PDA

View Full Version : Should The Broncos Trade For Philip Rivers?



Cugel
01-16-2017, 02:06 PM
There have been all kinds of trade rumors involving Denver trading for a veteran QB. Lots of discussion on talk radio. Not a lot of substantiation of rumors by any official source. It's probably not happening that Philip Rivers could come to Denver. But, would it be a good move for both teams? Probably yes.

No less a Charger Hall of Famer than LaDamian Tomlinson has called for Rivers to be traded:


LaDainian Tomlinson says the Chargers should trade Philip Rivers (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/10/6/13184730/chargers-philip-rivers-trade-talk). The Chargers are in rebuild mode and should trade Philip Rivers instead of ruin the rest of his career. Is that realistic?

It makes some sense on the surface of things. The Chargers are, once again, an absolute disaster, losing three games in excruciating fashion by blowing fourth-quarter leads. Rivers isn't part of the problem. He's completing almost 68 percent of his passes, 7.8 yards per attempt, has 1,110 yards, seven touchdowns and just one interception.

The Chargers signed Rivers to a four-year, $83 million extension this year, but the structure of the contract doesn't make it especially prohibitive for trading him. The cap hit doesn't top $22 million until the last year, and it'd be easy for a team to wiggle out of after 2018.

Then again, the Chargers really, really need as much fan support as they can get ... something that they don't have much of after losing so much lately, the Bosa holdout and that whole alienating fans by threatening relocation thing. If they could fire Mike McCoy and make the right kind of moves in the offseason, they might be competitive again sooner than you think. But that's admittedly a huge leap of faith for a team that hasn't done much of anything positive, on the field or off.

Rivers may just have to spend his last years in San Diego, putting up amazing numbers in obscurity.

Logic would dictate that the Chargers trade Rivers. Decades of being the Chargers dictates that they do nothing but suck for the rest of his career and THEN look for a QB.

The Case For Trading Rivers: (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/10/6/13184730/chargers-philip-rivers-trade-talk) Either a team is ready to win now or they are building for the future. The Chargers are perpetually building for the future of course. They are by far the worst team in a division filled with teams that are focused on winning a SB, not rebuilding. The defending SB champions, the Raiders, who are convinced only injury to Derek Carr prevented them from potentially hosting the AFC Championship game, & the Chiefs who won the division and had a first round bye.

In addition they are moving to a new market and worse, that market is LA where fans have LOTs of other things to do rather than pay big $ to come out to a Soccer stadium that holds 30,000 to watch the Chargers finish last again and again. Rivers is a top 10 QB, but he's as good as he's ever going to be right now, and the Chargers still can't win.

There's no "future upside potential" to Philip Rivers. And by the time the rest of the team could possibly be ready to compete for a SB (in a couple of years) he will be 39-40 years old and ready for retirement. And there's ZERO buzz, zero excitement to offer their fans.

BUT, what if they traded Philip Rivers to Denver for a 2nd round pick, plus Trevor Siemian. Then they use their #7 overall pick on a franchise QB like maybe Deshaun Watson of Clemson. Then they sell fans on coming out to watch their shiny new QB develop.

The cap economics of this are unarguable. Both the Seahawks and Broncos won SBs doing exactly this. The Seahawks were able to cement themselves as an elite team for 5 years because they were paying Russell Wilson less than $1 M a year for 3 seasons. This enabled them to use their cap $ to re sign Bobby Wagner, Kam Chancellor, Cliff Avril, Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, et al. The Legion of Boom is still largely intact which makes them a dangerous team.

The Broncos cut Peyton Manning's salary and now are paying Paxton & Trevor combined less than $2 Million. That gives them cap flexibility to re-sign Darien Stewart, CJ Anderson, TJ Ward, Aquib Talib, Chris Harris, and Von Miller, among others. The No-Fly Zone is intact for the foreseeable future, (outside of Demarcus Ware retiring).

If the Chargers went out and traded Rivers, drafted a QB like Watson to develop for the future, and used the $100 M they have under the cap to sign veteran FAs and draft some elite players, they could build for a long term future. The Raiders did precisely this: developing Derek Carr as their franchise QB and signing a bunch of high priced veteran FAs at key positions: particularly their OL where their OL are among the highest priced in the league. But, it obviously worked.

And just as obviously, if the Broncos acquired Philip Rivers to rejoin McCoy on offense, they would instantly become the team to beat in the AFC. Rebuild the OL, maybe add a DT or DE on defense and you're ready to go to some more SBs. Then when Rivers retires, they have a fully developed Paxton Lynch ready to step in. It's a no brainer from the Broncos point of view, but the Chargers will never trade Rivers within the division.

And they lack the courage to admit "we suck, we're a rebuilding team, so let's trade Rivers for some picks and rebuild with Deshaun Watson as our QB of the future." I don't see it happening, but I think it would be good for both teams.

Northman
01-16-2017, 02:09 PM
If Denver doesnt want to trade for Romo they wont trade for Rivers either. Denver has stated they are fine with what we have.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 02:18 PM
If Denver doesnt want to trade for Romo they wont trade for Rivers either. Denver has stated they are fine with what we have.

I don't think either team will explore a trade of Rivers, but it would make tremendous sense for the Broncos. They reunite McCoy and Rivers. Remember that McCoy revitalized Rivers' career in SD. He's now playing tremendous football. He's the best QB in the division - yes better than Derek Carr. And he doesn't have the injury history that Romo has. Rivers, with a really good team could possibly play for another 3 years or more. He has no real injury problems, unlike Manning when he came here and unlike Romo, who can't stay healthy behind the Dallas OL, and they're the best in football.

Name ONE AFC team, including the Patriots, that the Broncos would need fear if they had Philip Rivers? Even with a somewhat improved OL they would be formidable with this defense and a legitimate top 10 QB. On paper they would be a match for any team in the league, and frankly better than the Ravens, Bengals, Steelers, Colts or Chiefs - to name other (potential) top AFC contenders for 2017. They would still have a better defense than the Raiders although the Raiders offense would probably still be better with their superior OL. They would be back to what they were under Peyton Manning - a serious threat to win 12 or 13 games and force the Patriots to come to Denver for the AFC Championship game.

All in all, it would be worth a phone call to the Chargers to see if Rivers could be acquired.

It would make sense for the Chargers for the reasons I listed above, but because they are a lousy franchise I don't see them trading Rivers. I don't see them exciting the fans or giving them any hope.

As for Romo, I have no interest in Romo. He's got a bad back - and that is not going to get better, and he's proven that he's fragile and a fragile QB is not a good fit behind this endlessly rebuilding OL.

Jaded
01-16-2017, 02:21 PM
I hope they use the draft choice on the OL instead.

weazel
01-16-2017, 02:25 PM
I don't think McCoy "revitalized" Rivers' career, did he really need to be revitalized?

Jaded
01-16-2017, 02:30 PM
I don't think McCoy "revitalized" Rivers' career, did he really need to be revitalized?

He was trending down at the time.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 02:36 PM
I hope they use the draft choice on the OL instead.

Second round Jaded? Nobody is going to give a 1st round pick for a 37 year old QB. But, the draft is not strong in OL this year. In fact it's historically a very weak OL draft according to all the draft experts like Cecil Lammey.

It's not like the Broncos can go out and get a franchise LT like Ryan Clady with the 20th pick of the draft, let alone a 2nd round pick (#52). First of all there probably isn't an elite LT in this entire draft, and if there is the guy will go top 10 picks and the Broncos don't have such a pick. This is just not the year to rebuild the OL through the draft.

That leaves FA. Well, are the Broncos going to go out and spend something like $12 M to sign a top flight veteran FA LT? Teams do not let their franchise LT go. Ever if they're smart.

At BEST you're taking a guy like Russell Okung, who underperformed his elite draft status and played his way out of Seattle. Now he's due $11 M a year and he hasn't earned it. Yet, the Broncos probably try and re-negotiate and re-sign him because there's no better alternative out there. They might not even be able to upgrade from RT Stevenson, who was the WORST RT in football according to Football Outsiders.

There are LOTS of teams that desperately want to rebuild their OL and not a lot of players coming out of college capable of stepping into the NFL and being quality starters. The draft competition is fierce and this is a bad year. That leaves FA. So, lots of teams will be competing savagely and overpaying for what few FA OL are available.

Russell Okung might be one of the BEST OTs in the FA market this season! And the Broncos might just have to eat that ginormous salary because what alternative is there? Put Ty Sambrailo back at LT and hope for the best? Siemian was getting flattened because of the porous blocking. How is that going to improve with Sambrailo at LT? His shoulder injury has prevented him from strengthening his frame - what he needs to play at the NFL level.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 02:43 PM
I don't think McCoy "revitalized" Rivers' career, did he really need to be revitalized?

Absolutely, he was "trending down". Rivers career was reaching a crisis point. He had several really bad years and people were saying his career was effectively over - rather like what happened to Carson Palmer in Cincy. Then McCoy came to town and Rivers has been playing great, throwing for 33 TDs and 4,300 yards. Siemian by contrast is the 24th best QB. That's below replacement level. Of course it was his rookie season, but so far it hasn't been great. At all. And Lynch has been worse.

Again, both can and possibly will develop, but Rivers doesn't need to develop to become a top 5 QB. He's that right now.

weazel
01-16-2017, 02:43 PM
He was trending down at the time.


Absolutely, he was "trending down". Rivers career was reaching a crisis point. He had several really bad years and people were saying his career was effectively over - rather like what happened to Carson Palmer in Cincy. Then McCoy came to town and Rivers has been playing great, throwing for 33 TDs and 4,300 yards. Siemian by contrast is the 24th best QB. That's below replacement level. Of course it was his rookie season, but so far it hasn't been great. At all. And Lynch has been worse.

Again, both can and possibly will develop, but Rivers doesn't need to develop to become a top 5 QB. He's that right now.

yeah, so was Rodgers early this season. I also remember media types talking about Brady's impending retirement because of his diminished skills a couple years ago, then they won the Superbowl.

"Crisis point" Wow the hyperbole!
Quit listening to the media

Yeah, look how horrible he was.
10047

dogfish
01-16-2017, 02:44 PM
come on, this is silly! they aren't going to start their tenure in a new city by trading their best player to a division rival. . .

Joel
01-16-2017, 02:46 PM
No (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+old+is+Philip+Rivers%3F). $20M/yr is far too much to spend on an aging QB who'd be pulverized behind our pathetic line (I concede having said that before, but Rivers isn't the GoAT.)

aberdien
01-16-2017, 02:53 PM
I would like it but it ain't happening.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 02:54 PM
come on, this is silly! they aren't going to start their tenure in a new city by trading their best player to a division rival. . .

If I were the Chargers I wouldn't trade Rivers to the Broncos, but I WOULD look for a trade partner, preferably in the NFC. What's the point of keeping him? They are rebuilding, and with Rivers they are still not winning 8 games next year. What have they got to lose?

They need to give the fans hope for the future. And stockpiling picks and rebuilding with really GOOD young players is the only way to do that.

What they will do instead is finish last in the division the next 3 seasons, and then Rivers retires, and then they go out and get a new QB. They will probably finish last for the next 5 years. That's what stupid franchises do. They want to pretend they are close to competing in their division and Rivers gives them that cover. They lose a lot of close games and tell themselves "if only we added a couple of pieces we would win those close games and then we'd be in the playoffs and competing for a championship."

Only that's a delusion. They are 10 or 11 players short of a SB run, not 2 or 3. They are a rebuilding team.

There's no point in holding onto Rivers. In fact he hurts them. He wins several games a year they would probably lose - and that hurts their draft stock. The quickest way for them to become relevant in the NFL would be to lose 12 games next year, get a bunch of great players in this year and next year's draft, draft a franchise QB like Deshaun Watson and develop him. Then they have a good young team.

In short, they follow the same model as the Raiders did. I remember the Raiders TRIED to short-cut their development process - they got Carson Palmer remember? Then, after that failed, they drafted Carr in the 2nd round, went out and signed a couple of elite OL in FA (very expensive signings), and drafted a couple of really good players like Kalil Mack. Result? The Raiders went 12-4 and would have potentially gotten home field advantage throughout the playoffs if they didn't lose Carr to injury.

weazel
01-16-2017, 02:58 PM
If I were the Chargers I wouldn't trade Rivers to the Broncos, but I WOULD look for a trade partner, preferably in the NFC. What's the point of keeping him? They are rebuilding, and with Rivers they are still not winning 8 games next year. What have they got to lose?

They need to give the fans hope for the future. And stockpiling picks and rebuilding with really GOOD young players is the only way to do that.

What they will do instead is finish last in the division the next 3 seasons, and then Rivers retires, and then they go out and get a new QB. They will probably finish last for the next 5 years. That's what stupid franchises do. They want to pretend they are close to competing in their division and Rivers gives them that cover. They lose a lot of close games and tell themselves "if only we added a couple of pieces we would win those close games and then we'd be in the playoffs and competing for a championship."

Only that's a delusion. They are 10 or 11 players short of a SB run, not 2 or 3. They are a rebuilding team.

There's no point in holding onto Rivers. In fact he hurts them. He wins several games a year they would probably lose - and that hurts their draft stock.

I agree with you on this.

Traveler
01-16-2017, 03:00 PM
Tired of all the retreads and stopgap QB's. It would be nice to finally have our own"drafted QB" come up through our system and become our next great Franchise QB.

tripp
01-16-2017, 03:01 PM
I would trade for him, but wouldn't fork over a kings ransom. Like North said, I'm not too sure how willing the Chargers will be to trade within their division.. and if they did, I'd imagine they'd ask for quite a bit.

I'm all for the trade because of how our team is built, and we're built to win now. QB play has let us down this past season and the last, I'm not too sure how much better we will be next season with either TS or Lynch starting, certainly not SB contenders either way.

