PDA

View Full Version : Osweiler to buy thick notebook, jot down Manning's every move



iLands
04-29-2012, 05:11 PM
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/43468/mannings-affect-on-osweiler

BroncoNut
04-30-2012, 08:58 AM
well, I hope the organization at least helps out a bit with some of the expense.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 09:01 AM
Osweiler can absorb everything Manning says and does....doesnt mean it will translate into anything on the field.

Nomad
04-30-2012, 09:57 AM
Osweiler can absorb everything Manning says and does....doesnt mean it will translate into anything on the field.

Debbie Downer:lol:

Nomad
04-30-2012, 10:00 AM
well, I hope the organization at least helps out a bit with some of the expense.

Especially with the medical....he probably get carpal tunnel syndrome

BroncoNut
04-30-2012, 10:00 AM
Osweiler can absorb everything Manning says and does....doesnt mean it will translate into anything on the field.

wow. Brilliant

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:21 AM
wow. Brilliant

My point being...we could have filled a more pressing need with that pick

topscribe
04-30-2012, 10:39 AM
My point being...we could have filled a more pressing need with that pick
That was a pressing need, Coach. If you don't think so now, you will have
thought so a couple years from now. Excellent quarterbacks don't grow on
trees. When you run across one, you've got to pull the trigger. Can Osweiler
be an excellent quarterback?

Elway thinks so: “He’s a guy that in my mind has an extreme upside and has a
chance to be a great quarterback in this league for a long, long time”
(Retrieved 30 April from CBS 4 Denver (http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/30/osweiler-ready-to-get-to-work-with-manning/)).

If Elway thinks so, then so do I. Speaking for myself, he's forgotten more
about that kind of thing than I'll ever know . . .
.

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 10:41 AM
We filled our most pressing needs in this draft (DT, CB, RB, OL) and still came out with a potential QB of the future. I don't get all of the complaining. If Elway likes what he sees in a QB, far be it from me to say he's wrong. He's forgotten more about that position than anyone on this message board will ever know. I'm willing to give Oz a chance.

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 10:42 AM
If Elway thinks so, then so do I. Speaking for myself, he's forgotten more
about that kind of thing than I'll ever know . . .

You beat me to that line! :lol:

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 10:46 AM
We filled our most pressing needs in this draft (DT, CB, RB, OL) and still came out with a potential QB of the future. I don't get all of the complaining. If Elway likes what he sees in a QB, far be it from me to say he's wrong. He's forgotten more about that position than anyone on this message board will ever know. I'm willing to give Oz a chance.

I guess I fail to see that. At DT, we added another pass rusher...not a run stuffer. Added a 3rd down back. Added a "maybe" at G/C for depth. And added a CB with knee issues.

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either

topscribe
04-30-2012, 10:50 AM
I guess I fail to see that. At DT, we added another pass rusher...not a run stuffer. Added a 3rd down back. Added a "maybe" at G/C for depth. And added a CB with knee issues.

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either
You need to look into Wolfe a bit more closely. he had nine (9) sacks this last year . . . from the DT spot.

You also would do well to study Malik Jackson. Look at some of his game film. The guy is a wicked pass rusher.

Feel better now? :D

BroncoNut
04-30-2012, 10:50 AM
My point being...we could have filled a more pressing need with that pick

and such an outstanding point at that too :clap:

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 10:52 AM
I guess I fail to see that. At DT, we added another pass rusher...not a run stuffer. Added a 3rd down back. Added a "maybe" at G/C for depth. And added a CB with knee issues.

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either

Every player in the draft is a maybe. Unless you are one of the very top elite blue chip guys, there is no guarantee if you will be good or not. And even some of those blue-chippers bust. None of the players we drafted were drafted very much earlier than where many people had them.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:00 AM
You need to look into Wolfe a bit more closely. he had nine (9) sacks this last year . . . from the DT spot.

You also would do well to study Malik Jackson. Look at some of his game film. The guy is a wicked pass rusher.

Feel better now? :D

Maybe I'm crazy...but I recall mentioning that we added pass rushing, but no run stuffing. I guess i fail to see your point.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:00 AM
and such an outstanding point at that too :clap:

I'll wait for you to offer something credible to any of this

topscribe
04-30-2012, 11:13 AM
Maybe I'm crazy...but I recall mentioning that we added pass rushing, but no run stuffing. I guess i fail to see your point.
Okay, I misread your post. Run stuffing? Bannan's known for that. I assume
that's what the Broncos signed him for. Ty Warren has been good for that,
too. Come to find out, Mays was near the top of the league against the run,
which is why they re-signed him to the tune of $4 million a year, I assume.

Moreover, Wolfe is better against the run than what he has been given credit
for. So maybe they didn't especially feel the need to select a "run stuffer."

You mentioned a CB with "knee issues." Bolden was brought in for a physical,
and he passed it. Give EFX more credit, Coach. They're not going to waste a
draft choice on a gimp. And Blake was selected in the fifth round. You're
going to criticize them for that?

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:20 AM
Okay, I misread your post. Run stuffing? Bannan's known for that. I assume
that's what the Broncos signed him for. Ty Warren has been good for that,
too. Come to find out, Mays was near the top of the league against the run,
which is why they re-signed him to the tune of $4 million a year, I assume.

Moreover, Wolfe is better against the run than what he has been given credit
for. So maybe they didn't especially feel the need to select a "run stuffer."

You mentioned a CB with "knee issues." Bolden was brought in for a physical,
and he passed it. Give EFX more credit, Coach. They're not going to waste a
draft choice on a gimp. And Blake was selected in the fifth round. You're
going to criticize them for that?

And yet, the end of my post read...

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either


I'm not writing anyone off...but I'm not proclaiming greatness either

topscribe
04-30-2012, 11:34 AM
And yet, the end of my post read...

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either


I'm not writing anyone off...but I'm not proclaiming greatness either
Neither am I, Coach. Any draft is wait-and-see, of course.

But you'd better have a very good QB if you plan to hoist the Lombardi at
the end of the Big Game. As I mentioned, you'd better grab him at any time
he comes along. Elway believes Osweiler is that guy. Who am I to say I know
better than Elway?

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 11:38 AM
And yet, the end of my post read...

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either


I'm not writing anyone off...but I'm not proclaiming greatness either

Dude, we picked at 25. Not a single player on the board at that point is going to be guaranteed to be great. That is just ridiculous to expect.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 11:51 AM
Dude, we picked at 25. Not a single player on the board at that point is going to be guaranteed to be great. That is just ridiculous to expect.

However...there are a few people that seem to think this draft sucked and there are a few that seem to think we had an AMAZING draft. My point is made to those that are abundantly optimistic. That's all

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 12:08 PM
However...there are a few people that seem to think this draft sucked and there are a few that seem to think we had an AMAZING draft. My point is made to those that are abundantly optimistic. That's all

I honestly think it's ridiculous to evaluate a draft until at least 2-3 years later. There is no way of knowing how good any of these guys will be, but we do know that we drafted players to fill into our positions of need that are high-character, high-effort players. I don't really think you could ask for much more. It's not like any of our picks were crazy reaches or lazy knuckleheads.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 12:10 PM
I honestly think it's ridiculous to evaluate a draft until at least 2-3 years later. There is no way of knowing how good any of these guys will be, but we do know that we drafted players to fill into our positions of need that are high-character, high-effort players. I don't really think you could ask for much more. It's not like any of our picks were crazy reaches or lazy knuckleheads.

I agree. Except Malik Jackson. That guy will be a toal waste from day 1.












