PDA

View Full Version : Elway, GM, and the QB position



Hawgdriver
09-23-2019, 01:12 PM
This seems like the central issue right now for the franchise. Coaching staff and O-line are also important, but we all know the big reason we suck post-Manning is because of the QB position.

Might as well talk about it. Any of you who haven't read the SI article "Elway is looking for himself (https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/09/05/john-elway-denver-broncos-quarterbacks)" might take a peek.

Beginning in 2011, there have been 104 quarterbacks drafted. Many others have joined rosters or practice squads as UDFA. Elway picked his first QB in 2012 and most recent in 2019.

These are the QBs he and his staff arrived upon as the best options for the franchise:

Brock Os - 2012, #57
Zac Dysert - 2014, ~#250
Trevor Siemian - 2015, ~#250
Paxton Lynch - 2016, #26
Chad Kelly - 2017, ~#250
Drew Lock - 2019, #42

UDFA - Caleb Hanie, Kyle Sloter, Brett Rypien (only ones I can recall)

These are notable options that were available when Elway and his team picked a QB early (Osweiler, Lynch, Lock), but were not chosen in favor of Elway's pick:

2012 - Russell Wilson, Nick Foles, Kirk Cousins
2016 - Christian Hackenberg, Jacoby Brissett, Cody Kessler, Connor Cook, Dak Prescott
2019 - Minshew

Select other QBs during this 2011-2019 era that were overlooked by the Broncos when the Broncos had the opportunity to select them:

Andy Dalton
Tyrod Taylor
Colin Kaep
Jimmy G
Derek Carr
Sean Mannion
DeShone Kizer
Josh Allen
Josh Rosen
Lamar Jackson
Mason Rudolph

The Broncos never had a chance at many of the QBs that came off the board #1 or #2--e.g., Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Marcus Mariotta, Jameis Winston, Jared Goff (I actually spelled it Goof at first, thx Shane), Carson Wentz, Trubisky, Mayfield, and Kyler Murray.

Broncos could probably have packaged and dealt to get: Mahomes, Watson, Darnold, Daniel Jones, and Dwayne Haskins

I'm just laying out some facts if anyone finds them useful for forming opinions. I don't have a good objective opinion yet.

I do have a highly subjective view that Osweiler and Lynch were terrible draft picks and the full brunt of that failure is what currently plagues the franchise.

Hawgdriver
09-23-2019, 01:17 PM
One of the central assumptions I would like to challenge is that Elway and his staff have the ability to identify a young QB that a franchise can build around for the future. I am not saying I believe this to be true, only that I want to explore the truth of it.

Northman
09-23-2019, 01:21 PM
The funny thing is Oz was the closest he has come to having a "successful" QB. Problem is Oz failed in other areas with the mental aspect of it. Lynch was a huge reach especially when Dak was there but then i myself was not that sold on Dak and still dont know if he can actually carry that team when needed. Dysert never actually got a chance to play so he is pretty irrelevant to the discussion. Siemian got it by chance, Kelly looked promising but clearly has the same problem that Sloter has in that no other team feels either one can be their starter over who they already have.

Poet
09-23-2019, 01:29 PM
Part One - The Context

Elway liked Oz and PL. There's something about big arms and height that he likes. He also liked TS and CK. He has a respect for guys with limited talent who possess intellect and intangibles. The simple answer to me is that he hasn't been able to find someone who possesses enough physical talent (hard talent) and the mental/grit 'talent's (soft talent). I don't know why. I can't blame him for missing on Wilson because almost everyone did. I do blame him for missing on PL because we apparently knew he was a lazy bum.

In a way, I respect his approach. He's tried everything. Young talented guys, young gritty guys, older talented players (Flacco) and older gritty guys like CK. I think Flacco right now is good enough to do some damage on a stronger roster. But Flacco was a first round pick and he still wasn't designed or thought to be a guy to carry teams. People forget that when Baltimore drafted JF the thought was he can be good enoguh to win with via a brutal defense.

We don't have that. We HAD that. And that's the issue - JE on some level is either unaware, or unable, or unwilling, to do a full rebuild. The painful part of it is that we've wasted seasons living in a fake contender world. It can take as little as one or two seasons for a full turnaround. If we wanted to do a quasi-rebuild when we were good, we would have had to have traded up for a top shelf QB prospect and sat him behind PM knowing that PM had no interest in mentoring him.