If the opportunity presented itself at the right price, I think it's a no brainer. We can argue all day it doesn't matter who we put in at QB because our O-line stinks.. we might have forgotten, but Peyton's O-line in Denver was exactly stellar either.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 03:05 PM
No (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+old+is+Philip+Rivers%3F). $20M/yr is far too much to spend on an aging QB who'd be pulverized behind our pathetic line (I concede having said that before, but Rivers isn't the GoAT.)

Rivers is 35 years old, which gives him another 4 years in the NFL if he was no healthier than Peyton. And he's a lot healthier than Peyton.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 03:08 PM
Tired of all the retreads and stopgap QB's. It would be nice to finally have our own"drafted QB" come up through our system and become our next great Franchise QB.

That would be ideal, but all too often what happens is that you develop that QB - and he turns out to be the next Ryan Tannehill, not the next Derek Carr.

Lynch might not turn out to be good, let alone the franchise QB Elway hopes. And as for Trevor, he's "exceeded expectations" for a 7th round QB. But, there's ZERO indication that he will ever be a top 10 QB in this league.

And without such a QB the Broncos are not going to win any more championships, even with this defense. Look what happened with Brock Osweiler?

Elway tried to pay Osweiler $16 M a year. The Texans are paying him $18 M, $37M guaranteed. Elway dodged a bullet. It's a lot easier to draft and develop a guy than to have that player turn out to be a top 10 QB. Sometimes it works (Dak Prescott, Russell Wilson), but much more often it doesn't.

If you have a chance to land a top 5 QB, you should take it. I agree that the Chargers probably won't consider it, but the Broncos should try at least.

Joel
01-16-2017, 03:09 PM
Rivers is 35 years old, which gives him another 4 years in the NFL if he was no healthier than Peyton. And he's a lot healthier than Peyton.
With the notable exception of his broken neck in 2011, Manning was a very healthy QB his whole career, because he had the protection (and the quick reads/release) to annually keep his sack total <20—until he came to Denver, and within two years was hobbled, limping and limited by midseason. Rivers would fare no better, nor even as well, because, good as he is, he'll never be the pocket passer Manning was.

I felt confident Kubiak would develop Lynch and/or Siemian into a legit franchise QB because doing that for QBs and RBs is the former QB and RB coachs thing, but now we're probably in a bad way: We still have NOTHING but green QBs on the roster, our new HC is a defensive secondary coach, and our returning OC has never developed ANY QB, only played (however well) to whatever strengths his current QB already had. It is what it is.

Hawgdriver
01-16-2017, 03:14 PM
Siemian by contrast is the 24th best QB. That's below replacement level.

Can you explain how replacement level works? And how you arrive at 24th best QB?

Cugel
01-16-2017, 03:16 PM
With the notable exception of his broken neck in 2011, Manning was a very healthy QB his whole career, because he had the protection (and the quick reads/release) to annually keep his sack total <20—until he came to Denver, and within two years was hobbled, limping and limited by midseason. Rivers would fare no better, nor even as well, because, good as he is, he'll never be the pocket passer Manning was.

I felt confident Kubiak would develop Lynch and/or Siemian into a legit franchise QB because doing that for QBs and RBs is the former QB and RB coachs thing, but now we're probably in a bad way: We still have NOTHING but green QBs on the roster, our new HC is a defensive secondary coach, and our returning OC has never developed ANY QB, only played (however well) to whatever strengths his current QB already had. It is what it is.

Or Trevor Siemian will get pounded into the dust by mid-season, and Lynch still wouldn't be ready. And the Broncos wind up just like the Texans did this year - the defense plays lights out in the playoff, but because of garbage play by their QB they just waste that defensive performance. The Texans defense outplayed the Patriots, but Osweiler and their offense let the Patriots win by default.

How long can Denver wait for Lynch to develop before the defense starts to fall apart? Wouldn't having a top 5 QB be better? They'd instantly be a threat to win the SB again.

Rick
01-16-2017, 03:18 PM
Unless for multiple picks I see 0 value in SD moving on from Rivers unless he becomes a locker room issue OR they find they have drafted the QB of the future and are ready to go with him or they just really want the cap space.

Otherwise, there really is no point in trading a top 10 QB for some dude you draft in the 2nd round who "may" produce.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 03:27 PM
Can you explain how replacement level works? And how you arrive at 24th best QB?

QBs fall into "franchise QBs" or "developmental QBs" or guys their team is looking to upgrade. Ten or 12 teams have a legitimate chance of winning SBs because they have that franchise QB. The rest either have "developmental" guys - QBs they HOPE will develop into an elite QB, or a PLACE-HOLDER QB, who is just holding down the job until they can find someone better in the draft or FA.

Between 5-10 QBs are "developmental" QBs. Until they prove they suck the team is building around them. Ryan Tannehill is a perfect example of that. Derek Carr or Russell Wilson are the success stories.

Siemian is the 24th best QB in the NFL on the NFL.com chart of QBs. That's below "replacement value" because if your QB is 24th best in the league of 32 teams that's worse than mediocre.

Of course he was a rookie starter this year and they are hoping he improves. But, how much can you expect him to improve? He's a 7th round pick nobody thought would get as far as he has. That makes for a nice story. But, it doesn't make him an elite QB. It means he's probably the next Kyle Orton.

Of course, Lynch may be no better. But, at least coming out of college a lot of scouts thought he had the potential to become an elite QB. So, it's something that could happen. Why does Elway seem to favor Lynch over Siemian?

Fans often think it's because Elway "invested" a draft pick in Lynch. But, Elway just wants to win championships. He has over $150 M and doesn't need to work at all, let alone this hard. If he thought Siemian could become a top 10 QB he wouldn't care about Lynch's development. It's because he looks at Siemian and says "meh" that he's so keen on seeing what Lynch can become.

dogfish
01-16-2017, 04:39 PM
guys, i think we should trade for andrew luck instead. . .

Joel
01-16-2017, 04:43 PM
guys, i think we should trade for andrew luck instead. . .
At least we wouldn't need to replace HIM in 2-3 seasons (plus he's certainly used to playing with garbage protection and nonexistent run support.)

UnderArmour
01-16-2017, 04:50 PM
Giving up a first round pick for Philip Rivers would be worth it, because it would instantly put this team right back into Super Bowl contention. Rivers has another 3 elite seasons left in him. I do not see the Chargers ever trading him to us though, when other teams would be happy to pay a similar price (Chicago). Given the circumstances of their move, a fire sale might be a really good idea for Spanos to go ahead and do and start over from scratch. I doubt any veteran player on the roster is happy about the move or playing in front of fans that aren't theirs.

weazel
01-16-2017, 04:54 PM
I'm thinking Elway should start and we should pick up Aaron Rodgers for 2nd string and Tom Brady for 3rd. I'm thinking it would take a 2nd and two 3rd round picks to make this happen! Of course this is only if we can't find Cleo Lemon.

Northman
01-16-2017, 04:56 PM
Im just thinking since everyone likes QB's who throw a lot of interceptions why not go and get Cutler back. hehehehehehehehehehehehe

Nomad
01-16-2017, 05:07 PM
Im just thinking since everyone likes QB's who throw a lot of interceptions why not go and get Cutler back. hehehehehehehehehehehehe

MO once said he'd take Cutler back over Siemian and Lynch. :shocked: :lol:

UnderArmour
01-16-2017, 05:15 PM
MO once said he'd take Cutler back over Siemian and Lynch. :shocked: :lol:

I mean, he's not wrong. Fans forget, Cutler once almost died to finish a season for us (before they discovered his diabetes). Guy is tough as nails, but media will never like him or recognize him for it. Cutler has won games for his team that they had no business winning, solely on his arm (yes, he has lost them too). Jury is out on Lynch, and I hope he develops, but there is no question Cutler is a better option than either one as of right now.

Northman
01-16-2017, 05:42 PM
I mean, he's not wrong. Fans forget, Cutler once almost died to finish a season for us (before they discovered his diabetes). Guy is tough as nails, but media will never like him or recognize him for it. Cutler has won games for his team that they had no business winning, solely on his arm (yes, he has lost them too). Jury is out on Lynch, and I hope he develops, but there is no question Cutler is a better option than either one as of right now.

He has also lost games for them. But i get your meaning. lol

Cugel
01-16-2017, 06:32 PM
Unless for multiple picks I see 0 value in SD moving on from Rivers unless he becomes a locker room issue OR they find they have drafted the QB of the future and are ready to go with him or they just really want the cap space.

Otherwise, there really is no point in trading a top 10 QB for some dude you draft in the 2nd round who "may" produce.

The problem for the Chargers is that they are locked into 4th place in a 4 team division, with little chance of moving up any time soon. The Broncos are still the outgoing SB champions, while the Chiefs and Raiders both won 12 games last year.

Meanwhile, they just left town and are moving to LA where they will be an afterthought for the next 5 years. They won't have the fan base of the LA Clippers.

Well, what can excite the fan base?

If you're not built to win now, the only thing that can lure fans is the promise of future success.

Well, does Philip Rivers promise ANY hope of future success? No. Not at all. He is what he is.

They are not going to ever get any better with Philip Rivers. They need to re-build from scratch. They are moving to a new town, what better time to get a future franchise QB in the draft like Deshaun Watson.

Then they spend the rest of their payroll on FAs, trade Rivers and stockpile draft picks. If they draft well, they become the Raiders. That's the path the Raiders took to catch up and overtake the Broncos.

Cugel
01-16-2017, 06:36 PM
At least we wouldn't need to replace HIM in 2-3 seasons (plus he's certainly used to playing with garbage protection and nonexistent run support.)

True, but a Hall of Fame member of the Colts, like say Peyton Manning, didn't call for trading Andrew Luck, so it's not a story. Ladamian Tomlinson did call publicly for trading Philip Rivers, so it IS a story.

The Colts aren't as bad as the Chargers either and Luck is a lot younger.

nevcraw
01-16-2017, 08:40 PM
I mean, he's not wrong. Fans forget, Cutler once almost died to finish a season for us (before they discovered his diabetes). Guy is tough as nails, but media will never like him or recognize him for it. Cutler has won games for his team that they had no business winning, solely on his arm (yes, he has lost them too). Jury is out on Lynch, and I hope he develops, but there is no question Cutler is a better option than either one as of right now.
cutler would have had twice as many Int's then did Trevor this season in this offense. he's had maybe a couple ok seasons and so many bad to mediocre. he's a jerk / locker room pariah and ready to play out his days as a back up.

Jaded
01-16-2017, 08:57 PM
No (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+old+is+Philip+Rivers%3F). $20M/yr is far too much to spend on an aging QB who'd be pulverized behind our pathetic line (I concede having said that before, but Rivers isn't the GoAT.)

Sold!

The last time you said this turned out to be one of the best decisions the Broncos ever made.

Jaded
01-16-2017, 08:59 PM
MO once said he'd take Cutler back over Siemian and Lynch. :shocked: :lol:

I'm sorry...what?

Um...what?

What?

slim
01-16-2017, 09:00 PM
I mean, he's not wrong. Fans forget, Cutler once almost died to finish a season for us (before they discovered his diabetes). Guy is tough as nails, but media will never like him or recognize him for it. Cutler has won games for his team that they had no business winning, solely on his arm (yes, he has lost them too). Jury is out on Lynch, and I hope he develops, but there is no question Cutler is a better option than either one as of right now.

No. He is wrong.

UnderArmour
01-16-2017, 09:59 PM
cutler would have had twice as many Int's then did Trevor this season in this offense. he's had maybe a couple ok seasons and so many bad to mediocre. he's a jerk / locker room pariah and ready to play out his days as a back up.

lol. He's not. Guy did nothing but sacrifice for the Denver Broncos while he was here, and I saw -nothing- to suggest otherwise. I have never seen Cutler give up in a game or mail it in at the end of a season. Trevor was serviceable last year, but he is never going to have even half the career Cutler has had. Cutler's problem has always been he tries to do too much and force things that aren't there, not that he doesn't try or doesn't have the talent.

King87
01-16-2017, 10:28 PM
Jay Cutler on this team would be a huge improvement.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-16-2017, 10:51 PM
Jay Cutler on this team would be a huge improvement.

Shots fired! :laugh:

dogfish
01-16-2017, 10:54 PM
Jay Cutler on this team would be a huge improvement.

it would be worth it, just to watch MO's head explode in slow-motion every week. . .

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-16-2017, 11:00 PM
I'd love to have Rivers

MOtorboat
01-16-2017, 11:36 PM
lol. He's not. Guy did nothing but sacrifice for the Denver Broncos while he was here, and I saw -nothing- to suggest otherwise. I have never seen Cutler give up in a game or mail it in at the end of a season. Trevor was serviceable last year, but he is never going to have even half the career Cutler has had. Cutler's problem has always been he tries to do too much and force things that aren't there, not that he doesn't try or doesn't have the talent.

Lol, Jay Cutler certainly wasn't some altruistic team-saving hero. He was a standoffish, arrogant ***** with a lot of talent who didn't listen to anyone.

He's still better than Siemian, but let's not go overboard.

ShaneFalco
01-17-2017, 12:06 AM
if they had stayed in SD i could see this.

But they want Rivers for "LA", he will be somewhat of a sell to the fans there

chazoe60
01-17-2017, 12:25 AM
Trade for Rivers? Yes.

chazoe60
01-17-2017, 12:27 AM
if they had stayed in SD i could see this.

But they want Rivers for "LA", he will be somewhat of a sell to the fans there

Yeah, nothing will light a fire in the fandom of Las Angelinos like a devout Christian with 8 kids who refuses to cuss.

Joel
01-17-2017, 02:59 AM
The bottom line is that we need a long term franchise QB (and the line to both protect him and provide enough run support he doesn't live in 3rd and long.)

Pointing to Manning winning a lone championship with one of the all time great Ds completely ignores the fact that what made it noteworthy was the fact he's the ONLY SB champ to win another with a new team, not to mention the fact that the next SB Rivers wins will be his first. I mean, he's a great QB, but no Manning, Montana, Favre or Warner, and all four of those HoFers together managed to do it all of ONCE.