(just feeling a bit antagonistic)

NightTerror218
04-30-2012, 12:28 PM
My point being...we could have filled a more pressing need with that pick

And if Manning goes down this season and career is over, what do we do then? We now have a QB who is suppose to be the future, Manning is not 10-15 yrs, Osweiler could be.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 12:32 PM
And if Manning goes down this season and career is over, what do we do then? We now have a QB who is suppose to be the future, Manning is not 10-15 yrs, Osweiler could be.

If Manning goes down this year and his career is done, we wont win anyway. And then we'd be in a position to get a guy that is more ready than Osweiler.

Like I said...I understand the logic. Just not the timing

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 12:43 PM
If Manning goes down this year and his career is done, we wont win anyway. And then we'd be in a position to get a guy that is more ready than Osweiler.

Like I said...I understand the logic. Just not the timing

That's no guarantee. I don't see a Luck/RG3 type prospect in this draft. Barkley could be good but unless we picked first we may not get him. I think Landry Jones is highly overrated. Past that this really doesn't seem like the year to get a blue-chipper at QB.

NightTerror218
04-30-2012, 12:44 PM
If Manning goes down this year and his career is done, we wont win anyway. And then we'd be in a position to get a guy that is more ready than Osweiler.

Like I said...I understand the logic. Just not the timing

They expect the be in playoffs next season and miss out on the top QBs again. They really like Osweiler and think he has a high ceiling. They prob figure they have 2 years in Manning.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 12:49 PM
That's no guarantee. I don't see a Luck/RG3 type prospect in this draft. Barkley could be good but unless we picked first we may not get him. I think Landry Jones is highly overrated. Past that this really doesn't seem like the year to get a blue-chipper at QB.

Was RGIII considered a blue chip prior to the season? He certainly wasnt rated to be 1st round material...let alone the #2 pick. Just one example

We have no clue what will become in the next year. And it's not like we just draft a blue chip anyway, so what difference does it make? My thought process is yes...we always have to prepare for the future, but with Manning...we also have to take an immediate approach to the now.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 12:51 PM
point taken Coach...i really wish we'd taken Ta'amu in the 5th over Blake. I saw that as at least as big a need and felt Alameda was a late second to mid third type talent. Now if we hadn't traded up for Hill man we could have had Turbin, Blake and Ta'amu and I've have been very happy.

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 12:54 PM
My thought process is yes...we always have to prepare for the future, but with Manning...we also have to take an immediate approach to the now.

And I think that both were accomplished in this draft.

topscribe
04-30-2012, 12:56 PM
If Manning goes down this year and his career is done, we wont win anyway. And then we'd be in a position to get a guy that is more ready than Osweiler.

Like I said...I understand the logic. Just not the timing
I don't understand your logic. So if Manning doesn't go down and the Broncos
win championships, they pick near to the bottom of the order every year. So
the candidates such as Barkely are not even in their wildest dreams.

Whether Manning goes down or stays up, there is going to come a time when
the Broncos will need a top QB, and that is three or four years away at the
most. So what do we do? Should they be caught by surprise as they were
when Elway retired? Should we have to go through what we have for the last
twelve years?

I have to give kudos to EFX for their foresight. They filled holes and grabbed
a terrific candidate for future franchise at the same time. To me, what they
did this year was pretty shrewd, and I believe the future will bear that out . . .



We have no clue what will become in the next year.

Exactly. And that is why the Broncos felt they had to go for their future QB now . . .
.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:00 PM
I don't understand your logic. So if Manning doesn't go down and the Broncos
win championships, they pick near to the bottom of the order every year. So
the candidates such as Barkely are not even in their wildest dreams.

Whether Manning goes down or stays up, there is going to come a time when
the Broncos will need a top QB, and that is three or four years away at the
most. So what do we do? Should they be caught by surprise as they were
when Elway retired? Should we have to go through what we have for the last
twelve years?

I have to give kudos to EFX for their foresight. They filled holes and grabbed
a terrific candidate for future franchise at the same time. To me, what they
did this year was pretty shrewd, and I believe the future will bear that out . . .

If Manning goes down and we have to rely on Hanie...do you think we are still a playoff team? Or a top 10 draft pick team?

Right off the bat, you have Barkley, Jones, Wilson. Then depending on juniors, you also have Murray, Bray, Pachall, Thomas. All of them are going to be drafted before we'd have a shot? Not likely. The 2013 QB class is about as talented as any in recent years. No...not all of them will pan out. But at least the option is there a year later.

Once again...I'm not saying Osweiler wont turn out to be something amazing. I'm just saying we could have filled a more immediate need for THIS year

iLands
04-30-2012, 01:03 PM
If we fall short in the playoffs, you think the solution should have been to skip out on an impact player and cost the FQB a year of development?

topscribe
04-30-2012, 01:06 PM
If Manning goes down and we have to rely on Hanie...do you think we are still a playoff team? Or a top 10 draft pick team?

Right off the bat, you have Barkley, Jones, Wilson. Then depending on juniors, you also have Murray, Bray, Pachall, Thomas. All of them are going to be drafted before we'd have a shot? Not likely. The 2013 QB class is about as talented as any in recent years. No...not all of them will pan out. But at least the option is there a year later.

Once again...I'm not saying Osweiler wont turn out to be something amazing. I'm just saying we could have filled a more immediate need for THIS year
You ignored my entire post and came back with the "what if" . . . what if
Manning goes down. What if he does and the Broncos had drafted Osweiler?
What if he does and the Broncos hadn't drafted Osweiler but they have a
bigshot on the DL? Would the results be different?

But what if Manning doesn't go down and retires three years from now? Are
we going to go through another twelve years of Brister/Griese/Plummer/
Cutler/Orton/Tebow? You must not become so fixated on the present that
you find yourself naked in the future . . .

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:08 PM
If we fall short in the playoffs, you think the solution should have been to skip out on an impact player and cost the FQB a year of development?

Manning is in his first year with a new team, new staff, new supporting cast...all after recovering from multiple neck surgeries. In all reality...how much time is he really going to have to play big brother, mentor, coach to a rookie? If Osweiler wanted more learning experience, he should have stayed in school.

By drafting a "help us now" player at 57, we'd have additional help for Manning. If Manning goes down...none of it will matter. Not even the rookie QB.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:09 PM
You ignored my entire post and came back with the "what if" . . . what if
Manning goes down. What if he does and the Broncos had drafted Osweiler?
What if he does and the Broncos hadn't drafted Osweiler but they have a
bigshot on the DL? Would the results be different?

But what if Manning doesn't go down and retires three years from now? Are
we going to go through another twelve years of Brister/Griese/Plummer/
Cutler/Orton/Tebow? You must not become so fixated on the present that
you find yourself naked in the future . . .

I think I answered that when I stated the amount of talent that will be available at the position next year. Do you really see Osweiler learning THAT much this first year? I dont...but that's just me

topscribe
04-30-2012, 01:10 PM
I think I answered that when I stated the amount of talent that will be available at the position next year. Do you really see Osweiler learning THAT much this first year? I dont...but that's just me
All right, my friend. We're just going to have to agree to disagree, methinks.

It's been fun . . . 1404

Day1BroncoFan
04-30-2012, 01:13 PM
I hope he doesn't write all this down in his notebook.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:20 PM
Let me try it this way...