Hawgdriver
09-23-2019, 01:29 PM
Does it not seem that Elway is ignoring data, eschewing empiricism, and plain ol' floppin it out there when he picks his QBs?

What makes me say this--traits of the QBs he has selected with significant draft capital:

Tall (unusually so)
Athletic-ish
Arm strength

Traits in other QBs he apparently views as impossible to reconcile with winning:

Short/small

Seems like his process relies on his personal gut feel rather than any method or science. (Not saying you need science to do this, just making observations)

NightTrainLayne
09-23-2019, 01:30 PM
Finding a true franchise QB seems like a roulette spin.

Who, (besides Andy Reid) in their right mind, thought Mahomes would turn into what he is? I doubt even Reid dreamed of such success. At the time, virtually everyone thought Reid was off his rocker for trading up so high for him.

Point of data #2 is guys like Tom Brady. Literally nobody saw even a potential HOF career in him.

Meanwhile, there are scores of guys who were "sure things" and flamed out, crushing rebuild attempts.

Elway hasn't found "that guy", but he's in pretty good company. "Those guys" are exceedingly rare.

Hawgdriver
09-23-2019, 01:35 PM
Finding a true franchise QB seems like a roulette spin.

Who, (besides Andy Reid) in their right mind, thought Mahomes would turn into what he is? I doubt even Reid dreamed of such success. At the time, virtually everyone thought Reid was off his rocker for trading up so high for him.

Point of data #2 is guys like Tom Brady. Literally nobody saw even a potential HOF career in him.

Meanwhile, there are scores of guys who were "sure things" and flamed out, crushing rebuild attempts.

Elway hasn't found "that guy", but he's in pretty good company. "Those guys" are exceedingly rare.

I agree this is a very difficult thing, and I'm not trying to come down too hard on Elway even though it seems a big failure to not have 'a guy'. Most can't find 'a guy' even when they pick #1 overall. It's crazy hard.

So I'm just exploring this space I guess, and inviting others to do the same.

Poet
09-23-2019, 01:36 PM
Part Two - The Subjective Truth

I don't think John Elway is bad at finding or seeing QB talent. I think he's just as average as most people are in his trade. Watson wasn't seen as a can't miss prospect. Wilson wasn't seen as that, either. In fact, Seattle has to go to some pains to make an offense fit his strengths, and I'm of the opinion RW is a top three QB right now. JE just saw what everyone else did - Watson is a mobile guy who might rely on that too much at the pro level even though that's not an issue at the collegiate level. Wilson is small, Oz is big, Wilson has a good arm, Oz has a great arm.

What I BELIEVE to be the reality is that if a QB has enough 'boxes checked on a list' it's just about coaching and support. If your guy has enough talent to be a first rounder (even if he's not a top shelf mandatory first or second pick overall) and he's gritty enough and smart enough, you are what you're made into. Mahomes in Kansas City learned from a good player at QB, and a brilliant HC. Mahomes in Oakland would be something else. Mahomes in Philadelphia would still be scary. Mahomes in Tampa? Probably not, albeit they do have Arians now.

Even if John could see something that others don't, it's hard to believe we could cultivate a rare talent into something great. I'll use Mahomes again - he'd be okay here. We'd think about all his potential and be maddened by it. Maybe a more traditional QB who was can't miss could make it under JE, but that's only if they were as can't miss as Luck. This isn't a slight on Luck, either - Mahomes has/had more X factor but Luck was more likely to succeed because he was more plug and play.

My overall point is that it feels like we'd need dumb luck to solve the QB issue long term with JE running the ship. It doesn't feel like he can think outside the box, nor that he could set up a support system for a young QB if we found one.

Northman
09-23-2019, 01:37 PM
I dont think you even have to have a Mahomes or Brady, you can find some guys who are close to that tier and still be very successful. We just cant even find that at this point and are continuing to settle for projects. Its that last part that is killing us right now. Maybe Lock changes that but we shall see.

Northman
09-23-2019, 01:39 PM
I mean, i think we can pretty much agree a guy like Stafford would benefit a team like ours but he is also a guy who doesnt really have much on his resume as far as post season success. BUT, he does have a lot more to offer than anyone (and even to a degree Flacco) we have had post Manning.