Likewise, I couldn't care less what LaDainian Tomlinsom has to say about NFL roster management: The difference between his comments and Manning seeking a new team is that 1) no one spent the last decade of Tomlinsons career talking about how his cerebral tortuous style would make him a great coach some day and 2) Rivers didn't miss all of last season having FOUR surgeries on his SPINE. His comments aren't a "story," just a headline that generates lots of attention (i.e. money.)

NONE of that tells us who's going to be guiding Denvers offense for the next decade, but I promise it won't be a guy who turned 35 last month.

ShaneFalco
01-17-2017, 03:55 AM
Yeah, nothing will light a fire in the fandom of Las Angelinos like a devout Christian with 8 kids who refuses to cuss.

i dont even know who the chargers backup QB is currently.

UnderArmour
01-17-2017, 06:39 AM
Lol, Jay Cutler certainly wasn't some altruistic team-saving hero. He was a standoffish, arrogant ***** with a lot of talent who didn't listen to anyone.

He's still better than Siemian, but let's not go overboard.

Uncoachable and hard to manage, definitely. Bad teammate and quitter, definitely not. Cutler too often gets attacked for the wrong things when his issue is as you said, his arrogance and open defiance of offensive coaches at times, just doing whatever the hell he wanted to.

Rick
01-17-2017, 08:08 AM
I still see no reason for SD to move him anywhere.

They don't have the guy to replace him yet and they won't get the ammunition from trading him.

To have an elite team it generally starts with an elite QB. They have one.

They have a young promising RB and just hired a coach who's specialty is the run game.

They have a young stud on defense and a high pick to get another.

They have the building blocks.

In today's day of FA, if you have the building blocks you will be attractive to FAs, they could potentially be competitive again as early as this year.

The NFL is one of those sports where the shit teams can be contenders in a year or 2 and the contenders can be average to bad in a year or 2, crazy things happen.

TXBRONC
01-17-2017, 09:28 AM
Like Romo, Rivers is not Peyton Manning. He might have more left in the tank than Romo but I don't think trading for him would be a good idea.

Cugel
01-17-2017, 12:57 PM
lol. He's not. Guy did nothing but sacrifice for the Denver Broncos while he was here, and I saw -nothing- to suggest otherwise. I have never seen Cutler give up in a game or mail it in at the end of a season. Trevor was serviceable last year, but he is never going to have even half the career Cutler has had. Cutler's problem has always been he tries to do too much and force things that aren't there, not that he doesn't try or doesn't have the talent.

Cutler's problem is that he has an attitude. He doesn't get along with his teammates. He's petulant and churlish. He alienates the fans wherever he goes. In short, he's a rather large jerk. He has all the physical talent in the world. He just has a personality defect. And after 10 years in the NFL he is what he is. The brought in Marc Trestman to act as "QB whisperer coach" and bring Cutler's talent to the fore, and he failed utterly and got fired in short order. Now they are looking for a new QB in Chicago and Marc Trestman was last seen coaching the Montreal Allouettes.

Cugel
01-17-2017, 01:05 PM
I still see no reason for SD to move him anywhere.

They don't have the guy to replace him yet and they won't get the ammunition from trading him.

To have an elite team it generally starts with an elite QB. They have one.

They have a young promising RB and just hired a coach who's specialty is the run game.

They have a young stud on defense and a high pick to get another.

They have the building blocks.

In today's day of FA, if you have the building blocks you will be attractive to FAs, they could potentially be competitive again as early as this year.

The NFL is one of those sports where the shit teams can be contenders in a year or 2 and the contenders can be average to bad in a year or 2, crazy things happen.

They think like you do, which is why they are going to sit comfortably in last place and not make any moves for the next several years. As for the Chargers becoming competitive for a SB in 2 or 3 years - not unless they totally remake the culture inside that organization.

And their team is going to be competitive and come close to winning a lot of games they will inevitably lose. Whoopie.

Meanwhile, they are an afterthought in LA, where most people will remain ignorant that there even is another football team in town.

What they would be selling to their fans is HOPE and CHANGE. Because keeping Rivers and still losing 9 or 10 games a year for the next 3 or 4 years is not a great plan. Getting rid of him and drafting a QB might cause them to lose more games in the short-term, but would give them a chance to have a franchise QB in place when they are ready to win, instead of a 38 or 39 year old guy who's ready to retire, leaving them the task of rebuilding for ANOTHER 3 or 4 years.

Make all the changes at once. Sometimes you have to get worse in order to get better in the NFL. Rivers locks them into winning several games a year they would otherwise lose, but that just hurts their draft stock. They will NEVER win the division with Philip Rivers. They need to start over.

weazel
01-17-2017, 01:06 PM
Cutler's problem is that he has an attitude. He doesn't get along with his teammates. He's petulant and churlish. He alienates the fans wherever he goes. In short, he's a rather large jerk. He has all the physical talent in the world. He just has a personality defect. And after 10 years in the NFL he is what he is. The brought in Marc Trestman to act as "QB whisperer coach" and bring Cutler's talent to the fore, and he failed utterly and got fired in short order. Now they are looking for a new QB in Chicago and Marc Trestman was last seen coaching the Montreal Allouettes.

Who said he doesn't get along with teammates? What attitude? Listen I'm not a Cutler fan but this is just bullshit. His largest failing is going rogue and in turn, throwing a lot of interceptions, how does that make him a "large jerk", and "petulant and churlish"

No... Trestman was last seen coaching for the Bears, he coached Montreal before that gig. He has had offers to coach elsewhere and has chosen to take time off and spend with his family.

NightTerror218
01-17-2017, 01:08 PM
Elway has 1 st round pick and a better than expected siemian. I think he is set. Obviously he saw more problems then just QB play. So why spend the money there and fix the OL and DL.

Traveler
01-17-2017, 01:17 PM
Romo or Rivers are not coming here IMO. Guess we need something to talk about until free agency starts. Not sure I can take much more of this though.

Cugel
01-17-2017, 01:17 PM
Elway has 1 st round pick and a better than expected siemian. I think he is set. Obviously he saw more problems then just QB play. So why spend the money there and fix the OL and DL.

The obvious answer is that Philip Rivers is a top 5 QB in the NFL, and if the Broncos had him they would instantly be SB contenders, whereas neither Trevor nor Paxton look like they will ever be elite QBs in this league, which will probably doom Denver to mediocrity for several years while the defense declines.

That is not inevitable. Lynch COULD suddenly grasp the reins and prove he's the next Russell Wilson. But, you notice that really great QBs normally don't hesitate to seize the starting job when they get their chance. They get their chance and never look back. And the guy who was supposed to be the starter, gets "Wally Pip'd" as in Wally Pip takes the day off and allows Lou Gehrig to start.

Example: Chris Harris. He was undrafted, 10th on the depth chart, and the defensive backs coach did not even know his name. He simply made plays every time he was on the field and forced them to keep him on the 53 man roster. Then he was on special teams, and he kept making plays, so they used him in nickel. He kept making plays and knowing his position, so he forced his way into the starting lineup. Then he got a big contract and is now one of the top CBs in the League.

Russell Wilson and Dak Prescott are only the most obvious examples of this. And the guys they beat out were clearly more experience and better QBs than Trevor Siemian.

If you have a guy who is going to be a top NFL QB, it usually is obvious within the first year. And it's not at all obvious in Denver's case that either QB will ever be better than Kyle Orton.

Guys like Prescott, Russell Wilson, Chris Harris, or Rod Smith were late round or undrafted afterthoughts, never expected to do anything, but they forced their way into the lineup. In short, the OPPOSITE Of Paxton Lynch, Elway's golden boy who is being given every possible chance to succeed and they are even bringing in Bill Musgrave, who was formerly the Raiders' OC to be the QBs coach and try and coach him up, like an anxious parent who hires a tutor to get his underachieving son into college.

I don't count them out, but it's far from a sure thing that either will ever be good enough to lead Denver anywhere near the SB. And Philip Rivers can.

I doubt the Chargers will trade Rivers, and if they do, probably not to Denver. But, Denver would probably offer more than other teams. They SHOULD trade Rivers, even if they don't dare.

BroncoJoe
01-17-2017, 02:06 PM
Romo or Rivers are not coming here IMO. Guess we need something to talk about until free agency starts. Not sure I can take much more of this though.

^^^

x2

Jaded
01-17-2017, 02:13 PM
Trestman was Ravens OC til about week 5 before he got fired.

dogfish
01-17-2017, 02:32 PM
anybody think the cowballs would give us a package deal for dak and zeke?

Jaded
01-17-2017, 02:33 PM
anybody think the cowballs would give us a package deal for dak and zeke?

Of course.

The real question is would Dak be ok with being a backup?

BroncoJoe
01-17-2017, 02:40 PM
anybody think the cowballs would give us a package deal for dak and zeke?

'Tis a pleasure to live in Colorado. Now that weed is legal, anyway.

dogfish
01-17-2017, 02:41 PM
'Tis a pleasure to live in Colorado. Now that weed is legal, anyway.

you burnin' that dank kush, joe?

BroncoJoe
01-17-2017, 02:42 PM
you burnin' that dank kush, joe?

No, but after reading your statement, I'm pretty sure you are!

Slick
01-17-2017, 02:43 PM
you burnin' that dank kush, joe?

His wife would beat his ass.

Nomad
01-17-2017, 02:45 PM
How about Garoppolo? Colin Cowherd is all on board his train.

chazoe60
01-17-2017, 02:46 PM
anybody think the cowballs would give us a package deal for dak and zeke?

Sure, for our next 12 first round picks.

NightTerror218
01-17-2017, 06:38 PM
The obvious answer is that Philip Rivers is a top 5 QB in the NFL, and if the Broncos had him they would instantly be SB contenders, whereas neither Trevor nor Paxton look like they will ever be elite QBs in this league, which will probably doom Denver to mediocrity for several years while the defense declines.

That is not inevitable. Lynch COULD suddenly grasp the reins and prove he's the next Russell Wilson. But, you notice that really great QBs normally don't hesitate to seize the starting job when they get their chance. They get their chance and never look back. And the guy who was supposed to be the starter, gets "Wally Pip'd" as in Wally Pip takes the day off and allows Lou Gehrig to start.

Example: Chris Harris. He was undrafted, 10th on the depth chart, and the defensive backs coach did not even know his name. He simply made plays every time he was on the field and forced them to keep him on the 53 man roster. Then he was on special teams, and he kept making plays, so they used him in nickel. He kept making plays and knowing his position, so he forced his way into the starting lineup. Then he got a big contract and is now one of the top CBs in the League.

Russell Wilson and Dak Prescott are only the most obvious examples of this. And the guys they beat out were clearly more experience and better QBs than Trevor Siemian.

If you have a guy who is going to be a top NFL QB, it usually is obvious within the first year. And it's not at all obvious in Denver's case that either QB will ever be better than Kyle Orton.

Guys like Prescott, Russell Wilson, Chris Harris, or Rod Smith were late round or undrafted afterthoughts, never expected to do anything, but they forced their way into the lineup. In short, the OPPOSITE Of Paxton Lynch, Elway's golden boy who is being given every possible chance to succeed and they are even bringing in Bill Musgrave, who was formerly the Raiders' OC to be the QBs coach and try and coach him up, like an anxious parent who hires a tutor to get his underachieving son into college.

I don't count them out, but it's far from a sure thing that either will ever be good enough to lead Denver anywhere near the SB. And Philip Rivers can.

I doubt the Chargers will trade Rivers, and if they do, probably not to Denver. But, Denver would probably offer more than other teams. They SHOULD trade Rivers, even if they don't dare.

Tldr

Lynch is unproven. This line could possibly make any QB look bad. Rivers wont change line.

chazoe60
01-17-2017, 06:46 PM
Rivers wont change line.

Smart experienced QBs can definitely hide a lot of warts on an OL. Audibling, changing protection and getting the ball out of their hands quicker are the three major ways a good QB can hide deficiencies in an OL.

Rick
01-17-2017, 06:56 PM
They think like you do, which is why they are going to sit comfortably in last place and not make any moves for the next several years. As for the Chargers becoming competitive for a SB in 2 or 3 years - not unless they totally remake the culture inside that organization.

And their team is going to be competitive and come close to winning a lot of games they will inevitably lose. Whoopie.

Meanwhile, they are an afterthought in LA, where most people will remain ignorant that there even is another football team in town.

What they would be selling to their fans is HOPE and CHANGE. Because keeping Rivers and still losing 9 or 10 games a year for the next 3 or 4 years is not a great plan. Getting rid of him and drafting a QB might cause them to lose more games in the short-term, but would give them a chance to have a franchise QB in place when they are ready to win, instead of a 38 or 39 year old guy who's ready to retire, leaving them the task of rebuilding for ANOTHER 3 or 4 years.

Make all the changes at once. Sometimes you have to get worse in order to get better in the NFL. Rivers locks them into winning several games a year they would otherwise lose, but that just hurts their draft stock. They will NEVER win the division with Philip Rivers. They need to start over.

2007 7-9
2008 8-8
2009 8-8
2010 4-12
2011 8-8
2012 13-3

What is the difference between 4 seasons of mediocracy, 1 shitty season and suddenly a fantastic season? An elite QB, a few other timely free agents and a high draft pick the year before.

A team can change it's colors in nothing flat, sometimes the cards just need to fall a certain way.

NightTerror218
01-17-2017, 07:39 PM
Smart experienced QBs can definitely hide a lot of warts on an OL. Audibling, changing protection and getting the ball out of their hands quicker are the three major ways a good QB can hide deficiencies in an OL.

Keyword can.

So siemian was that bad?

Cugel
01-17-2017, 08:06 PM
2007 7-9
2008 8-8
2009 8-8
2010 4-12
2011 8-8
2012 13-3

What is the difference between 4 seasons of mediocracy, 1 shitty season and suddenly a fantastic season? An elite QB, a few other timely free agents and a high draft pick the year before.