IF we draft a "play now" player at 57...it helps Manning and Denver achieve their current goal. Win now. If Manning stays healthy, then maybe that player helps achieve that goal. IF Manning goes down, then it's pretty irrelevant what that player or any player would accomplish, because we'll be stuck with Hanie running the ship. Osweiler will be irrelevant because he is nowhere near ready.

That being said...there is a ton of QB talent available in the next draft. Whether we win and have a low pick...or lose (if Manning goes down) and have a high pick...there will still be talent available that is at least on par with Osweiler.

The sum of it all...I dont think waiting a year to get an equal or potentially more talented QB would have been a bad idea while we filled a more pressing need immediately. That's all.

BroncoNut
04-30-2012, 01:26 PM
Let me try it this way...

IF we draft a "play now" player at 57...it helps Manning and Denver achieve their current goal. Win now. If Manning stays healthy, then maybe that player helps achieve that goal. IF Manning goes down, then it's pretty irrelevant what that player or any player would accomplish, because we'll be stuck with Hanie running the ship. Osweiler will be irrelevant because he is nowhere near ready.

That being said...there is a ton of QB talent available in the next draft. Whether we win and have a low pick...or lose (if Manning goes down) and have a high pick...there will still be talent available that is at least on par with Osweiler.

The sum of it all...I dont think waiting a year to get an equal or potentially more talented QB would have been a bad idea while we filled a more pressing need immediately. That's all.
OMG, 57 is way too old for a quarterback in today's league

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 01:36 PM
Let me try it this way...

IF we draft a "play now" player at 57...it helps Manning and Denver achieve their current goal. Win now. If Manning stays healthy, then maybe that player helps achieve that goal. IF Manning goes down, then it's pretty irrelevant what that player or any player would accomplish, because we'll be stuck with Hanie running the ship. Osweiler will be irrelevant because he is nowhere near ready.

That being said...there is a ton of QB talent available in the next draft. Whether we win and have a low pick...or lose (if Manning goes down) and have a high pick...there will still be talent available that is at least on par with Osweiler.

The sum of it all...I dont think waiting a year to get an equal or potentially more talented QB would have been a bad idea while we filled a more pressing need immediately. That's all.

By the same token, if Osweiler is someone whom Elway thinks will be a future FQB for the Broncos, 57 is a bargain to get that. We can all debate if he has that potential or not, but if Elway sees that potential in him, why not grab him when you have the chance?

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:42 PM
By the same token, if Osweiler is someone whom Elway thinks will be a future FQB for the Broncos, 57 is a bargain to get that. We can all debate if he has that potential or not, but if Elway sees that potential in him, why not grab him when you have the chance?

I am definitely a proponent for "take the guy you like as soon as you have a chance to get him". Unfortunately, I dont necessarily buy into this for future purposes. If the theory is this is the guy I see taking over for my aging safety in a year...fine. but if it's the guy that will take over for my aging QB in 3-4 years. maybe not so much. At least not with a 2nd round pick at a time when we need to filla lot of holes.

Again...just my thinking. Right or wrong...it is what it is. I hope Osweiler ends up being a stud for 15 years

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 01:46 PM
I am definitely a proponent for "take the guy you like as soon as you have a chance to get him". Unfortunately, I dont necessarily buy into this for future purposes. If the theory is this is the guy I see taking over for my aging safety in a year...fine. but if it's the guy that will take over for my aging QB in 3-4 years. maybe not so much. At least not with a 2nd round pick at a time when we need to filla lot of holes.

Again...just my thinking. Right or wrong...it is what it is. I hope Osweiler ends up being a stud for 15 years

I think QB is the one position you can take someone who won't be an immediate impact guy if you think he will be a stud for you in the future. It worked for the Packers and Rodgers when they probably had other needs in the first round that could have made them a more immediate contender. I certainly understand your point though.

Day1BroncoFan
04-30-2012, 01:47 PM
Just throwing this out there.

What if Manning stays healthy and we do well but no superbowl. We have no high draft picks. Now what do we do for a quarter back when manning retires? Not saying I like Os or not but just saying. Is there talent out there in the later rounds for us to pickup?

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:48 PM
I think QB is the one position you can take someone who won't be an immediate impact guy if you think he will be a stud for you in the future. I certainly understand your point though.

Typically I would agree. Like the Pack taking Rodgers when they did. However...they dint quite have the needs at the time that we have now. Not too many teams take their QB of the future in the top 2 rounds while having as many potential holes as we do.

Again...it may just be me that would have went about it differently.

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 01:52 PM
Just throwing this out there.

What if Manning stays healthy and we do well but no superbowl. We have no high draft picks. Now what do we do for a quarter back when manning retires? Not saying I like Os or not but just saying. Is there talent out there in the later rounds for us to pickup?

Hell even if we win three super bowls with Manning it would still suck to be in another 12 year rut like post-Elway where we became a revolving door for QBs.

Day1BroncoFan
04-30-2012, 01:55 PM
Hell even if we win three super bowls with Manning it would still suck to be in another 12 year rut like post-Elway where we became a revolving door for QBs.

I'm with you on that but a lot are saying we should have waited on the QB pick, I'm wondering what they think the result would be in that case.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:58 PM
Just throwing this out there.

What if Manning stays healthy and we do well but no superbowl. We have no high draft picks. Now what do we do for a quarter back when manning retires? Not saying I like Os or not but just saying. Is there talent out there in the later rounds for us to pickup?

That's where I was going with the idea of the depth that is likely available in next year's draft. 6 or 7 QB's with 1st-2nd round potential

BroncoWave
04-30-2012, 01:58 PM
I'm with you on that but a lot are saying we should have waited on the QB pick, I'm wondering what they think the result would be in that case.

Oh I agree. I think if you see a guy who you think will be your FQB and can get him at 57 you have to pull the trigger. I don't know enough about Oz to form an opinion of him but if Elway is on board who am I to argue?

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 01:59 PM
I'm with you on that but a lot are saying we should have waited on the QB pick, I'm wondering what they think the result would be in that case.

Got someone with late 2nd rounder this year...why not next year?

BroncoStud
04-30-2012, 02:14 PM
I'm not worried about Brock being able to pick up where Peyton Manning is going to leave off, I'm just hoping he is better than Caleb Hanie, and FAST, because right now, if Peyton Manning gets hurt, the Broncos face the realistic probability of having to start Caleb Hanie, who is one of the worst QBs I've ever seen.

Nomad
04-30-2012, 02:19 PM
I'm not worried about Brock being able to pick up where Peyton Manning is going to leave off, I'm just hoping he is better than Caleb Hanie, and FAST, because right now, if Peyton Manning gets hurt, the Broncos face the realistic probability of having to start Caleb Hanie, who is one of the worst QBs I've ever seen.

Perhaps Hanie will learn a thing or 2 from Manning and Elway and get better.

Day1BroncoFan
04-30-2012, 02:25 PM
I'm good with that. What picks do we have next year?

BroncoNut
04-30-2012, 03:15 PM
I think Hanie could be a sleeper

Nomad
04-30-2012, 03:27 PM
I think Hanie could be a sleeper

Hanie could be the hometown hero if Manning goes down.

Lancane
04-30-2012, 03:56 PM
I'm good with that. What picks do we have next year?

Actually, I believe that next year and for the first time since Post-Shanahan we have all our own draft picks in every round.

Lancane
04-30-2012, 04:15 PM
Got someone with late 2nd rounder this year...why not next year?