Poet
09-23-2019, 01:39 PM
Finding a true franchise QB seems like a roulette spin.

Who, (besides Andy Reid) in their right mind, thought Mahomes would turn into what he is? I doubt even Reid dreamed of such success. At the time, virtually everyone thought Reid was off his rocker for trading up so high for him.

Point of data #2 is guys like Tom Brady. Literally nobody saw even a potential HOF career in him.

Meanwhile, there are scores of guys who were "sure things" and flamed out, crushing rebuild attempts.

Elway hasn't found "that guy", but he's in pretty good company. "Those guys" are exceedingly rare.

It feels like it's easier now than ever, though because of the rules. Marcus Mariota is thought to be sucky, but as far as a sucky QB goes his numbers are passable. Garbage talents like Dalton, and I'm willing to admit I was wrong about Cousins, can win you games. Lamar Jackson was taken at the end of the first round. You should at least be able to find someone quasi-decent in the draft. JE hasn't even come close to that.

Poet
09-23-2019, 01:46 PM
It feels like it's easier now than ever, though because of the rules. Marcus Mariota is thought to be sucky, but as far as a sucky QB goes his numbers are passable. Garbage talents like Dalton, and I'm willing to admit I was wrong about Cousins, can win you games. Lamar Jackson was taken at the end of the first round. You should at least be able to find someone quasi-decent in the draft. JE hasn't even come close to that.

Still, it's hard. Sure, it's fun for the first years when you have someone like that on a rookie deal. You get huge value out of the draft, you can sign free agents. Your team improves quickly and if you're lucky the strength of schedule balancing works out and you get to beat up on bad teams. BOOM! You're the toast of the town. You get to style. You're seen as a young gunner. You're in the playoffs.

And then it goes away. You gotta pay your own free agents. That slightly above average QB, when you have a loaded roster, he gets paid too. Now he has to do as much if not more...with less because his above average players left in free agency...I just described some of the promising looking Texan teams pre-Watson, Browns teams via Derek Anderson's 11-5 season, the god forsaken Lions, the Bears with Rex Grossman, the Joe Flacco Ravens, the Bengals (lulz) the Cardinals, etc. etc. etc. Some of those teams signed a journeymen QB like the Cardinals (Palmer) and Bucs (Johnson) and hit deep playoff success.

Poet
09-23-2019, 01:47 PM
I dont think you even have to have a Mahomes or Brady, you can find some guys who are close to that tier and still be very successful. We just cant even find that at this point and are continuing to settle for projects. Its that last part that is killing us right now. Maybe Lock changes that but we shall see.

Bingo. And that guy is as tough as nails, a huge talent, and respected as a hard worker. I was always impressed with him because I felt like he's overcome more issues than he's caused. In a different time line, he has a SB MVP, a regular season MVP, less injuries, and he's playing for the Packers or Patriots or Steelers. So much is what can your team do for a young hungry QB.

dogfish
09-23-2019, 02:39 PM
I won't pretend to be able to identify why we failed on those past draft picks, but it's certainly obvious that we're paying the price for those failures right now. Layne isn't wrong; finding a QB is difficult. My main complaint really isn't Elway's failure to do so. But rather his failure to address it as aggressively as he can. Putting lock on IR was pure hubris. I don't care if it's Drew, or if we land someone like Fromm or Herbert next year, but seven needs to commit all out to developing a young guy. Stop wasting freaking time with half ass stop gaps, whether it's Keenum, Flacco, or whatever retread they dig up in the future. John needs to take a deep breath, and accept that we simply don't have that 2015 defense anymore. you don't have to burn the whole thing to the ground, but you do need to rebuild around a young quarterback.

Elevation inc
09-24-2019, 02:59 AM
We had The guy we needed in OZ, He just got pissy and had a ego when he was benched for Peyton by Kubes. Had he not bolted to Houston I think the course of the franchise would have been different. No Paxton and prob no VJ....cause OZ would have had a pretty solid first year as the starter with kubes after Peyton and we would have built around that. Instead he ended up on a crappy Houston team in a spread offense, while Denver panicked and drafted Lynch despite obvious red flags.