A team can change it's colors in nothing flat, sometimes the cards just need to fall a certain way.

They think that in L.A. (Chargers) too, and it's just as delusional.

Yes. Going from Mr. Mumbles to Peyton Manning CAN "transform" a team. But, the Chargers ALREADY have Rivers. And they still suck. And they will suck next year. They are stuck being the 4th best team in the division. That's not going to change. The Broncos offense is going to be better next year and the defense will still be top 5. The Raiders and Chiefs just finished 12-4. Which team are the Chargers going to over-take?

Denver? Not unless the offense continued to suck, and the defense gets worse.

Kansas City? They have more proven talent than any other team in the division - taking both offense and defense & QB.

Oakland? They think that only terrible injury to Derek Carr ruined their path to the Super Bowl, or at least hosting the Patriots in the AFC Championship Game. They could be right.

So which team are the Chargers going to overtake? I refuse to believe it's Denver!

DenBronx
01-17-2017, 08:13 PM
Had we kept Wade and hired Kyle Shanahan I would have been on board with trading for Rivers. Now we're getting a 1st time HC ,1st time DC, McCoy as OC and Musgrave as QB coach (Two totally different styles) with 2 QBs that will battle during camp.

This team is officially an experiment and I wouldn't waste a pick until we know what we have as a team.

But...I do think Rivers is the guy you hate but would love as your QB.

Cugel
01-18-2017, 11:52 AM
Who said he doesn't get along with teammates? What attitude? Listen I'm not a Cutler fan but this is just bullshit. His largest failing is going rogue and in turn, throwing a lot of interceptions, how does that make him a "large jerk", and "petulant and churlish"

No... Trestman was last seen coaching for the Bears, he coached Montreal before that gig. He has had offers to coach elsewhere and has chosen to take time off and spend with his family.

Huh? Personally, I liked Cutler when he was here and ripped McMoron for trading him. But, I've had to face facts over the years. He's failed to live up to his potential, and now it's obvious he never will. His teammates have publicly ripped his attitude, fans in Chicago hate him for things like sitting out the NFC Championship game with a questionable injury, etc., etc. "Has Jay Cutler lost Bears locker room?" According to Bleacher Report's Mike Freeman, Cutler's own teammates reportedly have lost faith in him (http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-bears/has-jay-cutler-lost-bears-locker-room)

Former Teammates Michael and Martellus Bennett rip Jay Cutler, call him the 'worst quarterback in the NFL' (http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/08/michael-martellus-bennett-jay-cutler)

He will never come here, and about 99% of Broncos fans heads would explode if he did. As for Trestman, he was hired to "fix" Cutler, and failed and was fired. Those are facts.

NCBronco
01-25-2017, 04:57 PM
Yeah, nothing will light a fire in the fandom of Las Angelinos like a devout Christian with 8 kids who refuses to cuss.

Yes, Phillip. Come to the clean living in the Rockies! Don't mind the smoke....

TXBRONC
01-25-2017, 07:19 PM
Smart experienced QBs can definitely hide a lot of warts on an OL. Audibling, changing protection and getting the ball out of their hands quicker are the three major ways a good QB can hide deficiencies in an OL.

Rivers is all of those things except doesn't have a quick release.

Cugel
01-25-2017, 08:05 PM
2007 7-9
2008 8-8
2009 8-8
2010 4-12
2011 8-8
2012 13-3

What is the difference between 4 seasons of mediocracy, 1 shitty season and suddenly a fantastic season? An elite QB, a few other timely free agents and a high draft pick the year before.

A team can change it's colors in nothing flat, sometimes the cards just need to fall a certain way.

That's what all the losing teams say, and yet they continue to lose year after year. The Chargers have had Philip Rivers for 12 years now, and never got to, let alone won, the SB. And it's been something like more than 10 years since the Chargers got to the AFC Championship Game.

That team has a losing culture. And by far the worst "home field advantage" in the NFL - playing in front of 30,000 fans in an old soccer stadium the next 2 years, and 1/2 of those fans will be rooting for the other team!

There is just no way that team is going to leap-frog the other 3 teams in the AFC West, when ALL of those teams are clearly superior to the Chargers.

Unless something drastic happens over the next 2 years the following will happen in the AFC West:

1. The Raiders and Chiefs will continue to get stronger. Both have good young teams and strong QB play. I make fun of Alex Smith, but he's not the reason they lost. Both won 12 games and are actually getting better. This is the strongest division in football right now.

2. One of those teams will finish ahead of the Chargers each of the next 3 years. Possibly both.

3. As to the Broncos it's an either/or situation. If they get great QB play, they get back to SB contention and the Chargers will eat their dust. If not, the Chargers could finish ahead of them each of those years.

DenBronx
01-25-2017, 08:32 PM
Not saying we SHOULD do it but if we do get Rivers it is pretty hard to imagine us not winning the division.

I like our QB situation but Rivers on this team would make us a much better offense.

I know cap is going up and we are already in ok shape, just not certain how or where Elway is going to spend this money. Imo, I'd go get Joe Thomas and pay attention to the OL for once. But, I'd take Rivers over Romo any day!

gregbroncs
01-25-2017, 09:05 PM
Second round Jaded? Nobody is going to give a 1st round pick for a 37 year old QB. But, the draft is not strong in OL this year. In fact it's historically a very weak OL draft according to all the draft experts like Cecil Lammey.

It's not like the Broncos can go out and get a franchise LT like Ryan Clady with the 20th pick of the draft, let alone a 2nd round pick (#52). First of all there probably isn't an elite LT in this entire draft, and if there is the guy will go top 10 picks and the Broncos don't have such a pick. This is just not the year to rebuild the OL through the draft.

That leaves FA. Well, are the Broncos going to go out and spend something like $12 M to sign a top flight veteran FA LT? Teams do not let their franchise LT go. Ever if they're smart.

At BEST you're taking a guy like Russell Okung, who underperformed his elite draft status and played his way out of Seattle. Now he's due $11 M a year and he hasn't earned it. Yet, the Broncos probably try and re-negotiate and re-sign him because there's no better alternative out there. They might not even be able to upgrade from RT Stevenson, who was the WORST RT in football according to Football Outsiders.

There are LOTS of teams that desperately want to rebuild their OL and not a lot of players coming out of college capable of stepping into the NFL and being quality starters. The draft competition is fierce and this is a bad year. That leaves FA. So, lots of teams will be competing savagely and overpaying for what few FA OL are available.

Russell Okung might be one of the BEST OTs in the FA market this season! And the Broncos might just have to eat that ginormous salary because what alternative is there? Put Ty Sambrailo back at LT and hope for the best? Siemian was getting flattened because of the porous blocking. How is that going to improve with Sambrailo at LT? His shoulder injury has prevented him from strengthening his frame - what he needs to play at the NFL level.
So you state how difficult it is going to be to rebuild the Oline, and still want them to trade for a QB that will seriously hinder the available money to fix said Oline? Makes sense.

Northman
01-25-2017, 09:32 PM
Chargers didnt suck, they lost a lot of close games. Their defense is in need of help but they are competitive.

Cugel
01-25-2017, 09:34 PM
So you state how difficult it is going to be to rebuild the Oline, and still want them to trade for a QB that will seriously hinder the available money to fix said Oline? Makes sense.

Do you suppose for some bizarre reason that the Broncos are going out in FA and buying up a $12 M a year left tackle or something? :laugh:

Sorry to disappoint you, but that ain't happening.

Right Tackle: They are in the market for a RT to replace Donald Stephenson, and it's unlikely they will find an OL starter in this year's draft since it's one of the worst drafts for OL in decades. So, they will be looking in FA to find a starting RT who won't cost them more than about $4-5M, about what they paid Stephenson:


Donald Stephenson signed a 3 year, $14,000,000 contract with the Denver Broncos, including a $3,000,000 signing bonus, $10,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $4,666,667. In 2016, Stephenson will earn a base salary of $3,000,000 and a signing bonus of $3,000,000. Stephenson has a cap hit of $4,000,000 while his dead money value is $6,000,000.

His dead cap hit this year is $2M if they cut him, but they will probably do it anyway since he got paid and then immediately retired. He just didn't tell anybody. I'd probably do the same thing if I could get away with it!

Right Guard: They could be in the market to find a new RG, pushing Michael Schofiled to swing guard. Once again it's unlikely they could find a starter in this year's draft, so it will have to be through FA. They might be able to sign someone, but it's not as if top quality G's are just floating around out there. The pickings are thin and there are a lot of teams competing to sign those few players. Most of those teams have more cap room than the Broncos and can overpay. Elway won't overpay. He has real cap discipline - like when Brock Osweiler got that $18 billion a year contract, 370 billion guaranteed over 4 seasons. Elway didn't blink. He let Osweiler go.

Center: The one bright spot on the OL, Paradis is expected to return from his two hip surgeries and be ready to start come September. He was graded #1 in the NFL by Football Insiders.

Left Guard: Max Garcia. Garcia was inconsistent, but he's very strong. He's still a young guy that they like and best of all he's cheap. His biggest problem was supposedly that he was too aggressive at times, he would get out of alignment with his linemates. And that is very bad in a zone blocking system. Perhaps his aggressiveness can be more of an advantage in a traditional power running system, instead of the Kubiak system.

Left Tackle: There's nobody out there better than Russell Okung. There might be a LT available in FA, but never a really top one. Those guys almost always get re-signed before the expiration of their contract. Their teams would never let them hit FA unless they had serious health issues.

Example: Ryan Clady. While Clady was healthy (2006-2012) he was an elite LT with power and speed. Injuries hobbled him and his only healthy season recently was 2014 when he was not very good. Now he's starting for the Jets. Perhaps he regained his health. But that was an example of an elite LT who gets traded or hits FA.

I.e. there was some problem. There was a reason Seattle let Russell Okung go. They didn't want to pay him even what the Broncos did.

Yet looking around the cratered moonscape of FA it's hard to avoid the conclusion that re-signing Russell Okung is a top FA priority. They might try and negotiate his contract down a bit, but they better keep him, because there's nobody better out there coming to Denver. Not unless they are willing to pay $12-13 M a year or something.

Take a look at what the top LTs get in this league:


Tyron Smith (2016-2023) LT DAL 8 year deal total: $97,600,000 average: $12,200,000 dead-cap: $22,118,013 $22,118,013 22.66% 2024
Joe Thomas (2011-2018) LT CLE 7 year deal total: $80,500,000 ave. $11,500,000 $19,000,000 $28,500,000 35.40% 2019
Trent Williams (2015-2020) LT WAS 28 5 $68,000,000 $13,600,000 $30,000,000 $41,250,000 60.66% 2021
Terron Armstead (2016-2021) LT NO 25 5 $65,000,000 $13,000,000 $15,880,000 $38,000,000 58.46% 2022
Cordy Glenn (2016-2020) LT BUF 27 5 $60,000,000 $12,000,000 $28,000,000 $36,000,000 60.00% 2021\

This year there are so few FAs who are real LT prospects that they will command salaries roughly comparable to these top guys. But, of course, they will not be among these top guys. In short some teams will overpay.

Conclusion: Do you understand? Denver is going to keep most of their OL and try and work with them because they are young and cheap and Elway has spent his cap room elsewhere - particularly on defense, where he still needs to re-sign T.J. Ward, and that won't be cheap.

They are at most looking to find veteran FA starters at RT and RG. LG they would like to find too, but you can't have everything.

In short, this OL will be a "work in progress" this year. Any fantasy they will go out and break the bank to get dramatically better on the OL is just that. Fantasy. They will pick up a couple of guys.

But, 3 or 4 of the OL starters from 2016 will be starting in 2017. Bank on it.

Cugel
01-25-2017, 09:57 PM
Oh, I forgot to mention Jeff Davidson. He was a forgotten man on Kubiak's team. Drafted by Elway, Kubiak essentially just said "fine. He's your guy and I get it, you want him on the roster so, I'm putting him on the roster. But, he's not getting dressed on game day. I run this team and he's not a good fit for my zone blocking system."

He's a mauler with somewhat slow feet. In a more traditional power scheme he could be potentially useful. Listed as a C, he could potentially move to guard. I don't know that he could come out of nowhere and start, but he could be in the rotation.

EDIT: apparently, I was wrong. Donald Stephenson's dead cap hit is $6 M. I guess they are stuck with him for one more year. That's probably too much to swallow just to get rid of him. I think he takes up a roster spot and chews gum.

LTC Pain
01-25-2017, 10:14 PM
Hell no!

Cugel
01-25-2017, 10:16 PM
Chargers didnt suck, they lost a lot of close games. Their defense is in need of help but they are competitive.

Show me a team that loses a lot of close games and I'll show you a loser. That's the very definition of a loser. A team that keeps it close, but always finds a way to lose in the end.

The Chargers have it in spades. It's been like that for close to 10 years. That is a culture that some teams have. Why have the Browns organization been so bad for 30 years, when they keep getting high draft picks year after year? Losing culture.

And they have less talent on their roster than the other three teams in the division, particularly the Raiders who are unfortunately seriously trending upward with Derek Carr. I hate to think how good he could become in 2 or 3 years when he really gets used to playing in the NFL. He could become a top 5 QB which would be like living in the AFC East and having to face Tom Brady twice a year, or in the AFC North and dealing with Ben Roethlisberger twice.

And Andy Reid has the Chiefs going in the right direction. Those ******** are adding a bunch of OFFENSIVE talent for a change. Take a look at Tyreek Hill: 593 yrds. receiving & 6 TDs, 263 yards rushing & 3 TDs. 2 TDs on kickoff returns, 1 TD on a punt return. TOTAL: close to 1500 all purpose yards and 12 TDs?

The Broncos have nobody like that. We need Christian McCaffrey!

Cugel
01-25-2017, 10:18 PM
Hell no!

Hell, no, we won't glow?
10079

Joel
01-25-2017, 10:50 PM
Not saying we SHOULD do it but if we do get Rivers it is pretty hard to imagine us not winning the division.