Because Coach, there is no guarantees - the Broncos likely had Brock with a late first round grade and I agree with a number of posters, I believe they would have overlooked the position had Osweiler not been available, despite their pre-draft visits with other quarterbacks in this draft. I knew early on that Brock was different because as I stated no draft prospect has more ties to an NFL organization then Brock, not to mention the effort the exuded on him, name another draft pick where the team sent a special contingent (which included all the decision makers) to fly out and have a pre-draft visit with a kid and a private workout? (just like they did with Manning). I understand the sentiment of waiting for less learning time, but Denver is unsure when Manning will play his last snap, heck he could be having a Pro-Bowl year and suddenly in November re-agitate his injury and then we'd be stuck with Hanie and then trying to trade up for a quarterback they feel could take over as the franchise quarterback in the next draft. Simply put there was a risk to not having a possible franchise quarterback in the wings, the mere fact that Osweiler entered the draft after only starting fifteen games hurt his draft stock, others believed he would have been a solid first had he stayed another year, some were arguing he could be a first this year and we drafted him with a late second round pick...(he literally could end up being a steal). From every aspect this pick makes way too much sense, and while it would have been nice to add a weapon to help for a Championship run, I've long agreed with building a team that is a continual contender instead of a one and done team built to win now.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 04:26 PM
I'll go on record now. Regardless of where we draft next year, there will be a QB with more talent and a higher grade than Osweiler that will be available.

NightTerror218
04-30-2012, 04:39 PM
I'll go on record now. Regardless of where we draft next year, there will be a QB with more talent and a higher grade than Osweiler that will be available.

with a higher ceiling? Osweiler has only started 1 season and is said to be high reward as a project.

CoachChaz
04-30-2012, 04:43 PM
with a higher ceiling? Osweiler has only started 1 season and is said to be high reward as a project.

And of course he is the only one to ever have that label and no one else will ever have it.

Sorry...but there will be better prospects

NightTerror218
04-30-2012, 04:57 PM
And of course he is the only one to ever have that label and no one else will ever have it.

Sorry...but there will be better prospects

You can assume. We will see in 360 days.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 05:02 PM
And of course he is the only one to ever have that label and no one else will ever have it.

Sorry...but there will be better prospects

He throws timing routes. Has a big arm is a leader and an above average athlete. I don't know about that at the spot we drafted Coach.

Lancane
04-30-2012, 05:14 PM
I'll go on record now. Regardless of where we draft next year, there will be a QB with more talent and a higher grade than Osweiler that will be available.

Usually I agree with you Coach and I believe that your one of the more level headed evaluators on here in regards to talent. One thing I am positive about myself is my ability to evaluate quarterbacks, strangely as a former safety I thought I would be better at that in regards to the safety position and defensive players in general, but I've always been better at grading quarterbacks...dunno, I guess I spent far too much time watching them year in and year out. Maybe it's because I spent far too much time with Banks at State. Who knows...because it sure in the hell doesn't make sense to me, but that is the way it is. And I'm not tooting my own horn either, but for some reason I can gauge and measure quarterbacks better then any other position on the field, with that said - I do see what Denver saw in the Osweiler, watching his games it's easy to devalue his throws because they look awkward because of his size, but from a level eye view the kid's accuracy is phenomenal and he does have a cannon, he actually may even have a stronger arm then Cutler, his mechanics look off because he is so lanky. But a lot of what I see in him, people saw in Flacco and if I was to compare him to any pro-quarterback, I would say his floor is about that of Joe Flacco or Carson Palmer at worst, his ceiling though is that of Philip Rivers or Matt Schaub, even if he steadies out in between he'd be comparable to Bernie Kosar or Drew Bledsoe. I seriously think this kid has the intangibles to be good, even elite at this level and to make a difference. Of course there will be those that would much rather prefer the next Matt Ryan or Aaron Rodgers, those quarterbacks that are near guarantees to succeed.

Rick
04-30-2012, 06:02 PM
Those that think we should not have drafted a QB as we have other needs need to remember we have a 36 year old QB...

If we don't take a guy now, then when?

The colts ignored the issue for years and what happened last year, they had the worst record in the NFL and now that they suck and have moved on from manning they draft their QB.

Should we wait until manning is done with us before drafting a guy? When exactly will that be? Does anyone know? This year, next year, year after? If you can't pin point the exact date then how can we pin point the exact date we should draft the replacement?

There is something to be said about putting as much talent on the field as possible to when a SB with manning but there is something to be said about not having a huge drop off with no starting QB when he leaves.

Jsteve01
04-30-2012, 06:14 PM
Usually I agree with you Coach and I believe that your one of the more level headed evaluators on here in regards to talent. One thing I am positive about myself is my ability to evaluate quarterbacks, strangely as a former safety I thought I would be better at that in regards to the safety position and defensive players in general, but I've always been better at grading quarterbacks...dunno, I guess I spent far too much time watching them year in and year out. Maybe it's because I spent far too much time with Banks at State. Who knows...because it sure in the hell doesn't make sense to me, but that is the way it is. And I'm not tooting my own horn either, but for some reason I can gauge and measure quarterbacks better then any other position on the field, with that said - I do see what Denver saw in the Osweiler, watching his games it's easy to devalue his throws because they look awkward because of his size, but from a level eye view the kid's accuracy is phenomenal and he does have a cannon, he actually may even have a stronger arm then Cutler, his mechanics look off because he is so lanky. But a lot of what I see in him, people saw in Flacco and if I was to compare him to any pro-quarterback, I would say his floor is about that of Joe Flacco or Carson Palmer at worst, his ceiling though is that of Philip Rivers or Matt Schaub, even if he steadies out in between he'd be comparable to Bernie Kosar or Drew Bledsoe. I seriously think this kid has the intangibles to be good, even elite at this level and to make a difference. Of course there will be those that would much rather prefer the next Matt Ryan or Aaron Rodgers, those quarterbacks that are near guarantees to succeed.

wait, wait wait...you stole my floor is Flacco line. damnit...just kidding I agree 100%. The sky is the limit. And I don't think any of us that understand how the NFL works expect Peyton to tutor him. What we do think is that just by virtue of watching the way Peyton prepares, studies and practices, he should learn what it takes to do it at the next level. The beautiful thing is that if that sticks, with Brock's athletic ability the sky really is the limit.

Broncfan1970
04-30-2012, 09:32 PM
We filled our most pressing needs in this draft (DT, CB, RB, OL) and still came out with a potential QB of the future. I don't get all of the complaining. If Elway likes what he sees in a QB, far be it from me to say he's wrong. He's forgotten more about that position than anyone on this message board will ever know. I'm willing to give Oz a chance.

I guess I fail to see that. At DT, we added another pass rusher...not a run stuffer. Added a 3rd down back. Added a "maybe" at G/C for depth. And added a CB with knee issues.

Potential is there for some decent things...greatness is doubtful. Not a bad draft...but not a great one either I have to disagree watch his highlights, quite a few stuffs on rbs behind line, not just sacks....

MOtorboat
04-30-2012, 09:39 PM
I have to disagree watch his highlights, quite a few stuffs on rbs behind line, not just sacks....

I don't think that's necessarily coach's contention. He certainly worked well as a penetrating UT, but he won't be able to penetrate that well, at least not at first. He's not a hold the point of attack and let your linebackers make tackles type of player, nor is he a guy who is going to demand, or take on double teams, especially in the run game.

I think there is some concern about his ability to stop the run, in terms of being able to hold the point of attack. What you find with a guy who is quick twitch and likes to penetrate is that NFL offensive lines are simply too good, and running backs fast enough to avoid them, unless they come through virtually unblocked. I think what you'll see early on in his career is teams may ole him on purpose on run plays. It also makes him susceptible to draws, which a lot of NFL teams use now.