Us not admitting that failure is why were still in this boat. I think Lock is the guy to get us there, but we need another strong draft with some OL help and we need to get rid of a lot of our dead weight and have a strong FA class as well. Flacco isn't and wasn't ever the answer, but lock does need some time to develop so I get that vet QB move. I just hate Flacco cause he is avg. at best, and now were into the position for far more money then we should have been in my opinion. We really just need to build around a young guy finally

Shazam!
09-24-2019, 08:20 AM
We had The guy we needed in OZ, He just got pissy and had a ego when he was benched for Peyton by Kubes. Had he not bolted to Houston I think the course of the franchise would have been different. No Paxton and prob no VJ....cause OZ would have had a pretty solid first year as the starter with kubes after Peyton and we would have built around that. Instead he ended up on a crappy Houston team in a spread offense, while Denver panicked and drafted Lynch despite obvious red flags.

Us not admitting that failure is why were still in this boat. I think Lock is the guy to get us there, but we need another strong draft with some OL help and we need to get rid of a lot of our dead weight and have a strong FA class as well. Flacco isn't and wasn't ever the answer, but lock does need some time to develop so I get that vet QB move. I just hate Flacco cause he is avg. at best, and now were into the position for far more money then we should have been in my opinion. We really just need to build around a young guy finally

There is no guarantee that Oz coulda been a Starter no evidence. Sure anything is possible but...

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 08:37 AM
I do blame him for missing on PL because we apparently knew he was a lazy bum.

There were concerns prior to the draft about Paxton expressed by many scouts. But the arm, size, and athleticism were rare and real. So too was the mental inability to play NFL ball and grind like a pro QB.

The seeming inability or reluctance to measure or equally weigh those mental attributes as major red flags is my biggest knock on Elway's QB selections.

I'd really like to know his internal proof statement about why big-framed athletic QBs are the ideal schema for NFL QB, and why he doesn't challenge that schema in light of the many flavors of NFL success a QB can have.

Shazam!
09-24-2019, 08:47 AM
I do blame him for missing on PL because we apparently knew he was a lazy bum.

There were concerns prior to the draft about Paxton expressed by many scouts. But the arm, size, and athleticism were rare and real. So too was the mental inability to play NFL ball and grind like a pro QB.

The seeming inability or reluctance to measure or equally weigh those mental attributes as major red flags is my biggest knock on Elway's QB selections.

I'd really like to know his internal proof statement about why big-framed athletic QBs are the ideal schema for NFL QB, and why he doesn't challenge that schema in light of the many flavors of NFL success a QB can have.

Better see what Lock has down the stretch

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 08:47 AM
The painful part of it is that we've wasted seasons living in a fake contender world.

Easy to say in hindsight.

You and I and many other fans might have felt genuine doubt at the beginning of each of the last few seasons of any hope for championship or playoffs. We thought, 'this ain't a championship staff + roster' so bite the bullet and make the moves to get there.

But it is difficult to fault an attitude that sees a championship within each season and does everything to make that so. After all, 2015 wasn't jumping up and down 'I'm a championship season'.

Davii
09-24-2019, 08:54 AM
Year: 2000
Team: Patriots
Coach: Bill Belichick

Team went 5-11, started 0-4 and had some ugly losses where the defense (Bill's specialty) just wasn't getting it done when it counted.

Am I saying Fangio = Belichick?

No. I'm saying it's idiotic to say the man should be fired after this start. The all-time greats weren't always great.

Shazam!
09-24-2019, 09:03 AM
Year: 2000
Team: Patriots
Coach: Bill Belichick

Team went 5-11, started 0-4 and had some ugly losses where the defense (Bill's specialty) just wasn't getting it done when it counted.

Am I saying Fangio = Belichick?

No. I'm saying it's idiotic to say the man should be fired after this start. The all-time greats weren't always great.

I wouldnt put Belly in the Fang category though. He won Championships as DC and HC exp going in to NE

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 09:05 AM
My overall point is that it feels like we'd need dumb luck to solve the QB issue long term with JE running the ship. It doesn't feel like he can think outside the box, nor that he could set up a support system for a young QB if we found one.

This is my gut feeling as well based on history, but I would hope that JFE wants to grow, improve, and win. Building dynasties is another form of competition, he's the ultimate competitor, I would hope he's not too stubborn to surround himself with the people that can help him do so.