I like our QB situation but Rivers on this team would make us a much better offense.

I know cap is going up and we are already in ok shape, just not certain how or where Elway is going to spend this money. Imo, I'd go get Joe Thomas and pay attention to the OL for once. But, I'd take Rivers over Romo any day!
Unless we do that it doesn't MATTER who's our QB. In which case I'm back to "I'd rather pay Siemian or Lynch $1M to be on IR by midseason than $20M for some All Pro in his late thirties." NONE of them will be healthy enough for a playoff game anyway.... :(


EDIT: apparently, I was wrong. Donald Stephenson's dead cap hit is $6 M. I guess they are stuck with him for one more year. That's probably too much to swallow just to get rid of him. I think he takes up a roster spot and chews gum.
According to Spotrac (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/donald-stephenson-9884/), we only guaranteed Stephensons 2016 salary and $3M signing bonus, but on March 13 his 2017 salary ($4M) also becomes guaranteed. So cutting him before then would leaves $2M in dead money (i.e. the rest of his 3-year signing bonus,) but cutting him later would cost a guaranteed $6M that hasn't hit our cap yet. We could eat it all now or $3M each of the next two years, but a one-time $2M hit sounds better than either.

This is just me, but I expect him gone before St. Patricks Day. ;) Right after Okung: The club option he negotiated GUARANTEES ~$12M EACH of the next TWO years (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/russell-okung-6515/)—unless we cut him before March 9; then we owe NOTHING, we merely paid a former All Pro LT $5.2M for one year, it didn't work out and we sent him on his way.

I STRONGLY doubt "Denver is going to keep most of their OL and try and work with them because they are young and cheap and Elway has spent his cap room elsewhere." We've got some cap room to use, but, far more importantly, our current OL is CRAP, and keeping Okung despite his weak performance last year would blow up a big chunk of our cap. Paying $12M/yr for a bad LT isn't exactly Elways pattern (it's off by an order of magnitude.)

This would hardly be the first time we played Musical Blockers in the offseason, and probably won't be the last.

Guard is more flexible, because most teams (wrongly) value them FAR less the all-important edge blockers. Ideally, I would draft one early, because there should still be top Gs available even in a draft as weak as this one supposedly is.

Then use the cap space to shop for FA OTs. If Okungs lousy season makes him open to renegotiating a smaller contract, great; if not, we're in the market for two OTs. That sucks, but let's not kid ourselves that what we've got NOW doesn't suck just as bad: We can just get it for FAR less than the $17M cap hit we'd take for keeping Okung and Stephenson. Anyone who thinks Elways history makes him likely to do THAT is crazy.

TXBRONC
01-26-2017, 10:28 AM
Not saying we SHOULD do it but if we do get Rivers it is pretty hard to imagine us not winning the division.

I like our QB situation but Rivers on this team would make us a much better offense.

I know cap is going up and we are already in ok shape, just not certain how or where Elway is going to spend this money. Imo, I'd go get Joe Thomas and pay attention to the OL for once. But, I'd take Rivers over Romo any day!

I don't see anything that leads me to believe that Denver will try and bring Rivers in. It seems to me Joe Thomas would be more of a possibility than Rivers.

VonDoom
01-26-2017, 12:01 PM
Oh, I forgot to mention Jeff Davidson. He was a forgotten man on Kubiak's team. Drafted by Elway, Kubiak essentially just said "fine. He's your guy and I get it, you want him on the roster so, I'm putting him on the roster. But, he's not getting dressed on game day. I run this team and he's not a good fit for my zone blocking system."

He's a mauler with somewhat slow feet. In a more traditional power scheme he could be potentially useful. Listed as a C, he could potentially move to guard. I don't know that he could come out of nowhere and start, but he could be in the rotation.

EDIT: apparently, I was wrong. Donald Stephenson's dead cap hit is $6 M. I guess they are stuck with him for one more year. That's probably too much to swallow just to get rid of him. I think he takes up a roster spot and chews gum.

Stephenson's dead money hit would be $2 million with a $3 million savings:

http://overthecap.com/player/donald-stephenson/501/

Also, what "mauler" are you talking about? You said Jeff Davidson, but he's our new OL coach, so I don't imagine it's him. McGovern? I'd be interested to see what he can do in our new system.

Joel
01-26-2017, 01:00 PM
Stephenson's dead money hit would be $2 million with a $3 million savings:

http://overthecap.com/player/donald-stephenson/501/
Technically, EITHER of you could be right, depending on whether he's cut before/after March. But for just that reason we'll probably do it by then or never.

Cugel
01-26-2017, 03:11 PM
Technically, EITHER of you could be right, depending on whether he's cut before/after March. But for just that reason we'll probably do it by then or never.

No. Joel is right. I wasn't taking into account that they could cut him before his guarantees kick in. I imagine based on what Broncos insiders are saying that they will attempt to re-structure his deal, rather than release him outright.

But, Joel is dreaming if he thinks Denver is going out in FA and replacing virtually the entire OL (except Paradis). That ain't happening because there are not a lot of FA upgrades out there, and those few that are available will be hideously expensive.

Look, let's be honest here. There are not a lot of good FA T's available in FA and according to Cecil Lammey, the draft guru, "if the Broncos draft a T in the first round it will be a reach, and I don't expect them to do it." There's only a couple of Ts with a first round grade in this draft, and none of them are "can't miss" guys, and it's very unlikely that the best of them would be available when the Broncos draft at #20.

So, there's no help coming for the Broncos OL in 2017 via the draft. They should still draft a developmental OL or two, teams do that every year, but don't expect to see any of them start or provide a dramatic improvement this season. There's no Ryan Clady coming to Denver in this draft, stepping in and starting from day 1.

Problem #1: Lots of teams need help on their OL; all of them see the same crappy OL draft the Broncos do, and thus they will have to go out in FA and bid on FA OL.

This will bid the price for FA OL up, perhaps beyond what the Broncos are willing or able to pay. Remember Jacksonville paying a boatload of money to sign G Zane Beadles as a FA in 2015? I forget exactly how much, but it was an absurd amount for a journeyman G who would spend 1 season in Jacksonville before moving on to the 49ers.

That's the kind of market we can expect. This happens every year.

Broncos fans identify the top FAs we would like to see come to Denver. Then said FAs get ridiculous sums from some other team and don't come here. That other team overpays, but since they have colossal cap room it doesn't matter. It might be a waste of money Denver would never pay, but they don't get the player either.

Result? Denver is forced to get a couple of mid-tier FAs to fill the RT and maybe RG spots. I doubt they get crazy and replace the entire OL.

Cugel
01-26-2017, 03:26 PM
You guys have to remember WHY a FA OL is even available in FA in the first place. There must be something wrong with him or his team would re-sign him to a long term deal in year 3 or 4 of his contract (next to last season), preventing him from ever becoming a FA to begin with.

If you have a Franchise LT you don't let him go, unless he's old or injured and his play has declined. The Broncos decided that Ryan Clady was pretty used up after his string of season ending injuries in 2013 and 2015. That's why he was available. If he had stayed healthy and played like he did in 2012, he'd still be here.

Another reason would be that, like Seattle did with Max Unger, their pro-bowl C, the team decides not to pay the guy what he's worth when his contract expires, because they want to put their money into some other part of the team. In Seattle's case, they re-signed the entire Legion of Boom and that took up most of their cap room. They have made a strategic decision not to pay big $ to their OL.

This partially led to their releasing Russell Okung. But, there were also problems with Okung's development - problems we saw here in 2016. He didn't play like an elite franchise LT.

That doesn't make him worthless however. Looking around FA it's clear that it will NOT be easy for Denver to go out and replace Okung with anybody likely to be any better.

Here's a list from Pro-Football Focus of the top OL FAs in 2017 and their prospects as FAs:


1. Terron Armstead, LT, New Orleans Saints

After receiving the starting job late in the 2013 season, Armstead (90.9) has improved each year to become one of the best left tackles in the NFL. In 2015 pass-protection, he recorded a pass-blocking efficiency of 97.2—only bested by Joe Thomas. He’s also improved as a run-blocker each year, with a PFF grade of 92.8 in run-blocking last season, second-best for tackles behind only Dallas’ Tyron Smith. It should only be a matter of time before he makes the Pro Bowl every year.

2. Ryan Schraeder, RT, Atlanta Falcons

Currently, Schraeder (87.0) is a restricted free agent who was given a second-round tender. Assuming he signs it and doesn’t get a long-term deal, he will be an unrestricted free agent in 2017. Schraeder was our highest-graded right tackle of the 2015 season; he matched Armstead in pass-blocking efficiency (97.2) after allowing just three sacks, two hits, and 20 hurries.

3. Cordy Glenn, LT, Buffalo Bills

Like Jeffery, Cordy Glenn (85.0) has been given the franchise tag. This means he will either sign a long-term deal with the Bills, or it’s unlikely he will get the franchise tag again. The Bills’ left tackle allowed a sack or hit on one in every 138.8 pass-blocks, which was the second-best rate for left tackles in 2015 (just behind Joe Thomas).

4. David DeCastro, RG, Pittsburgh Steelers

While DeCastro (83.4) had a slow start to the season (as well as a slow end), he was the third best guard in football for the middle 12 weeks of the 2015 season, behind only Marshal Yanda and Richie Incognito. He is solid in both run- and pass-blocking situations, and is one of just 10 active guards with a PFF grade above 80.0 in both of those facets of play.

Not all of these guys will actually leave their teams and those that do will get a ginormous contract. Will Denver get any of them? Maybe, but a LT would cost somewhere around $12-$13 M a year, much of it guaranteed. There will be a LOT of teams bidding for the services of every one of these guys, so they won't be cheap. Not at all.

Will adding a top FA LT fit into Denver's salary cap, remembering they have to re-sign their own players like T.J. Ward? Probably not.

Then take into consideration Elway's insistence that the coaching staff coach up the players already on the Broncos roster. That was an issue between Elway and Fox, which led directly to Fox's firing. It was an issue between Elway and Kubiak last season too.

Well, Elway is clearly in charge, and he thinks these OL have "potential." Just because the fans have given up on the OL and want them all GONE, like yesterday, doesn't mean Elway shares their opinion. He looks at his salary cap and has to think "it would be great if some of these guys could be developed into reliable starters so that I don't have to go out in FA and get a $12M a year player."

He's likely to try to do that.

BroncoJoe
01-26-2017, 03:29 PM
Does anyone think Cugel might be Cecil Lammey?

Cugel
01-26-2017, 03:31 PM
Oh, I forgot to mention Connor McGovern. He was a forgotten man on Kubiak's team. Drafted by Elway, Kubiak essentially just said "fine. He's your guy and I get it, you want him on the roster so, I'm putting him on the roster. But, he's not getting dressed on game day. I run this team and he's not a good fit for my zone blocking system."

He's a mauler with somewhat slow feet. In a more traditional power scheme he could be potentially useful. Listed as a C, he could potentially move to guard. I don't know that he could come out of nowhere and start, but he could be in the rotation.

That's about it. Connor McGovern is like Paradis was in 2014, a guy who was on the practice squad, or didn't suit up on game days. Expect to see more of McGovern this season.

Cugel
01-26-2017, 03:36 PM
Does anyone think Cugel might be Cecil Lammey?

Thank God no! I could never stand to spend as much time watching high school athletes and college athletes work out in shorts as he does, going to the Combine, the East West Shrine Game, etc., etc., etc. ZZZZZZzzzzz! Endless grind, long hours, lots of travel, and mostly boring.

When NFL games start being played by Cheerleaders then I will envy Cecil Lammey going to colleges and scouting "the prospects." "Well, her 40 time may be a bit slow, but she's really built." :laugh:

Jaded
01-26-2017, 11:16 PM
You guys have to remember WHY a FA OL is even available in FA in the first place. There must be something wrong with him or his team would re-sign him to a long term deal in year 3 or 4 of his contract (next to last season), preventing him from ever becoming a FA to begin with.

If you have a Franchise LT you don't let him go, unless he's old or injured and his play has declined. The Broncos decided that Ryan Clady was pretty used up after his string of season ending injuries in 2013 and 2015. That's why he was available. If he had stayed healthy and played like he did in 2012, he'd still be here.

Another reason would be that, like Seattle did with Max Unger, their pro-bowl C, the team decides not to pay the guy what he's worth when his contract expires, because they want to put their money into some other part of the team. In Seattle's case, they re-signed the entire Legion of Boom and that took up most of their cap room. They have made a strategic decision not to pay big $ to their OL.

This partially led to their releasing Russell Okung. But, there were also problems with Okung's development - problems we saw here in 2016. He didn't play like an elite franchise LT.

That doesn't make him worthless however. Looking around FA it's clear that it will NOT be easy for Denver to go out and replace Okung with anybody likely to be any better.

Here's a list from Pro-Football Focus of the top OL FAs in 2017 and their prospects as FAs:



Not all of these guys will actually leave their teams and those that do will get a ginormous contract. Will Denver get any of them? Maybe, but a LT would cost somewhere around $12-$13 M a year, much of it guaranteed. There will be a LOT of teams bidding for the services of every one of these guys, so they won't be cheap. Not at all.

Will adding a top FA LT fit into Denver's salary cap, remembering they have to re-sign their own players like T.J. Ward? Probably not.

Then take into consideration Elway's insistence that the coaching staff coach up the players already on the Broncos roster. That was an issue between Elway and Fox, which led directly to Fox's firing. It was an issue between Elway and Kubiak last season too.

Well, Elway is clearly in charge, and he thinks these OL have "potential." Just because the fans have given up on the OL and want them all GONE, like yesterday, doesn't mean Elway shares their opinion. He looks at his salary cap and has to think "it would be great if some of these guys could be developed into reliable starters so that I don't have to go out in FA and get a $12M a year player."

He's likely to try to do that.

All four of those player signed extensions already.