He definitely has some areas he needs to improve upon if he is going to be a three-down defensive tackle.

Shazam!
04-30-2012, 10:59 PM
Manning's backups on Indy have been mediocre to trash.

Oz has the arm, size and athleticism to be a good QB. But he didnt play much in College so he is behind and has a ton of work ahead. He sits and watches Manning for a year or two will help him tremendously. If he can do what Rodgers did even half as well... we couldn't ask for more.

Like the potential. A lot of upside on a team that behind Manning was wafer thin. Plus he was only a 2nd.

RebelRocker
04-30-2012, 11:14 PM
I don't understand your logic. So if Manning doesn't go down and the Broncos
win championships, they pick near to the bottom of the order every year. So
the candidates such as Barkely are not even in their wildest dreams.

Whether Manning goes down or stays up, there is going to come a time when
the Broncos will need a top QB, and that is three or four years away at the
most. So what do we do? Should they be caught by surprise as they were
when Elway retired? Should we have to go through what we have for the last
twelve years?

I have to give kudos to EFX for their foresight. They filled holes and grabbed
a terrific candidate for future franchise at the same time. To me, what they
did this year was pretty shrewd, and I believe the future will bear that out . . .




Exactly. And that is why the Broncos felt they had to go for their future QB now . . .
.

I have been saying this same sentiment for MONTHS now. This was the year to grab a developmental guy for the future. We can't afford to go "all in" with an aging QB like Minnesota did a few years ago. They sold their soul for ONE good year and have been shitting the bed ever since. Favre crapped out on them and they panicked the following draft by REACHING for Christian Ponder. Now, they're stuck in a full on re-build in arguably the toughest division in the league with a QB they reached for and are stuck with AND now they may re-locate to another city in the near future. I'm not saying that will happen to Denver(The Broncos will never leave Denver), but this "ALL IN" approach people think we're taking is a bit short-sighted.

Do we want to win now? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean we can't avoid the foundation for future success. After seeing how teams have operated over the past few years, I'm fully convinced that Green Bay has the best foundation of any organization. From front office to coaches and players, they have FIGURED OUT how to be an elite team without jeopardizing the future of the team. THAT is how the Broncos will be modeled going into the future.

BeefStew25
04-30-2012, 11:15 PM
Oswieler seems odd to me. I can't finger it exactly.

Dzone
05-01-2012, 12:08 AM
I love the highlights of Oswieler. Of course he has some low lights as well from what I have read. But this kid can throw the ball on a rope. He has an excellent throwing motion and very quick release. I would imagine that is what EFX saw in this kid. I was surprised when I saw the films of him because I expected that at 6-7 he would have some funky windup mechanics, but he doesnt. No need to completely over haul his throwing mechanics. He was great on Grudens qb show. With the way the league is going toward a wide open throwing game, and defenses practically banned from defending, a guy with a rocket arm like Oz might end up lighting up the league. He could end up being everything Al Davis was hoping for in Jawalrus.

TXBRONC
05-01-2012, 06:33 AM
Osweiler can absorb everything Manning says and does....doesnt mean it will translate into anything on the field.

I think trying to find a quarterback who could eventually replace Manning long term was a need. If this team does as well as Elway thinks it will this upcoming season we wont be in any position to draft any quarterback that is going rise to top on next year's draft.

claymore
05-01-2012, 06:53 AM
Oswieler seems odd to me. I can't finger it exactly.

He looks like Edward from twilight.

BroncoNut
05-01-2012, 06:55 AM
I'm not too excited about this Osweiler fellow either

HORSEPOWER 56
05-01-2012, 06:59 AM
Here's the thing about Oz... he's not Manning's protege, he's Elway's. John courted this guy, worked him out, then drafted him to eventually be the guy when Peyton hangs them up. Peyton won't be responsible for trying to mentor or groom Oz (vet starters don't mentor their backups, vet backups mentor young, stud starters), that's John's job. Much of Brock's development behind Peyton will be "watch and learn" how a HOF QB operates from everything to running practice, to workouts, to game day. The rest will be Elway.

Seriously I think Elway, more than anyone, is chomping at the bit to develop Oz as his project. John sure as shit doesn't need to spend time mentoring Peyton. Oz isn't expected to start any time soon. Elway has his new, hand selected, protege to groom. I have a feeling Elway has a personal interest in Oz and is going to do everything possible, personally, not to let Brock fail and to ensure he's ready when the time comes. The Oz pick wasn't just about learning from Peyton, it was getting and developing a guy to be our future FQB. I think John is going to jump into Brock's development with both feet.

BroncoJoe
05-01-2012, 07:52 AM
Osweiler is good friends with Jack Elway.

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 08:04 AM
I respect everyon'e opinion. But I keep coming across the comments like "if we do well, we wont have a pick high enough to warrant a QB next year anyway". Any pick we end up with will be better than where Osweiler was drafted.

I guess it's a wait and see approach. I'll be curious to see if Os ever amounts to anything compared to who may be available at certain points next year.

BeefStew25
05-01-2012, 08:55 AM
I don't like my QB having tattoos.

Ravage!!!
05-01-2012, 10:48 AM
I don't like my QB having tattoos.

Hah, welcome to year 1990

Northman
05-01-2012, 10:51 AM
I don't like my QB having tattoos.

Indeed. Should only be for kickers.

claymore
05-01-2012, 12:20 PM
I respect everyon'e opinion. But I keep coming across the comments like "if we do well, we wont have a pick high enough to warrant a QB next year anyway". Any pick we end up with will be better than where Osweiler was drafted.

I guess it's a wait and see approach. I'll be curious to see if Os ever amounts to anything compared to who may be available at certain points next year.

Im with you, I think we could have waited. Even if we won the SB, had the 32 pick in the draft... We could still package all our picks for a better backup.

Im trying to stay positive in regards to Osweiler simply because there is nothing I can do about it, and... Hopefully he wont play for 3-4 years.

iLands
05-01-2012, 12:38 PM
If he actually buys notebooks and fills them just from time spent with Manning, this pick was worth it.

This is the only year that we could spend a second on a QB with Manning. Every year after this one, we'll be spending those early picks on impact players to address a need on why we didn't win the Super Bowl the previous year. We'll know what we need after the first round of the Manning experiment and we'll be spending picks on getting those players.

Furthermore, we get the most value out of time spent as well. I don't expect Manning to tutor Os. I do expect Osweiler to learn if he really wants to. He'll get to see how Manning installs his offense from the ground up in year one. He'll be in the film room with him. He'll see how he prepares and what is required to be successful in this league.

Painter wasn't a QBotF. Os is. I hope Elway works with him as he said he would with Tebow. He'll be able to tell Os what he should be focusing on. He is his guy. He is the first drafted QB of the EFX regime.

BroncoStud
05-01-2012, 12:56 PM
Like he might suffer from narcolepsy?

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 12:58 PM
If he actually buys notebooks and fills them just from time spent with Manning, this pick was worth it.

This is the only year that we could spend a second on a QB with Manning. Every year after this one, we'll be spending those early picks on impact players to address a need on why we didn't win the Super Bowl the previous year. We'll know what we need after the first round of the Manning experiment and we'll be spending picks on getting those players.

Furthermore, we get the most value out of time spent as well. I don't expect Manning to tutor Os. I do expect Osweiler to learn if he really wants to. He'll get to see how Manning installs his offense from the ground up in year one. He'll be in the film room with him. He'll see how he prepares and what is required to be successful in this league.