Just not the same people that tell him drafting Oz and Lynch are good ideas (Matt Russell?)

Davii
09-24-2019, 09:07 AM
I wouldnt put Belly in the Fang category though. He won Championships as DC and HC exp going in to NE

Yeah.... his time with the Browns was so great he was fired.... Fangs had some accolades as DC as well...

Point is, neither you or I, or even Elway, have a category to put Fangs in other than "new". To say otherwise is dumb.

You don't fire someone 3 games in unless they're violating company policy, cheating, etc.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 09:08 AM
Year: 2000
Team: Patriots
Coach: Bill Belichick

Team went 5-11, started 0-4 and had some ugly losses where the defense (Bill's specialty) just wasn't getting it done when it counted.

Am I saying Fangio = Belichick?

No. I'm saying it's idiotic to say the man should be fired after this start. The all-time greats weren't always great.

Yeah. It's only 0-3 for goodness sake.

Gotta say though, I'm scratchin my head at the stuff MO showed about defensive scheme. It don't make sense to me either, but then again I'm not Fangio. The dude is obviously brilliant with defenses, so I'm not so arrogant to think there are no good reasons for what he's doing.

But damn...sure would be nice to know what they are, coach. :lol: :laugh:

Davii
09-24-2019, 09:34 AM
Yeah. It's only 0-3 for goodness sake.

Gotta say though, I'm scratchin my head at the stuff MO showed about defensive scheme. It don't make sense to me either, but then again I'm not Fangio. The dude is obviously brilliant with defenses, so I'm not so arrogant to think there are no good reasons for what he's doing.

But damn...sure would be nice to know what they are, coach. :lol: :laugh:

Agreed. Makes no sense and is VERY frustrating from my POV. I don't understand why he and Donatell are running the defense as they are and I hope to see major improvements there.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 09:50 AM
Agreed. Makes no sense and is VERY frustrating from my POV. I don't understand why he and Donatell are running the defense as they are and I hope to see major improvements there.

Otoh, the points allowed results have been acceptable outside of the points off turnovers.

I don't want to conflate sacks and generating turnovers with wins...but there's a reason Wade's defense with Ward, Junior, and Talib was so damned good...get to the damned QB and make it a very frustrating day!!!

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 09:51 AM
Apologies to OP for going OT. :D

Elevation inc
09-24-2019, 09:58 AM
There is no guarantee that Oz coulda been a Starter no evidence. Sure anything is possible but...

Without Oz playing well the way he did there is no SB that year...granted he had a rough game near the end, but he showed plenty of ability to build around....he had a ego though and so did John. OZ left and the rest is history......wether he could have been the guy or not. Had he stayed we would have built around him and not floundered our first rd pick on lazy Qb that capped the franchise for 3 years and trotted out Trevor followed by case...it was a catalyst....and it sucked.

Elevation inc
09-24-2019, 10:02 AM
We spent a 2nd rd pick on Oz it wasn’t a bust. He saved our season as a backup in relief on manning that SB year until manning was finally healthy enough to be avg instead of way below avg. he showed plenty of flashes to build around.....how he left, where he went and who coached him when he came back we’re why it didn’t work out.....I had no problem when we drafted OZ and still don’t. I’m pissed he left with his whiny ego, us the value and pick were on point. He just didn’t react well to being benched. Can’t say I blame him, but also it’s Peyton f’in manning and he should have understood that

Poet
09-24-2019, 10:23 AM
Year: 2000
Team: Patriots
Coach: Bill Belichick

Team went 5-11, started 0-4 and had some ugly losses where the defense (Bill's specialty) just wasn't getting it done when it counted.

Am I saying Fangio = Belichick?

No. I'm saying it's idiotic to say the man should be fired after this start. The all-time greats weren't always great.

There are some pretty smart people on the board who are just venting their frustrations about a head coach who is messing up, obviously and wasting talent on the team.

Given that we've had coaches for several years who don't scheme around the talent on this team, and given the level of talent on this team, idiotic is pretty harsh. I also don't believe the Patriots GM was pimping the idea that his team would be contending that year with the head coach.

