a centerfielder chasing down deep balls. He is a great open field tackler.

If we ever decided to move Bailey to FS...Mike Adams gams is exactly what we would want and expect from him.

don't bother him he's busy contructing his theory on the demise of the Broncos...57 threads saying the same thing combined with thousands of posts will be used as the basis of his thesis.

CoachChaz
05-03-2012, 03:51 PM
don't bother him he's busy contructing his theory on the demise of the Broncos...57 threads saying the same thing combined with thousands of posts will be used as the basis of his thesis.

I dont have a problem with people expressing concerns about players...but at least make sure you know the player, his skills, his experience and the type of game he plays.

The assessment of Adams couldnt have been more wrong.

topscribe
05-04-2012, 11:11 AM
erm Mayock had Ayers as his top defensive player and Moreno as his top back in that draft...so his draft guide might not have helped you
I wouldn't dismiss an analyst because he missed on one player (Moreno).

As for Ayers, Mayock qualified his opinion by saying that would happen within
three years. Ayers has not had three years at his natural position, but he did
start to come on last year at DE, his first there on the pro level . . .

NightTerror218
05-04-2012, 12:10 PM
If Ty Warren comes on strong this season. Then I think we will have done a great job. We got our first real UT. We got a CB who if healthy could have been a 1st round talent (dropped due to injuries). We got our potential replacement for Manning. Got a RB who I think is pretty solid and well rounded. He has great hands and use to be a WR in high school. Added some special team depth and another C to push Walton. C was not deep but I believe he was the 3rd C taken off board. Hell we even got a long snapper UDFA.

I would say that our defense will be dramatically improved with FA and draft. I think EFX did well. I like the picks overall, I might have drafted differently but with who was drafted I think it was good.

Cugel
05-08-2012, 03:12 PM
no quite the contrary, my friend. by drafting OSWEILER NOW and using the second pick of OUR draft to do so, the broncos are saying it is unlikely that the ENTIRE NCAA wont provide another single candidate at the QB position,
OVER THE NEXT 3-4 YEARS
that will be as good as brock !

That's not accurate at all. Elway needed a QB to step in when Manning retires. He can't draft him 2 years from now and expect he'll be ready. Elway like all NFL executives wants to avoid the dreaded "6-10 disease" where your Hall of Fame QB retires and suddenly you find the rest of your team is filled with role players and now you're faced with a 3 year rebuilding program. At best. (See 1999-Present Broncos for details).

My criticism is that I don't think it makes any difference.

I'm a fan. I see no point in cushioning the blow. Elway wants to keep his job and he can't do that for long if the team has losing seasons. Osweiler could well be the key to preventing the team from going 5-11 or something.

But, I say the only solution to Manning's retirement is to go up into the top 5 and get an elite prospect to replace him. Just like the Redskins did with RGIII.

And the odds Osweiler will EVER be a great QB drafted at #57 are not red-hot.

But, I can certainly understand why Elway doesn't actually "go all in for Manning."

One look at what happened to the Colts front office (mass firings) would be enough to convince any NFL executives that "sucking for Luck" isn't a good idea.

Even if it is the ONLY idea from a long-term perspective.

Even Shanahan's situation in D.C. isn't so strong that he can survive another bad season while RGIII learns to play QB. He's under tremendous pressure to "win now." If he doesn't, some other Coach will be teaching RGIII.

So, while it's not at all surprising, I still don't think it will work.

Ravage!!!
05-08-2012, 04:28 PM
Yeah. I defend the pick because I have absolutely nothing "against" it.. and certainly don't know how it will turn out. But my first impressions weren't "yippie" either. It was expected, so I wasn't really shocked. But I can see the logic in icking someone to learn from, and be the possible future of this franchise. You can pick apart any decision prior to results. But then, hindsight is always 20/20.

NightTerror218
05-08-2012, 04:58 PM
I love the Wolfe pick. Just saying. I love that we got a UT. He can add some pressure up front which will can stop QBs from stepping up easily. I have been waiting for a true UT for so long. I have been trying for a DT but never thought I would get a UT.

While I am not sure Wolfe will be a super star I think he is going to be very solid. His stock was rising and he was considered one of the safest DT prospects.

Cugel
05-08-2012, 05:09 PM
I love the Wolfe pick. Just saying. I love that we got a UT. He can add some pressure up front which will can stop QBs from stepping up easily. I have been waiting for a true UT for so long. I have been trying for a DT but never thought I would get a UT.

While I am not sure Wolfe will be a super star I think he is going to be very solid. His stock was rising and he was considered one of the safest DT prospects.

From Fox's comments they picked Wolfe over the other DT prospects because he was more "versatile." He can slide out to DE 5-tech and then move in to 3-tech UT.

He played some at DE in college and was effective and they want players who can move around on the DL and play at multiple positions and be effective.

In short, they projected Wolfe as a better fit for their defense. At this point, nobody can argue with it. We'll just have to wait and see if they were right.

At this point in 2007 I was happy with the selections of Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder because I assumed that Shanahan knew what he was doing. Unfortunately he didn't.

It's at least unclear whether EFX knew any better this season, but there's no reason to start criticizing at this point. If at the end of the season Wolfe has not contributed much then we can point fingers.

Ravage!!!
05-08-2012, 05:12 PM
Not true. DTs take time in the NFL. Wilfork wasn't very good the first two years of his NFL career.

NightTerror218
05-08-2012, 06:04 PM
From Fox's comments they picked Wolfe over the other DT prospects because he was more "versatile." He can slide out to DE 5-tech and then move in to 3-tech UT.

He played some at DE in college and was effective and they want players who can move around on the DL and play at multiple positions and be effective.

In short, they projected Wolfe as a better fit for their defense. At this point, nobody can argue with it. We'll just have to wait and see if they were right.

At this point in 2007 I was happy with the selections of Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder because I assumed that Shanahan knew what he was doing. Unfortunately he didn't.

It's at least unclear whether EFX knew any better this season, but there's no reason to start criticizing at this point. If at the end of the season Wolfe has not contributed much then we can point fingers.

Shanahan was good at drafting offense not defense. i was never really happy with Moss. Most players need more then a season to show what they can do. DL, WR, QB all need a couple years.

Cugel
05-09-2012, 01:23 PM
Not true. DTs take time in the NFL. Wilfork wasn't very good the first two years of his NFL career.

I didn't mean to suggest that if Wolfe isn't an immediate star then I'll rip the pick. I mean, if he's not contributing in the rotation.

Remember Tim Crowder never really was used that much and he was ineffective when he WAS used. It was obvious after his rookie year that he wasn't developing and that the coaches didn't have much confidence in him.

At that point he still had a year to develop and improve, but the signs weren't good.

After his second year they got rid of him.

As a 2nd round pick, Wolfe should be starting or playing a key backup role by the end of his rookie year, and preferably before that.

If he is then fine. If not then the indications are going to be he wasn't that great.

Haloti Ngata took 3 years to become an All-Pro, but he was contributing his rookie year, and starting, he just wasn't all that great yet. Similar standards can be usefully applied to Wolfe (except we won't expect him ever to develop into the NFLs' best DT).