Painter wasn't a QBotF. Os is. I hope Elway works with him as he said he would with Tebow. He'll be able to tell Os what he should be focusing on. He is his guy. He is the first drafted QB of the EFX regime.

Says who?

SpringsBroncoFan
05-01-2012, 01:01 PM
I thought the players were all getting Ipads.... is there not enough memory/disk on the things to jot down notes??? :confused:

I suppose it's possible the things are locked down with security...

chazoe60
05-01-2012, 01:02 PM
Says who?

John Elway for one.

Ravage!!!
05-01-2012, 01:05 PM
I thought the players were all getting Ipads.... is there not enough memory/disk on the things to jot down notes??? :confused:

I suppose it's possible the things are locked down with security...

Ever tried to take notes on an ipad? Sucks. Paper and pen is much easier and faster....

iLands
05-01-2012, 01:07 PM
Says who?

The teams that selected them.

Painter was selected for the Colts in the deep sixth. Does that sound like a selection of a QBotF to you?

Osweiler was selected in the second and was the first QB drafted by the current regime. Does that sound like a selection of a QBotF to you?

SpringsBroncoFan
05-01-2012, 01:09 PM
Ever tried to take notes on an ipad? Sucks. Paper and pen is much easier and faster....

Nope... but I guess an extension cord would be a problem on the practice field when the battery dies! :lol:

CoachChaz
05-01-2012, 01:16 PM
The teams that selected them.

Painter was selected for the Colts in the deep sixth. Does that sound like a selection of a QBotF to you?

Osweiler was selected in the second and was the first QB drafted by the current regime. Does that sound like a selection of a QBotF to you?

Doesnt make them right though

iLands
05-01-2012, 01:30 PM
Doesnt make them right though

Sure it does.

Are you arguing they picked him because they did not want him to play QB in the future?

He was picked to be our QB in the future and in the future he will be our QB.

Npba900
05-02-2012, 07:40 PM
And if Manning goes down this season and career is over, what do we do then? We now have a QB who is suppose to be the future, Manning is not 10-15 yrs, Osweiler could be.

If Manning goes down the Broncos will simply draft higher than #25 in 2013 and perhaps draft in the top 5 or 10.

Npba900
05-02-2012, 07:43 PM
I don't like my QB having tattoos.

Well Brock could always get a Mike Tyson face Tattoo!!!

Npba900
05-02-2012, 07:49 PM
Oswieler seems odd to me. I can't finger it exactly.

Yeah, he kinda has a "Surfer Dude" Personality/Mentality.

nflfan
05-02-2012, 11:03 PM
Brock should cut his hair like Peyton, get a girl who looks like Ashley who's name is Ally, request 81 for his jersey number, dine a few tables away from Peyton in the same restaurant, drive the same model car, buy a house beside Peyton's.

Then when the time is right, Brock will replace Peyton and no one will ever know the difference, just like Las Vegas Elvis.

:D

hamrob
05-02-2012, 11:29 PM
I love this pick. Oswieler is 6'7" and atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe/Ryan Mallet with better pocket awareness and atheletism. Getting him was wise.

Look, I was hoping we grabbed him in the 3rd. Elway wanted him, and didn't want to chance it. I think he would have been there...but, who knows. I respect the pick.

Overall, I like the players we chose.....did we get value....not the best value, but that doesn't diminish the fact that we got some good players. I really like everyone of them and I'd be surpised if all of them don't make the roster....with the exception of Trevethan who will probably be sent to the practice squad.

Osweiler throws a little like Rivers, but with a couple years under Manning.....forget about it. This kid loves football, and he is a student of the game. Watch and learn Coach!

TXBRONC
05-03-2012, 06:46 AM
I respect everyon'e opinion. But I keep coming across the comments like "if we do well, we wont have a pick high enough to warrant a QB next year anyway". Any pick we end up with will be better than where Osweiler was drafted.

I guess it's a wait and see approach. I'll be curious to see if Os ever amounts to anything compared to who may be available at certain points next year.

Obviously EFX is calculating that they will be a playoff contender with Manning under center. I don't think we can assume that next year or the year after that there will be a quarterback that like as well as Osweiler.

TXBRONC
05-03-2012, 06:48 AM
I love this pick. Oswieler is 6'7" and atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe/Ryan Mallet with better pocket awareness and atheletism. Getting him was wise.

Look, I was hoping we grabbed him in the 3rd. Elway wanted him, and didn't want to chance it. I think he would have been there...but, who knows. I respect the pick.

Overall, I like the players we chose.....did we get value....not the best value, but that doesn't diminish the fact that we got some good players. I really like everyone of them and I'd be surpised if all of them don't make the roster....with the exception of Trevethan who will probably be sent to the practice squad.

Osweiler throws a little like Rivers, but with a couple years under Manning.....forget about it. This kid loves football, and he is a student of the game. Watch and learn Coach!

According to what I've heard recently Osweiler's stock had risen to the point that he was valued as a 2nd rounder.

CoachChaz
05-03-2012, 09:00 AM
Obviously EFX is calculating that they will be a playoff contender with Manning under center. I don't think we can assume that next year or the year after that there will be a quarterback that like as well as Osweiler.

Agreed. That's obviously where the disconnect is. Elway actually like Osweiler. My comments are based on the fact that I dont.

iLands
05-03-2012, 10:39 AM
No quarterback drafted in the future would be there to watch this offense installed and built from the ground up.

I think that was a key consideration of EFX.

jlarsiii
05-03-2012, 11:44 AM
I love this pick. Oswieler is 6'7" and atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe/Ryan Mallet with better pocket awareness and atheletism. Getting him was wise.

Look, I was hoping we grabbed him in the 3rd. Elway wanted him, and didn't want to chance it. I think he would have been there...but, who knows. I respect the pick.

Overall, I like the players we chose.....did we get value....not the best value, but that doesn't diminish the fact that we got some good players. I really like everyone of them and I'd be surpised if all of them don't make the roster....with the exception of Trevethan who will probably be sent to the practice squad.

Osweiler throws a little like Rivers, but with a couple years under Manning.....forget about it. This kid loves football, and he is a student of the game. Watch and learn Coach!

Agreed. The kid was athletic enough as a basketball player to get recruited by big programs including Michigan state among others (which is saying something for a kid from Montana) before verbally committing to Gonzaga as a sophomore before deciding to pursue football. I hope that translates well onto the football field...

bcbronc
05-03-2012, 12:18 PM
Agreed. The kid was athletic enough as a basketball player to get recruited by big programs including Michigan state among others (which is saying something for a kid from Montana) before verbally committing to Gonzaga as a sophomore before deciding to pursue football. I hope that translates well onto the football field...

cue the "he's no QB, but he could be a probowl TE" talk.

NightTerror218
05-03-2012, 02:14 PM
If Manning goes down the Broncos will simply draft higher than #25 in 2013 and perhaps draft in the top 5 or 10.

Not if he happens near end of season and we in playoffs but lose Manning. Or our defense carries us again to playoffs. They liked Brock so they drafted him!! They know who is coming into draft next season. If they really liked one of them they might have held off since 2 of them could have been in this draft but stayed in school.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 10:57 PM
Not if he happens near end of season and we in playoffs but lose Manning. Or our defense carries us again to playoffs. They liked Brock so they drafted him!! They know who is coming into draft next season. If they really liked one of them they might have held off since 2 of them could have been in this draft but stayed in school.