I'm just saying, brother. I'm just saying.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 11:45 AM
We had The guy we needed in OZ, He just got pissy and had a ego when he was benched for Peyton by Kubes. Had he not bolted to Houston I think the course of the franchise would have been different. No Paxton and prob no VJ....cause OZ would have had a pretty solid first year as the starter with kubes after Peyton and we would have built around that. Instead he ended up on a crappy Houston team in a spread offense, while Denver panicked and drafted Lynch despite obvious red flags.

Us not admitting that failure is why were still in this boat. I think Lock is the guy to get us there, but we need another strong draft with some OL help and we need to get rid of a lot of our dead weight and have a strong FA class as well. Flacco isn't and wasn't ever the answer, but lock does need some time to develop so I get that vet QB move. I just hate Flacco cause he is avg. at best, and now were into the position for far more money then we should have been in my opinion. We really just need to build around a young guy finally

I am glad we dodged the Oz bullet. I am glad Kubiak benched the terrible tantrumy QB of marginal talent with terrible stats who is now out of the league. Could you imagine how bad it would be if Oz ended up with a deal with the Broncos?

But I'm glad he beat the Patriots, that kicked ass...so what I mean is, thanks Brock.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 11:49 AM
We spent a 2nd rd pick on Oz it wasn’t a bust. He saved our season as a backup in relief on manning that SB year until manning was finally healthy enough to be avg instead of way below avg. he showed plenty of flashes to build around.....how he left, where he went and who coached him when he came back we’re why it didn’t work out.....I had no problem when we drafted OZ and still don’t. I’m pissed he left with his whiny ego, us the value and pick were on point. He just didn’t react well to being benched. Can’t say I blame him, but also it’s Peyton f’in manning and he should have understood that

Not a bust, but a terrible pick in hindsight. An understandable pick at the time, but one that is shown inferior with the passage of time.

It depends on whether or not you think finding individuals who will help your franchise win is pure luck, or there is skill involved.

If it is pure luck, no point in talking about it, buy your lottery ticket.

If there is some skill, and there is, then you need to figure out how to get good at it. Ideally you do this before you waste several years of draft picks.

Easy to say sitting here. But it should be said.

slim
09-24-2019, 11:52 AM
If there is some skill, and there is

Is there?

BroncoJoe
09-24-2019, 11:53 AM
I believe (right or wrong...) that Oz's future would have been substantially different had he not thrown a grade-school-girl tantrum. He was familiar with the system and players, proved he was more than adequate, and won the crucial games we needed him to on the way to winning SB50.

Had he not thrown his fit and left for Houston, this franchise and his future would be completely different, and for the better. IMO.

Shazam!
09-24-2019, 11:55 AM
Oz was a capable back up yeah maybe not a starter class. Which is unfortuante in the long line if PFM backups that never became a QB1

Poet
09-24-2019, 11:56 AM
I believe (right or wrong...) that Oz's future would have been substantially different had he not thrown a grade-school-girl tantrum. He was familiar with the system and players, proved he was more than adequate, and won the crucial games we needed him to on the way to winning SB50.

Had he not thrown his fit and left for Houston, this franchise and his future would be completely different, and for the better. IMO.

I agree with this. He had NFL talent. He was a grinder and worked hard behind PM. Sometimes when you stop your own momentum, like he did, it all goes off the rails. He left to go learn a new system, on a worse overall team, with the pressure to win games on his own back. Here he could have relied upon familiarity, established relationships, and the like.

He never recovered.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 11:58 AM
Is there?

BTB's wife often mentions your skill, so...?

BroncoJoe
09-24-2019, 11:59 AM
I agree with this. He had NFL talent. He was a grinder and worked hard behind PM. Sometimes when you stop your own momentum, like he did, it all goes off the rails. He left to go learn a new system, on a worse overall team, with the pressure to win games on his own back. Here he could have relied upon familiarity, established relationships, and the like.

He never recovered.

One bad decision can really screw up someone's life. At least he has a hot wife and $$ in the bank!

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 12:02 PM
Is there?

Like...ok. Say it's like picking publicly traded stocks. We probably agree you aren't making money and the data shows you should just throw darts at stocks in the WSJ.

But then you get these cats who run hedge funds or PE GPs and many of them do well. Buy up distressed debt, find anomalies, pursue oddball theories that pay off sometimes...

I'd say selecting the 500-ish kids each year for the NFL is more like the latter than the former.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 12:05 PM
I believe (right or wrong...) that Oz's future would have been substantially different had he not thrown a grade-school-girl tantrum. He was familiar with the system and players, proved he was more than adequate, and won the crucial games we needed him to on the way to winning SB50.