Jaded
01-26-2017, 11:20 PM
Thank God no! I could never stand to spend as much time watching high school athletes and college athletes work out in shorts as he does, going to the Combine, the East West Shrine Game, etc., etc., etc. ZZZZZZzzzzz! Endless grind, long hours, lots of travel, and mostly boring.

When NFL games start being played by Cheerleaders then I will envy Cecil Lammey going to colleges and scouting "the prospects." "Well, her 40 time may be a bit slow, but she's really built." :laugh:

He goes through the brain damage of all those things but still chooses to plagiarize other draft analysts when all is said and done.

Joel
01-27-2017, 02:06 AM
IF there are quality OTs or Gs available and IF Elway wants one, OTC has us projected at $33M cap space next year, and cutting Okung or cutting/trading Talib would add ~$10M EACH. So we've got room to make big moves IF we're so inclined and the moves are there to be made.

If it were me, I'd probably resume talks with Cleveland about upgrading RGIII with Siemian in exchange for Thomas, look for a quality FA RT, and draft the top G prospect left at #50ish (they're valued low enough a LOT of top Gs have been drafted there.) That's presuming Elway and our secondary coach turned DC want to find their NT/DE of the future in the 1st round, but that's been Elways consistent pattern.

King87
01-27-2017, 02:21 AM
Why are you bringing up trading Talib? Why do you hone in on that. Do you still hate him so much?

Timmy!
01-27-2017, 02:29 AM
Why are you bringing up trading Talib? Why do you hone in on that. Do you still hate him so much?

Joel fears his awesomeness. He keeps trying to stop talibing.

Hawgdriver
01-27-2017, 02:39 AM
What about scenarios where we trade Talib and Von? Imagine the cap savings.

Joel
01-27-2017, 02:39 AM
Why are you bringing up trading Talib? Why do you hone in on that. Do you still hate him so much?
No, for the same reason I bring up cutting Okung: Because EITHER would create ~$10M of cap space. But I can reiterate TONS of other reasons if you like:

1) He plays a speed position physically, and turns 31 in 2 weeks.
2) That physical play earns him a lot of injuries and
3) Suspensions, and he doesn't help the team a bit when he's not playing.
4) He's only under contract one more year anyway and
5) We have much younger legit studs in Harris and Roby, plus quality up and comers in Webster and (possibly) Doss.

Put it in terms of the argument many people used for refusing Wades raise and promoting one of his assistants instead: He's only got a few years left, but they have their whole careers ahead of them and we'll lose them to someone else if we try to squeeze every last play out of their mentor. If that makes sense for a coaches UNcapped salary, it makes at least as much sense for a players capped salary. Especially since Wade's never missed practice or games because heshot himself in the ass in a bar it's illegal to have a gun in the first place, or for trying to gouge out an opponents eye because the guy beat him fair and square.

When healthy and unsuspended, Talib's a fine starting CB FOR NOW, but the cap means "we can't afford All Pros EVERYWHERE," as so many have pointed out to rationalize our consistently terrible OL year after year. And no one but his fan club seriously believes Talib's a HoFer. I'd rather trade than cut him (since the dead money's the same, but the return's much higher) but don't know if anyone will give up much for even an All Pro they'll owe $10M and need to re-sign in 2018.

Joel
01-27-2017, 02:42 AM
What about scenarios where we trade Talib and Von? Imagine the cap savings.
Von's 4 years younger, not in the final year of his contract, didn't miss most of camp because he shot himself in the ass with a gun it's illegal to even HAVE in a bar, and hasn't been suspended for attempting onfield eye surgery with no anesthetic. And, contrary to popular believe, Talib's not the face of our D like Von is.

King87
01-27-2017, 02:48 AM
Talib hasn't shown any decline and is a top five, probably top three corner. Miller's been suspended before, too, if we're taking that route.

Don't stop Talibing, Joel. Don't you stop!

King87
01-27-2017, 02:50 AM
No, for the same reason I bring up cutting Okung: Because EITHER would create ~$10M of cap space. But I can reiterate TONS of other reasons if you like:

1) He plays a speed position physically, and turns 31 in 2 weeks.
2) That physical play earns him a lot of injuries and
3) Suspensions, and he doesn't help the team a bit when he's not playing.
4) He's only under contract one more year anyway and
5) We have much younger legit studs in Harris and Roby, plus quality up and comers in Webster and (possibly) Doss.

Put it in terms of the argument many people used for refusing Wades raise and promoting one of his assistants instead: He's only got a few years left, but they have their whole careers ahead of them and we'll lose them to someone else if we try to squeeze every last play out of their mentor. If that makes sense for a coaches UNcapped salary, it makes at least as much sense for a players capped salary. Especially since Wade's never missed practice or games because heshot himself in the ass in a bar it's illegal to have a gun in the first place, or for trying to gouge out an opponents eye because the guy beat him fair and square.

When healthy and unsuspended, Talib's a fine starting CB FOR NOW, but the cap means "we can't afford All Pros EVERYWHERE," as so many have pointed out to rationalize our consistently terrible OL year after year. And no one but his fan club seriously believes Talib's a HoFer. I'd rather trade than cut him (since the dead money's the same, but the return's much higher) but don't know if anyone will give up much for even an All Pro they'll owe $10M and need to re-sign in 2018.

And until he shows signs of slowing down he hasn't slowed down.
There are plenty of great players with injury histories. New England doesn't seem keen to ditch Gronk.
Guess we better get rid of Von for his issues with that as well.
One more year of what will probably be elite production and then a chance to pick him back up for cheaper? I'll take that.

He's not a fine starting CB. He's one of the best defensive players. Don't downplay him. We all saw how different the defense was this year without him.

Joel
01-27-2017, 02:57 AM
Talib hasn't shown any decline and is a top five, probably top three corner. Miller's been suspended before, too, if we're taking that route.
Talib's been suspended more AND missed game to more injuries; until we signed him, he was the butt of Broncos fan jokes because of Cheatriot claims pint-sized concussion-prone Wes Welker "targeted" Talib when an injury early in the 2013 AFCCG caused him to miss the rest of the game. Talib got suspended for PEDs, and later for one of his many dirty hits; Von got suspended for getting wasted in the offseason, which isn't quite the same, is it?


Don't stop Talibing, Joel. Don't you stop!
Don't worry: You never need to stop if you never START. ;)

Joel
01-27-2017, 02:59 AM
And until he shows signs of slowing down he hasn't slowed down.
There are plenty of great players with injury histories. New England doesn't seem keen to ditch Gronk.
Guess we better get rid of Von for his issues with that as well.
One more year of what will probably be elite production and then a chance to pick him back up for cheaper? I'll take that.

He's not a fine starting CB. He's one of the best defensive players. Don't downplay him. We all saw how different the defense was this year without him.
We FREQUENTLY see how different the D is WITHOUT him, so why not pay $10M less for that show? In a few years he'll be gone anyway, just like Wade would've, so why not use that money to prevent his talented younger successors leaving first, just like Wades would've? It's the El Way. ;)

Look, it was a note in passing on how we could add $10M to a projected $33M in 2017 cap space, and maybe even get a quality new player under contract into the bargain—it wasn't even the ONLY such note; I led off with Okung for the same primary reason: $10M in cap space when top LTs make $12+M/yr.

Timmy!
01-27-2017, 03:00 AM
Trading all pro corners, the building blocks of success.

King87
01-27-2017, 03:01 AM
We FREQUENTLY see how different the D is WITHOUT him, so why not pay $10M less for that show? In a few years he'll be gone anyway, just like Wade would've, so why not use that money to prevent his talented younger successors leaving first, just like Wades would've? It's the El Way. ;)

Yeah, we should trade him and be much worse all the time? He's been here for three years. He played 15 games in the first two seasons and then 13 games this past season. I'm convinced that you know the Wade Talib thing is not actually analogous.

Timmy!
01-27-2017, 03:05 AM
Joel logic: Broncos have 30+ mil in cap space (and that assumes keeping Okung). Talib is an all pro on the last year of his contract. Therefore: trade Talib, because of reasons.

King87
01-27-2017, 03:06 AM
Sign Whitworth. Make that shit happen bb.

Timmy!
01-27-2017, 03:07 AM
Sign Whitworth. Make that shit happen bb.

Yes plz.

Joel
01-27-2017, 03:22 AM
Sign Whitworth. Make that shit happen bb.
Works for me, and we don't have to cut Okung or cut/trade Talib to do it, but "it'd be a lot cooler if you did.... ;)" For one thing, a trade would get us someone already under contract, rather than restricting us to the FA pool and whatever rookie's available by the time Elway gets around to drafting a starting lineman in the 5th round.

MOtorboat
01-27-2017, 03:37 AM
Trading all pro corners, the building blocks of success.

Joel doesn't have a ******* clue and talks in circles. He employs the "a broken clock is right twice a day" philosophy. Eventually, Talib's contract will be up, or he'll be cut because he makes too much and Joel will claim he's right just like every other idiotic "I'm right" diatribe he's ever been on. When you say as much shit as he does and say it as repetitively as he does, he's bound to be right every now and then.

Typically, he's just wrong, like how he was wrong about Manning. He doesn't have a clue about cap space, so it's useless to listen to him on the subject. Freeing Talib's contract won't improve the line, just as signing Manning didn't restrict Denver from free agents. Those are both misnomers and typical Joel bullshit.

Timmy!
01-27-2017, 04:57 AM
Joel doesn't have a ******* clue and talks in circles. He employs the "a broken clock is right twice a day" philosophy. Eventually, Talib's contract will be up, or he'll be cut because he makes too much and Joel will claim he's right just like every other idiotic "I'm right" diatribe he's ever been on. When you say as much shit as he does and say it as repetitively as he does, he's bound to be right every now and then.

Typically, he's just wrong, like how he was wrong about Manning. He doesn't have a clue about cap space, so it's useless to listen to him on the subject. Freeing Talib's contract won't improve the line, just as signing Manning didn't restrict Denver from free agents. Those are both misnomers and typical Joel bullshit.

And 1+1 still =2. Roger that.

Joel
01-27-2017, 06:55 AM
Joel doesn't have a ******* clue and talks in circles. He employs the "a broken clock is right twice a day" philosophy. Eventually, Talib's contract will be up, or he'll be cut because he makes too much and Joel will claim he's right just like every other idiotic "I'm right" diatribe he's ever been on. When you say as much shit as he does and say it as repetitively as he does, he's bound to be right every now and then.

Typically, he's just wrong, like how he was wrong about Manning. He doesn't have a clue about cap space, so it's useless to listen to him on the subject. Freeing Talib's contract won't improve the line, just as signing Manning didn't restrict Denver from free agents. Those are both misnomers and typical Joel bullshit.
Yet another reminder of all the folks who excused half a decade of awful lines because all our cash and high picks went on D and "the cap prevents a roster full of All Pros." Top linemen are unobtainable if you spend $10M/yr on a HoF DE, but easy to get if you spend TWICE that on a HoF QB. Meanwhile, I said:

1) Manning had 2 or MAYBE 3 years before he'd retire or we'd all wish he had; by the middle of year 3 he was limping and there were loud cries for Oz: Check

2) Our crappy line couldn't keep an aging pocket QB upright; by the middle of year 2 he was finishing seasons with BOTH ankles taped: Check

3) If he retired with no more Rings this place'd meltdown; thank God, Kubiak and Wade he didn't, yet it STILL melted down during and even AFTERWARD: Check.

Oh, and we can also throw in my observation in the wake of SB XLVIII that we should fire Fox and his staff and replace them with Kubiak, Wade and Dennison; you'd never know to read these boards, but that worked out pretty freaking well, even if Elway waited an extra year to do it.

I wasn't a broken clock on our offensive line: It's been garbage a long time, even in 2013, when people said I was crazy to claim Mannings pre-snap reads and quick release were the only thing keeping our sack totals at the same level he had in Indy—by the end of 2014 EVERYONE was saying that.

I don't pretend to be right about everything, but I was DEAD right about ALL of that, whether anyone wants to admit it or not.

weazel
01-27-2017, 10:24 AM
What about scenarios where we trade Talib and Von? Imagine the cap savings.

I tried trolling another thread with a trade Von post, I should go see what the outcome was.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-27-2017, 10:51 AM
Why are you bringing up trading Talib? Why do you hone in on that. Do you still hate him so much?

Cutting or trading or second best defender while he's still in his 20's would be monumentally bad.

Cugel
01-27-2017, 12:05 PM
IF there are quality OTs or Gs available and IF Elway wants one, OTC has us projected at $33M cap space next year, and cutting Okung or cutting/trading Talib would add ~$10M EACH. So we've got room to make big moves IF we're so inclined and the moves are there to be made.

If it were me, I'd probably resume talks with Cleveland about upgrading RGIII with Siemian in exchange for Thomas, look for a quality FA RT, and draft the top G prospect left at #50ish (they're valued low enough a LOT of top Gs have been drafted there.) That's presuming Elway and our secondary coach turned DC want to find their NT/DE of the future in the 1st round, but that's been Elways consistent pattern.

According to the pro player personnel guys around the league who have talked about it, Siemian has no trade value. No team thinks he's a future franchise QB so they're not going to offer anything for him.

Personally, if I were SF I'd trade for Siemian and start him, then move up and draft Deshawn Watson with their #1 pick and develop him for a year. But, nobody is going to do that.

As for Joe Thomas, he's 32 years old and has played 10 years in the NFL. He's still playing at a high level but I think that ship has sailed. The time to trade for him was back when the Browns were going through one of their periodic spasms of firing every coach and bringing in a new team, only to fire them all and repeat the process in 2 or 3 years. The old team is desperate, about to get fired, and they will do about anything to hold onto their jobs. A new coach comes in and says "Joe Thomas is our best player. Why would those previous idiots want to trade him? No deal!"

Cugel
01-27-2017, 12:12 PM
Cutting or trading or second best defender while he's still in his 20's would be monumentally bad.

Don't worry. Aquib Talib isn't going anywhere. He's earning $12 M this year which is entirely reasonable for maybe the best CB in football. If he's not the best he's top 5 and it's not as if they were paying him Darrell Revis money.