Well it is true that there probably isn't a QB in the upcoming drafts that is Jack Elway's best friend. So you do have a point.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 10:59 PM
Agreed. The kid was athletic enough as a basketball player to get recruited by big programs including Michigan state among others (which is saying something for a kid from Montana) before verbally committing to Gonzaga as a sophomore before deciding to pursue football. I hope that translates well onto the football field...

Despite the monumental blunder EFX made, I do like the kid. He seemed really nice on Gruden's QB camp compared to Tannehill and some of the others.

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:00 PM
Despite the monumental blunder EFX made, I do like the kid. He seemed really nice on Gruden's QB camp compared to Tannehill and some of the others.

"Monumental blunder."

They drafted Jamarcus Russell No. 1 overall?

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:02 PM
"Monumental blunder."

They drafted Jamarcus Russell No. 1 overall?

They did? How awful.

chazoe60
05-03-2012, 11:07 PM
Tell me who was in the board at 57 that was so good that passing him up was a monumental blunder?

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:09 PM
Tell me who was in the board at 57 that was so good that passing him up was a monumental blunder?

He just wants his binkie back.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:13 PM
Tell me who was in the board at 57 that was so good that passing him up was a monumental blunder?

You could have had Wolfe at 57. At 36 they could have drafted a bunch of impact players to help Peyton out. I liked Stephen Hill (6 foot 3, 4.3 40 speed). I think Peyton could have done wonders with a DT, Stephen Hill, Decker line up. Other liked Dougggg Martin (who they could have had if they didn't drop down) I think he's too slow but alot of people here think he is an impact player.

Osweiler's at the one position on the entire offense that cannot help out Peyton. So yeah I think it was a mistake because there were more pressing positions of need for Peyton.

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:19 PM
You could have had Wolfe at 57. At 36 they could have drafted a bunch of impact players to help Peyton out. I liked Stephen Hill (6 foot 3, 4.3 40 speed). I think Peyton could have done wonders with a DT, Stephen Hill, Decker line up. Other liked Dougggg Martin (who they could have had if they didn't drop down) I think he's too slow but alot of people here think he is an impact player.

Osweiler's at the one position on the entire offense that cannot help out Peyton. So yeah I think it was a mistake because there were more pressing positions of need for Peyton.

A.) it's likely Wolfe wouldn't have made it to 57, and B.) Can I borrow your crystal ball?

chazoe60
05-03-2012, 11:24 PM
Wolfe would not have been there at 57 IMHO. And Osweiler was for the long term health of the organization, thank God we have someone looking out for that.

Nomad
05-03-2012, 11:24 PM
Tell me who was in the board at 57 that was so good that passing him up was a monumental blunder?

I guess I was hoping for defense with the 1st 2 picks, at the least. Now I'm moving forward hoping it all works out and then Elway can walk into the middle of the field and flip off all the fans that questioned him and his drafting.:lol:

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:24 PM
A.) it's likely Wolfe wouldn't have made it to 57, and B.) Can I borrow your crystal ball?

Sorry. Cugel's borrowing it at the moment.

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:26 PM
Sorry. Cugel's borrowing it at the moment.

Oh, ok, so you're just full of shit?

Shocking.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:26 PM
I guess I was hoping for defense with the 1st 2 picks, at the least. Now I'm moving forward hoping it all works out and then Elway can walk into the middle of the field and flip off all the fans that questioned him and his drafting.:lol:

Yup. We can't go back in time. What's done is done even if it was a monumental blunder. Brockweiler seems like a good kid.

NorCalBronco7
05-03-2012, 11:26 PM
You could have had Wolfe at 57. At 36 they could have drafted a bunch of impact players to help Peyton out. I liked Stephen Hill (6 foot 3, 4.3 40 speed). I think Peyton could have done wonders with a DT, Stephen Hill, Decker line up. Other liked Dougggg Martin (who they could have had if they didn't drop down) I think he's too slow but alot of people here think he is an impact player.

Osweiler's at the one position on the entire offense that cannot help out Peyton. So yeah I think it was a mistake because there were more pressing positions of need for Peyton.

The offense had no pressings needs. The starters before the draft are the same after.

The Broncos only needed a DT that could come in and start. All other positions on offense/defense were not a NEED, so the 2nd round for the Broncos was very flexiable.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:27 PM
Oh, ok, so you're just full of shit?

Shocking.

I though you were. Well at least you got rid of that stupid smarmy Kyle Orton drinking avatar. I was sick of seeing that. Peyton's a huge upgrade.

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:29 PM
I though you were. Well at least you got rid of that stupid smarmy Kyle Orton drinking avatar. I was sick of seeing that. Peyton's a huge upgrade.

Interesting. I never used that as an avatar.

:whoknows:

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:31 PM
The offense had no pressings needs. The starters before the draft are the same after.

Most of the experts (who get paid, and study for hours and hours) thought the Broncos had the worst WR corps (with Decker being the worst #1 or #2 WR in the league). I think if they had Stephen Hill, DT and Decker as the starting 3 along with Stokley and Willis as the 4 & 5 then it would have been a huge upgrade. Do you disagree?

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:32 PM
Most of the experts (who get paid, and study for hours and hours) thought the Broncos had the worst WR corps (with Decker being the worst #1 or #2 WR in the league). I think if they had Stephen Hill, DT and Decker as the starting 3 along with Stokley and Willis as the 4 & 5 then it would have been a huge upgrade. Do you disagree?

Who was this, exactly?

Did they work for the Broncos?

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:34 PM
Who was this, exactly?

Did they work for the Broncos?

No, Broncos people would be biased.

Guys on NFL network and ESPN.

chazoe60
05-03-2012, 11:36 PM
Most of the experts (who get paid, and study for hours and hours) thought the Broncos had the worst WR corps (with Decker being the worst #1 or #2 WR in the league). I think if they had Stephen Hill, DT and Decker as the starting 3 along with Stokley and Willis as the 4 & 5 then it would have been a huge upgrade. Do you disagree?

Bullshit. Who are these experts you keep referring to? Our WR corp is fine.

MOtorboat
05-03-2012, 11:38 PM
No, Broncos people would be biased.

Guys on NFL network and ESPN.

Man, and I get accused of being a media shill?

You're really going to take Todd McShay and Mel Kiper more seriously than executives for the Broncos?

NorCalBronco7
05-03-2012, 11:39 PM
Most of the experts (who get paid, and study for hours and hours) thought the Broncos had the worst WR corps (with Decker being the worst #1 or #2 WR in the league). I think if they had Stephen Hill, DT and Decker as the starting 3 along with Stokley and Willis as the 4 & 5 then it would have been a huge upgrade. Do you disagree?

A lot of "experts" can suck my balls.

WR isnt a need, and still isnt a need. Upgrading and addresing needs are two different things. The point you fail to see is that after landing Wolfe, the Broncos were free to upgrade all position on offesne/defense.

TimHippo
05-03-2012, 11:50 PM
WR isnt a need, and still isnt a need. Upgrading and addresing needs are two different things. The point you fail to see is that after landing Wolfe, the Broncos were free to upgrade all position on offesne/defense.

I disagree. I think we kind of blew it in FA (besides getting Manning of course) but the rationalization was that we would get the impact players in the draft. Vincent Jackson would have been a great get in FA to go along with Manning.

The problem I see is that Decker is not a very good #1 possession WR. I think he can be a really good 3rd receiver. DT can be a very good #2. Willis & Stokely as #3 are also below average (Stokley primarily because of age).