He's under contract through 2019 and I would expect him to play out his contract. He'll be 32 years old by then and at that point, the Broncos can decide if they want to extend or release him.

BroncoJoe
01-27-2017, 01:05 PM
Yet another reminder of all the folks who excused half a decade of awful lines because all our cash and high picks went on D and "the cap prevents a roster full of All Pros." Top linemen are unobtainable if you spend $10M/yr on a HoF DE, but easy to get if you spend TWICE that on a HoF QB. Meanwhile, I said:

1) Manning had 2 or MAYBE 3 years before he'd retire or we'd all wish he had; by the middle of year 3 he was limping and there were loud cries for Oz: Check

2) Our crappy line couldn't keep an aging pocket QB upright; by the middle of year 2 he was finishing seasons with BOTH ankles taped: Check

3) If he retired with no more Rings this place'd meltdown; thank God, Kubiak and Wade he didn't, yet it STILL melted down during and even AFTERWARD: Check.

Oh, and we can also throw in my observation in the wake of SB XLVIII that we should fire Fox and his staff and replace them with Kubiak, Wade and Dennison; you'd never know to read these boards, but that worked out pretty freaking well, even if Elway waited an extra year to do it.

I wasn't a broken clock on our offensive line: It's been garbage a long time, even in 2013, when people said I was crazy to claim Mannings pre-snap reads and quick release were the only thing keeping our sack totals at the same level he had in Indy—by the end of 2014 EVERYONE was saying that.

I don't pretend to be right about everything, but I was DEAD right about ALL of that, whether anyone wants to admit it or not.

4) Broncos made two super bowls and were World Champions during his final year.

King87
01-27-2017, 01:18 PM
Yet another reminder of all the folks who excused half a decade of awful lines because all our cash and high picks went on D and "the cap prevents a roster full of All Pros." Top linemen are unobtainable if you spend $10M/yr on a HoF DE, but easy to get if you spend TWICE that on a HoF QB. Meanwhile, I said:

1) Manning had 2 or MAYBE 3 years before he'd retire or we'd all wish he had; by the middle of year 3 he was limping and there were loud cries for Oz: Check

2) Our crappy line couldn't keep an aging pocket QB upright; by the middle of year 2 he was finishing seasons with BOTH ankles taped: Check

3) If he retired with no more Rings this place'd meltdown; thank God, Kubiak and Wade he didn't, yet it STILL melted down during and even AFTERWARD: Check.

Oh, and we can also throw in my observation in the wake of SB XLVIII that we should fire Fox and his staff and replace them with Kubiak, Wade and Dennison; you'd never know to read these boards, but that worked out pretty freaking well, even if Elway waited an extra year to do it.

I wasn't a broken clock on our offensive line: It's been garbage a long time, even in 2013, when people said I was crazy to claim Mannings pre-snap reads and quick release were the only thing keeping our sack totals at the same level he had in Indy—by the end of 2014 EVERYONE was saying that.

I don't pretend to be right about everything, but I was DEAD right about ALL of that, whether anyone wants to admit it or not.

1. He got injured not because of his neck. You kept saying it would be the neck. You certainly didn't think he would be able to get a SB in such a state. Being right...eh...half points.

2. You also said it wold prevent us from winning....ergo the 'don't sign Manning sign these offensive lineman'....being right...eh...half points.

3. Zero points. He retired with rings. Kubiak didn't do help the offense do anything and it was the entire defense that carried the team. Manning came back from the injury and while he was limited, he kept defenses honest, and that was just enough to make it happen. So no...you can't get anything here, Joelio Jones.

4. I told the board after he was hired that Fox was shit. Let's give the real props right here where the belong! I even told the board that Kubiak wasn't an offensive guru who was going to make the offense great. Double style points, bb.

MOtorboat
01-27-2017, 01:24 PM
You're friendly reminder that Joel wanted Denver to sign LaRon Landry instead of Peyton Manning.

Northman
01-27-2017, 01:27 PM
2. You also said it wold prevent us from winning....ergo the 'don't sign Manning sign these offensive lineman'....being right...eh...half points.

.

You do have a massive point there. I remember a discussion i had with Joel when we first got Manning and Joel was pissed because he wanted us to stay with Tebow at the time.

Rex
01-27-2017, 01:28 PM
You do have a massive point there. I remember a discussion i had with Joel when we first got Manning and Joel was pissed because he wanted us to stay with Tebow at the time.

People that wanted to keep Tebow over Manning undoubtedly voted for Trump.

Northman
01-27-2017, 01:33 PM
People that wanted to keep Tebow over Manning undoubtedly voted for Trump.

You may be on to something there. lol

King87
01-27-2017, 01:35 PM
Joelio Jones did not vote for Trump....

Cugel
01-27-2017, 06:08 PM
You do have a massive point there. I remember a discussion i had with Joel when we first got Manning and Joel was pissed because he wanted us to stay with Tebow at the time.

Lots of fans wanted that. As Dwight Eisenhower once said: "their numbers are not negligible and they are stupid."

"Quote Originally Posted by Rex View Post
People that wanted to keep Tebow over Manning undoubtedly voted for Trump."

That's not actually the correlation: The people who wanted to keep Tebow over Manning were lots of Fundies. They loved Tebow for religious reasons. That infuriated me because it was dragging irrelevancies like religion or politics into FOOTBALL!

It's just that that crowd happens to be very conservative Republicans and Tea-baggers too, so they vote Trump as well.

ShaneFalco
01-27-2017, 07:21 PM
anyone who brings up tebow is trolling - Cugel

Cugel
01-27-2017, 08:04 PM
anyone who brings up tebow is trolling - Cugel

Nice try Troll! :coffee:

But I was NOT the one who introduced an irrelevancy like Tebow into the conversation. You did that. I merely responded to that comment.

Jaded
01-28-2017, 12:34 AM
You're friendly reminder that Joel wanted Denver to sign LaRon Landry instead of Peyton Manning.

Landry, Asamoah and Schwartz. All 3 out of the league before Manning's first Denver SB. Another one, Saints G (forget his name) never played another down in the NFL.

Jaded
01-28-2017, 12:43 AM
I notice how worried Joel is about Talib playing a speed position but has no issue with Harris. I like to give Harris shit for his speed because he's not fast, Talib will probably retire faster than Harris was as a rookie.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 12:46 AM
I notice how worried Joel is about Talib playing a speed position but has no issue with Harris. I like to give Harris shit for his speed because he's not fast, Talib will probably retire faster than Harris was as a rookie.

Harris has nightmares of being chased by Flacco.
Can't.get.away.

King87
01-28-2017, 12:49 AM
Talib runs stride for stride with almost every WR in the game.

King87
01-28-2017, 12:50 AM
Landry, Asamoah and Schwartz. All 3 out of the league before Manning's first Denver SB. Another one, Saints G (forget his name) never played another down in the NFL.

All four of those guys with less production in any one of Manning's year sans his last one. Manning the style god styled. If we built up the line and didn't build the godly defense I think we don't even make a SB, let alone win one. It's better to be an all-time dominant at one thing that just above average at two things.

Jaded
01-28-2017, 01:11 AM
Kreckman was talking about this today, the difference between Talid and Eric Berry.

Both came back from huge setbacks to have All-Pro seasons, differences; Berry came back from cancer, great story. My Man came back from shooting himself in the ass.

I ****ing my Dude.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 01:18 AM
Kreckman was talking about this today, the difference between Talid and Eric Berry.

Both came back from huge setbacks to have All-Pro seasons, differences; Berry came back from cancer, great story. My Man came back from shooting himself in the ass.

I ****ing my Dude.

Next time you're gonna shoot someone in the ass, make sure it's not you're own.

Seems like sound advice...

Joel
01-28-2017, 08:41 AM
According to the pro player personnel guys around the league who have talked about it, Siemian has no trade value. No team thinks he's a future franchise QB so they're not going to offer anything for him.

Personally, if I were SF I'd trade for Siemian and start him, then move up and draft Deshawn Watson with their #1 pick and develop him for a year. But, nobody is going to do that.

As for Joe Thomas, he's 32 years old and has played 10 years in the NFL. He's still playing at a high level but I think that ship has sailed. The time to trade for him was back when the Browns were going through one of their periodic spasms of firing every coach and bringing in a new team, only to fire them all and repeat the process in 2 or 3 years. The old team is desperate, about to get fired, and they will do about anything to hold onto their jobs. A new coach comes in and says "Joe Thomas is our best player. Why would those previous idiots want to trade him? No deal!"
No one thought Brady or Wilson were franchise QBs until they WERE. Many MUCH less likely things have happened with FAR less notice. If nothing else, two years averaging <$700K is a minuscule investment even for a reliable insurance policy in case the "real" starter is hurt for a month or two or the rookie a GM DOES believe a franchise QB turns out to be a bust.

Meanwhile, Thomas' getting older and his salary alone's costing Cleveland almost $9M for however few good years he has left; his bonus money pushes it to $11˝M this year: They could get back ALL that cap space back PLUS most of RGIIIs contract if they just traded straight up.

Looking at the pricey fraught decisions Cleveland faced with RGIII, Dallas with Romo, Minny with Bridgewater/Bradford and SF with Kaep last year, I find it hard to believe that NO ONE'S interested in ANY trade for Siemian. Look how indispensable even a mediocre backup QB was to our championship: Enough that guy got a starting job with $37M guaranteed. The same team that traded us a 7th for a bad backup OT like Chris Clark; Siemian's not worth THAT much?

Frankly, I think he's worth more. Maybe not a straight up Joe Thomas trade, but something like a 2nd and 4th round pick (i.e. what TB got for Steve Young when he was a "bust") or even a late 1st (i.e. what Atlanta got for Favre) should be possible. You can't sit there swearing up and down that QBs are the end all, be all and teams should move heaven and earth for even a CHANCE at a good one, then turn right around and say NOBODY will give ANYTHING for a guy who went 8-6 behind a bad line and against half a dozen playoff games when he hadn't even had a pro SNAP yet.

Joel
01-28-2017, 09:37 AM
4) Broncos made two super bowls and were World Champions during his final year.
Covered in #3: The place melted down ANYWAY, even WITH the World Championship, so imagine if Kubiak and Wade hadn't helped Manning limp over the finish line.


1. He got injured not because of his neck. You kept saying it would be the neck. You certainly didn't think he would be able to get a SB in such a state. Being right...eh...half points.
No, I kept saying his surgically repaired neck was a FURTHER injury risk behind a line that couldn't protect him in the first place. I certainly never said anything like his previous neck injury was the ONLY injury risk. I was quite clear our awful line was the main injury risk; that can (and DID) get guys hurt LOTS of ways.


2. You also said it wold prevent us from winning....ergo the 'don't sign Manning sign these offensive lineman'....being right...eh...half points.
I said it would prevent us winning SUPER BOWLS; I was also quite clear Manning could have dozen-win one-and-done seasons as regularly here as in Indy.


3. Zero points. He retired with rings. Kubiak didn't do help the offense do anything and it was the entire defense that carried the team. Manning came back from the injury and while he was limited, he kept defenses honest, and that was just enough to make it happen. So no...you can't get anything here, Joelio Jones.
Sure: Our DEFENSE is why a guy who'd NEVER started had 10 TDs, 6 Ints and an 86.4 rating behind a bad line vs. a couple SB contenders—even though he had 15 TDs, 16 Ints and a 72.2 rating behind a BETTER line facing one of the NFLs WORST divisions this year. WADE got Oz a starting job and $37M guarantee; logical. ;)


4. I told the board after he was hired that Fox was shit. Let's give the real props right here where the belong! I even told the board that Kubiak wasn't an offensive guru who was going to make the offense great. Double style points, bb.
Mmm, dubious; you also claim that at the same time you said that about Kubiak, I and many others said he was some offensive line guru (even though he's NEVER been a line coach and I NEVER said he was) so maybe I'm not the only one who's memory is a bit subjective. ;)

I'll give you props on Fox though; I barely knew anything about him before the hire, at which time I started researching and was... unfavorably impressed. People can say OT wins are a testament to skill, but when a guy goes 4-0 in OT (including once in the playoffs) TWICE that's just flipping a coin and getting heads eight times straight: Unlikely, but possible, and hardly a testament to his masterful coin-flipping ability. Sure didn't help against the 2013 Cheatriots or 2012 Ravens.

Point being, predicting Foxs fortunes in Denver was no harder than reviewing his record. And the same for Kubiak, but there you were... less successful. :tongue: When he loses I always have an explanation why it's not his fault, and when he wins you always have an explanation why THAT'S not his "fault"—but which of us has some 'splainin' to do more often....? ;)


You do have a massive point there. I remember a discussion i had with Joel when we first got Manning and Joel was pissed because he wanted us to stay with Tebow at the time.
There was a BIT more to it: Had Tebow bombed, we'd have gotten a top pick to land a franchise QB for the next DOZEN years instead of 2-3; had Tebow succeeded, we'd ALREADY have had that guy. It CERTAINLY wasn't an argument that Tebow=Manning (nor even close,) and implying otherwise is misleading (at best.)



People that wanted to keep Tebow over Manning undoubtedly voted for Trump.
That's not actually the correlation: The people who wanted to keep Tebow over Manning were lots of Fundies. They loved Tebow for religious reasons. That infuriated me because it was dragging irrelevancies like religion or politics into FOOTBALL!
At the risk of going down a rabbit hole that's verboten outside P&R, I wanted to keep him SOLELY for football reasons and DESPITE his constant attempts to politicize religion by religifying football. As the SECAA "dual-threat" du jour who made a SUPER BOWL AD before he'd even been DRAFTED, just to argue against abortion SOLELY on the grounds that "if you have an abortion, you might miss out on the next Tim Tebow," I REALLY wanted to hate the guy.

McDumbass lost me permanently and almost immediately by trying to deal Cutler and draft Tebow, and when calls for Ortons head reached their peak I started a thread on this very forum pleading for BRADY QUINN to start—even though he was nothing more than a recent ND "future HoFer" du jour, so as big a posterchild for the SECAAs popularity contest as the SEC itself. But, y'know, what was our alternative?

As it turns out, a far better one than any of us ever dared hope or most of us will yet admit. It was one of the biggest cases of me being wrong about football, which I freely and unequivocally conceded (after about half a seasons worth of convincing.) The irony is that I admitted it so loudly and often everyone seems to think my change of mind was my original position. That's people for you. ;)


Landry, Asamoah and Schwartz. All 3 out of the league before Manning's first Denver SB. Another one, Saints G (forget his name) never played another down in the NFL.
Asamoah played until 2014, and Schwartz until he broke his leg last year; he's currently a FA since the Lions released him at the end of camp, so I don't know why we STILL haven't called him. Oddly enough, his brother's taken his spot as one of KCs starting OTs, but BOTH are a HELL of a lot better than any of ours.


I notice how worried Joel is about Talib playing a speed position but has no issue with Harris. I like to give Harris shit for his speed because he's not fast, Talib will probably retire faster than Harris was as a rookie.
Harris is 4 years younger; he'll be faster than Talib when Talib retires, but doesn't make Pro Bowls because of his speed in the first place. Speaking of Talib, his lawyer now confirms Talib DID shoot HIMSELF in the leg (http://www.9news.com/sports/lawyer-confirms-talib-accidently-shot-himself-in-leg/394019168), and local Denver news says the possibility of a 2017 suspension for violating NFL conduct policy remains open. Meanwhile, the next time Chris Harris gets suspended will be his FIRST (instead of, y'know, THIRD.)

Jaded
01-28-2017, 10:52 AM
You avoided my point about Harris being slower than Talib, why his speed doesn't matter at a speed position but Talib's does?

Schwartz sucked then and that's why he's out of a job now, his brother has nothing to do with this.

Tebow was horrible, the worst QB I've ever seen from start to finish, I have no problem admitting that. If you're being honest about your original view on Tebow back in the day the irony is that apparently the only time I've seen/heard of you admitting you're wrong was when it was becoming painfully obvious that you were right.

Suck it WORLD!

Joel
01-28-2017, 11:39 AM
You avoided my point about Harris being slower than Talib, why his speed doesn't matter at a speed position but Talib's does?
Chris Harris's 40 time was 4.48 (https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=chris+harris+jr.+40+yard+dash+time); Talibs was 4.44 (https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=aqib+talib+40+time): Big difference. This whole narrative hinges on a QB who started 20 yds IN FRONT of Harris "running him down from behind" with an angle on an Int—and it DIDN'T EVEN HAPPEN, because Talib SCORED. All it proves is that a CB knows he can pull up when he reaches the end zone and a QB knows he can't if he wants to catch a CB. Which he didn't.


Schwartz sucked then and that's why he's out of a job now, his brother has nothing to do with this.
No, Schwartz broke his leg: And even then he was probably STILL a better OT and G than Schofield or Sambrailo.


Tebow was horrible, the worst QB I've ever seen from start to finish, I have no problem admitting that.
Worst QB you've ever seen? Tell that to Orton. Or Quinn, for that matter; there's a reason he beat out both of them for the starting job. I'm not saying he was the Second Coming of Jim Thorpe, but he also wasn't half as bad as his detractors made him out to be.


Suck it WORLD!
Keep it in your pants, dudebro; no one brought their microscope. ;)

TXBRONC
01-28-2017, 12:00 PM
According to the pro player personnel guys around the league who have talked about it, Siemian has no trade value. No team thinks he's a future franchise QB so they're not going to offer anything for him.

Personally, if I were SF I'd trade for Siemian and start him, then move up and draft Deshawn Watson with their #1 pick and develop him for a year. But, nobody is going to do that.

As for Joe Thomas, he's 32 years old and has played 10 years in the NFL. He's still playing at a high level but I think that ship has sailed. The time to trade for him was back when the Browns were going through one of their periodic spasms of firing every coach and bringing in a new team, only to fire them all and repeat the process in 2 or 3 years. The old team is desperate, about to get fired, and they will do about anything to hold onto their jobs. A new coach comes in and says "Joe Thomas is our best player. Why would those previous idiots want to trade him? No deal!"

I don't know Cug, I have a hard believing Siemian has no trade value. A couple of "experts" don't speak for all 32 teams. I would be willing to bet (that is if I were a betting man) Siemian has more trade value than Tebow. I would suspect most teams didn't of Kyle Orton as franchise quarterback but the Bears were still able to trade him.

Denver looked into trading for Joe Thomas but the Browns wanted way to much for him and we're unwilling to move off of their asking price. So again I disagree that a couple of years ago was the best time to go after Thomas. Lets say the coach says claims Joe Thomas to be their best player that in no way that they wouldn't be willing to trading. What I suspect a statement like that would mean it's will take a number one pick or a coulpe of picks for a deal to be made. When Jimmy Johnson became head coach of the Cowboys his only player of real value was Hershel Walker and still traded him. Now I doubt the Browns would be able get as Johnson got for Walker but they still might be able to get a number one pick for him. However, I doubt Denver will give up a number one for a 32 year old left tackle.

Jaded
01-28-2017, 12:35 PM
No, this whole discussion centers on Harris being slower than Talib and that speed only matters at a speed position when you want it to matter.

I never said anything about Schofeild and Sampro, I said Schwartz sucked before he broke his leg. Asamoah sucked too. You were right about Carl Nicks but unfortunately he's out of the league too. THIS part of the discussion centers around your ridiculous notion that Denver wasted their time/money on Manning instead of Landry, Schwartz, Asamoah and Nicks. Ironic that it's your argument against Manning (injuries) that ended the careers of these players long before it did Mannings career.

2-CnmVVHIzU

Tebow didn't beat out shit on merit, he was horrible in practice and was gifted the starting job, the offense actually got worse when he was promoted. He was every bit as pathetic as I'm making him out to be. He was horrible.

Joel
01-28-2017, 02:40 PM
We had more yds/att and a MUCH better TD/Int ratio than with Orton: Just not his stellar 58.7% completions. This was the Kyle Orton criticized as a dink and dunker who pumped his completion percentage at the expense of actually GAINING anything; makes sense that the guy who quit doing that would complete even FEWER passes—but those few were for gobs of yds (just under 3 more than Orton, on average.) Plus the most important stat:

8-5>1-4.

IDENTICAL team—wait, no: We traded our ONLY Pro Bowl WR a week after we benched Orton; WORSE team. Yet one was somehow THREE TIMES more successful (because a .615 winning percentage >3X .200; it's the difference between a 10-6 playoff record and a 3-13 top draft pick.)

Elways so focused on winning that he started a sophomore 7th rounder with NO pro snaps instead of his rookie 1st rounder: Because he plays whoever gives us the best chance to win. People talk about his body language when Tebow practiced: What was Elways body language like when he watched Orton or Quinn practice? And who did he trot out there on Sundays?

Again, I'm not one of those drooling idiots who think Tebow re-wrote the record books, or "would've" if he hadn't been "betrayed" by Elway Iscariot. I'm just saying he's ALSO not "the worst QB" you or ANYONE has ever seen. He was an incredibly athletic but incredibly raw guy who won a BAD team more games than he lost: We were fresh off a 4-12 season, remember? How do you go from that to 8-8 and a playoff win against a 12-4 team after Orton starts you 1-4? What CHANGED...?

Joel
01-28-2017, 02:48 PM
As for a 4.44 40 being SO much faster than a 4.48:

1) Harris is 4 years younger than Talib, so guess who's gonna slow down first? Harris may ALREADY be faster, but the difference was NEVER more than negligible. 0.04 seconds isn't the difference between "a burner" and "slower than my dead gramma."

2) Harris just doesn't EARN HIS PAY with speed ALONE: He's also smothering in coverage, instead of just going out there and trying to take a WRs head off or jump a route. Not that he's any less physical than Talib; like Champ Bailey, he's a sure and ferocious tackler who surrenders very little after the few catches he allows (as opposed to say, trying to jump yet another route only to misjudge so a WR runs to the end zone untouched.) He fearlessly sticks his head in on runs like Champ, too.

3) Yet for all that physically aggressive play, he's never been knocked out of a playoff game by a hulking bruiser like 5'9" 185 lb. Wes Welker.

4) He's also never been suspended for trying to gouge out an opponents eye because he was pissed off about being outplayed.

5) He's also never been suspended for PEDs.

6) He's also never SHOT HIMSELF IN THE ASS because he was carrying a gun in a titty bar even though EVERY bar has HUGE signs saying guns are illegal there.

7) His cap hit's also nearly $3M less than Talibs (and he earns it EVERY game, not just the ones in between suspensions and self-inflicted or other injuries.)

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 02:58 PM
Joel, Harris is one of the ten best corners out there, but Talib is one of the ten best defensive players in football.

You can shoot yourself in the ass with that bullet.

I think we should coin that phrase in place of "cash that check" or "take it to the bank".

Hawgdriver
01-28-2017, 03:49 PM
Joel, Harris is one of the ten best corners out there, but Talib is one of the ten best defensive players in football.

You can shoot yourself in the ass with that bullet.

I think we should coin that phrase in place of "cash that check" or "take it to the bank".

Dude wut.

Harris and Talib are both top 10 defensive players in football.

Von, Mack, Aaron Donald, maybe a few others have a claim above Harris.

They are both all-pro..only 11 dudes are.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 03:53 PM
Dude wut.

Harris and Talib are both top 10 defensive players in football.

Von, Mack, Aaron Donald, maybe a few others have a claim above Harris.

They are both all-pro..only 11 dudes are.

Come on man, give credit where credit is due. Shoot your self in the ass is golden.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 03:55 PM
But in all seriousness, I don't think Harris is as good as Talib. He doesn't excel on the outside as much as Talib does. He's not as physical and his sound bites are a fraction of what Talibs are.

King87
01-28-2017, 03:55 PM
Joel, Talib is smothering in coverage, has better ball skills, is a better tackler, and can play bump and run and pure coverage. He's not just some stupid mauler like that old Seattle cornerback.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 03:56 PM
Joel, Talib is smothering in coverage, has better ball skills, is a better tackler, and can play bump and run and pure coverage. He's not just some stupid mauler like that old Seattle cornerback.

You can shoot yourself in the ass with that bullet!

NightTerror218
01-28-2017, 03:58 PM
Joel is never wrong. He will dilute an argument with so many words that people just give up.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 03:59 PM
Joel is never wrong. He will dilute an argument with so many words that people just give up.

You can shoot yourself in the ass with that bullet!

Joel
01-28-2017, 04:38 PM
But in all seriousness, I don't think Harris is as good as Talib. He doesn't excel on the outside as much as Talib does. He's not as physical and his sound bites are a fraction of what Talibs are.
He hasn't played the outside as long, which sometimes shows; I don't think Talib's noticeably faster, just more fluid.

Yet Harris is MORE physical than Talib: He's just CLEANER. In fact, Talib only has 8 more career tackles despite playing THREE MORE SEASONS.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaliAq99.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrCh01.htm

That's not just because Harris gets beat a lot either (he doesn't and never has: It's because, in addition to usually taking down his receiver instantly when he DOES allow a catch, he also regularly dives in to make a TFL on RBs who often have 30 lbs. on him. As opposed to, y'know, getting taken out of a playoff game by a pint-size concussion prone slot receiver.

Then look at their penalty history: In addition to 0 suspensions to Talibs two (so far...) Harris has only been flagged ONCE (each) for Unnecessary Roughness or Unsportsmanlike (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrCh01/penalties/) (both his rookie season) but Talib's been flagged for one or both every year BUT one (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaliAq99/penalties/). Harris makes tackles: Talib makes cheap shots.


Joel, Talib is smothering in coverage, has better ball skills, is a better tackler, and can play bump and run and pure coverage. He's not just some stupid mauler like that old Seattle cornerback.
Talib could be all those things, yet chooses to go for highlight reel Ints (compromising his coverage and tackling) and be an enforcer (compromising his playing time.) He's not JUST some stupid mauler; he's also got good hands, instincts and awareness. He's one of the leagues top CBs, which I've never disputed.

Yet he ALSO comes with NUMEROUS and SERIOUS liabilities mitigating that, which is even more frustrating because they're purely his choice. If he were playing for ANY other team and pulled that crap on DT everyone here would call him a douchebag: And I know that for a fact because when DID do it in NE* everyone here DID call him a douchebag. All that crap didn't magically become OK when he started doing it FOR us instead of AGAINST us.

Throw in a high odometer, injury history and price tag and we're approaching diminishing returns.

Joel
01-28-2017, 04:39 PM
Joel is never wrong. He will dilute an argument with so many words that people just give up.
I'm like Sammy Baugh: Never lost, just ran out of words. ;)

King87
01-28-2017, 04:44 PM
When you say he could be all those things it makes it sound you don't watch him play. He's damn near perfect as a corner. He IS all those things. He's not the Jay Cuter of corners.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 04:48 PM
When you say he could be all those things it makes it sound you don't watch him play. He's damn near perfect as a corner. He IS all those things. He's not the Jay Cuter of corners.

Harris struggles with #1 receivers.

King87
01-28-2017, 04:58 PM
Harris struggles with #1 receivers.

Big WR's have styled upon him. Kelvin Benjamin. It was tough.

Hawgdriver
01-28-2017, 06:23 PM
Agree, Talib > Harris.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
01-28-2017, 06:34 PM
Agree, Talib > Harris.

"You can shoot yourself in the ass with that bullet"

Freyaka
01-31-2017, 10:36 AM
Worst QB you've ever seen? Tell that to Orton. Or Quinn, for that matter; there's a reason he beat out both of them for the starting job. I'm not saying he was the Second Coming of Jim Thorpe, but he also wasn't half as bad as his detractors made him out to be.



No you are right, he wasn't half as bad...he was every ounce as bad as his detractors made him out to be... Guy was terrible...