I think if we had added one more Vincent Jackson or Stephen Hill, even though they aren't really possession guys, they would have been top #2 or #3 receivers in the league to offset Decker as the #1 possession. With Manning such a line up would be unstoppable.

NorCalBronco7
05-03-2012, 11:57 PM
I disagree. I think we kind of blew it in FA (besides getting Manning of course) but the rationalization was that we would get the impact players in the draft. Vincent Jackson would have been a great get in FA to go along with Manning.

The problem I see is that Decker is not a very good #1 possession WR. I think he can be a really good 3rd receiver. DT can be a very good #2. Willis & Stokely as #3 are also below average (Stokley primarily because of age).

I think if we had added one more Vincent Jackson or Stephen Hill, even though they aren't really possession guys, they would have been top #2 or #3 receivers in the league to offset Decker as the #1 possession. With Manning such a line up would be unstoppable.

Caldwell will start at slot, not Willis/Stokely.

Trash DT, Decker all you want. We know what they're capable of. There were NO NEEDS troll.

CoachChaz
05-04-2012, 08:35 AM
I think I woul agree that getting a veteran presence in the WR corps would have been nice and still probably would be. Stephen Hill would not have been the answer. He has skills, but he is raw and will be a bit of a project for a few years. That wouldnt have benefitted our offense right now.

Ravage!!!
05-04-2012, 10:25 AM
Vincent Jackson? Good god

CoachChaz
05-04-2012, 10:59 AM
Vincent Jackson? Good god

Even Wayne would have been nice. Someone with the ability to get separation, run a route and mentor the younger guys

Ravage!!!
05-04-2012, 11:18 AM
Even Wayne would have been nice. Someone with the ability to get separation, run a route and mentor the younger guys

I get what you are saying. Would a guy like Wayne have helped? Sure, he would help any WR group. But I don't think the WR corp on the Broncos is in bad shape. DT, Decker, Caldwell, as well as others from last year .. and the two TEs. I think there will still be veteran WRs available later.

I said "good god" to Jackson because of the money it would have taken to get Vincent when our WR corp isn't bad enough to spend the kind of money for Jackson.

Northman
05-04-2012, 11:23 AM
I think we will be fine at WR. Manning knows how to get those guys on the same page.

jlarsiii
05-04-2012, 11:38 AM
I think we will be fine at WR. Manning knows how to get those guys on the same page.

Agreed. Plus Manning has a track record of elevating the play of his WRs to make them look better then they actually are. Somehow this coming season our WR core with Manning at the helm is now one of the worst in the league!?!? I don't believe that for a second.

topscribe
05-04-2012, 11:51 AM
I think we will be fine at WR. Manning knows how to get those guys on the same page.
I don't know why some are so down on DT and Decker. They just needed first
to get healthy. Then they needed to accumulate some experience, which
came belatedly for them because of their injuries. But both are studs, and I
really believe before it's all over, the Broncos will be viewed as having one of
the best WR corps in the league . . .

Northman
05-04-2012, 11:58 AM
I don't know why some are so down on DT and Decker. They just needed first
to get healthy. Then they needed to accumulate some experience, which
came belatedly for them because of their injuries. But both are studs, and I
really believe before it's all over, the Broncos will be viewed as having one of
the best WR corps in the league . . .

Well, to some degree i can understand the whole "veteran" thing but at the same time i think we are really going to find out if they are bad or if Tebow just wasnt that good. Obviously, we all have our own views on that particular topic but with Manning we will find out right away who was more to blame last year for drops, route running, passing, etc. For now im going to stick with my view that the receiving wasnt the problem last year.

NightTerror218
05-04-2012, 12:05 PM
Well, to some degree i can understand the whole "veteran" thing but at the same time i think we are really going to find out if they are bad or if Tebow just wasnt that good. Obviously, we all have our own views on that particular topic but with Manning we will find out right away who was more to blame last year for drops, route running, passing, etc. For now im going to stick with my view that the receiving wasnt the problem last year.

I think Manning can make any WR look better. Like Decker said about Manning being mad at himself if ball hit decker in belly button rather then chest. Manning demands the most of himself but also his WR. Manning knows what the WR needs to do and will help coach/teach/demand the WRs do it correctly. But if there are drops this season it will be on the WRs, they will no have a QB excuse this year. I expect great things out of both of them. My view was that both WR/QB were the problem. I tandem of inexperience.

Northman
05-04-2012, 12:08 PM
I think Manning can make any WR look better. Like Decker said about Manning being mad at himself if ball hit decker in belly button rather then chest. Manning demands the most of himself but also his WR. Manning knows what the WR needs to do and will help coach/teach/demand the WRs do it correctly. But if there are drops this season it will be on the WRs, they will no have a QB excuse this year. I expect great things out of both of them. My view was that both WR/QB were the problem. I tandem of inexperience.

While i would agree with you to a degree there are still those who sit more on one side or another including myself. I think this year will be very telling for all involved.

topscribe
05-04-2012, 12:11 PM
Well, to some degree i can understand the whole "veteran" thing but at the same time i think we are really going to find out if they are bad or if Tebow just wasnt that good. Obviously, we all have our own views on that particular topic but with Manning we will find out right away who was more to blame last year for drops, route running, passing, etc. For now im going to stick with my view that the receiving wasnt the problem last year.
Well, I mentioned in another place that some QBs throw more catchable balls
than others and that the QB can be just as responsible for drops as can the
receivers, but I was laughed down at that point.

Of course, some of those laughing were Tebow lemmings and others have
never passed nor caught a football in a game, no doubt . . .

NightTerror218
05-04-2012, 12:11 PM
While i would agree with you to a degree there are still those who sit more on one side or another including myself. I think this year will be very telling for all involved.

I agree. With having the best of the best at QB the WRs will show what they need to work on and Manning will let them know. As for growth of our young WRs this is the best thing to happen to them. I think Manning will help their development more then a vet WR. Stokely is there now so he can help them out too.

NightTerror218
05-04-2012, 12:15 PM
Well, I mentioned in another place that some QBs throw more catchable balls
than others and that the QB can be just as responsible for drops as can the
receivers, but I was laughed down at that point.

Of course, some of those laughing were Tebow lemmings and others have
never passed nor caught a football in a game, no doubt . . .

But then I can ask what balls are considered more catchable? What about the passes into areas where only the WR can make the play on the ball but CB can not. Those are never "easy" balls they can be low/high or headed out of bounds. While some could be easy but depending on where the defender is. I understand if the WR is in the middle of a route that the QB can hit him right on the numbers and that is where the more catchable ball can come into play.

Ravage!!!
05-04-2012, 01:36 PM
But then I can ask what balls are considered more catchable? What about the passes into areas where only the WR can make the play on the ball but CB can not. Those are never "easy" balls they can be low/high or headed out of bounds. While some could be easy but depending on where the defender is. I understand if the WR is in the middle of a route that the QB can hit him right on the numbers and that is where the more catchable ball can come into play.

Lots of factors can make a ball more catchable. Placement on the body, height it reaches the player, inside/outside of lead shoulder, out in front, pace of the pass, timing of the pass, and the amount of spin can all contribute to how catchable a ball is in comparison to another.

NightTerror218
05-04-2012, 01:53 PM
Lots of factors can make a ball more catchable. Placement on the body, height it reaches the player, inside/outside of lead shoulder, out in front, pace of the pass, timing of the pass, and the amount of spin can all contribute to how catchable a ball is in comparison to another.

True, those go along with the type of throw the QB is trying to make. Which were what i mentioned.