Had he not thrown his fit and left for Houston, this franchise and his future would be completely different, and for the better. IMO.

It would have looked better than the Siemian/Lynch/Keenum years, but still not good enough to justify paying him. If he was making Siemian money, sure. But at 15m a year?

It really comes down to how 2016 would have looked--could Oz work with Kube after his hissy fit? It didn't work in Houston on account of the same issue.

idk

Spitballing.

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:06 PM
One bad decision can really screw up someone's life. At least he has a hot wife and $$ in the bank!

Yeah - he's doing fine. He will always have that win at Chicago, and that rally at the end of the season. He has moments he can be proud of.

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:09 PM
It would have looked better than the Siemian/Lynch/Keenum years, but still not good enough to justify paying him. If he was making Siemian money, sure. But at 15m a year?

It really comes down to how 2016 would have looked--could Oz work with Kube after his hissy fit? It didn't work in Houston on account of the same issue.

idk

Spitballing.

At a certain point a big contract becomes reasonable again. Flacco's deal was huge, but after the third or fourth year (I can't remember) Baltimore was no longer strangled by it. They just happened to be over a barrel because of a few uncharacteristically bad draft classes and free agent signings.

Oz in the right situation would have been on the same side of the 'good' Cousins and Dalton barometer. His career year would have looked great, his worst year would have been frustrating. The rest of his career would have looked like he was arguably best case scenario top 12, and worst case 15-17.

slim
09-24-2019, 12:14 PM
Like...ok. Say it's like picking publicly traded stocks. We probably agree you aren't making money and the data shows you should just throw darts at stocks in the WSJ.

But then you get these cats who run hedge funds or PE GPs and many of them do well. Buy up distressed debt, find anomalies, pursue oddball theories that pay off sometimes...

I'd say selecting the 500-ish kids each year for the NFL is more like the latter than the former.

I get what you're saying, but I don't think that is a good analogy. The performance of the stock market is overly complex with numerous variables that the average Joe likely doesn't understand.

With football players, the only complex issue is determining if a player is willing to work hard/cares about the game. So, to the extent there is any real skill involved, I guess that is where folks make their money, but even that is a crap shoot.

I guess I feel like just about anyone could run a draft for 5 straight years and hit on about half of their picks over that period. I wonder if anyone keeps stats on that? I guess the problem would be defining what a 'hit' is.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 12:18 PM
At a certain point a big contract becomes reasonable again. Flacco's deal was huge, but after the third or fourth year (I can't remember) Baltimore was no longer strangled by it. They just happened to be over a barrel because of a few uncharacteristically bad draft classes and free agent signings.

Oz in the right situation would have been on the same side of the 'good' Cousins and Dalton barometer. His career year would have looked great, his worst year would have been frustrating. The rest of his career would have looked like he was arguably best case scenario top 12, and worst case 15-17.

Yeah, there was a moment in there when it seemed like the Broncos had a succession plan in place for 2016 and Talib and Wade could have kept the defense (and the team) on the rails...maybe you return to the playoffs...

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:18 PM
I get what you're saying, but I don't think that is a good analogy. The performance of the stock market is overly complex with numerous variables that the average Joe likely doesn't understand.

With football players, the only complex issue is determining if a player is willing to work hard/cares about the game. So, to the extent there is any real skill involved, I guess that is where folks make their money, but even that is a crap shoot.

I guess I feel like just about anyone could run a draft for 5 straight years and hit on about half of their picks over that period. I wonder if anyone keeps stats on that? I guess the problem would be defining what a 'hit' is.

One of the measurements of good drafters is how many of their players they keep on the next contract. It's imperfect because some teams resign bad players because that team is dumb, or can't because that administration/the prior one got them in cap trouble. I think to combat that issue, some analysis methods factor in teams losing players to free agency and replace the 'value' or 'metric' or 'points' or however you 'score' it with points on how big the deal is, or the tender they got.

Even that is imperfect because some guys get paid off of one big year. Or, they weren't great in one system, left for another team and then flourished for whatever.

So, I think it could be done, but it would be hard?

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:19 PM
Yeah, there was a moment in there when it seemed like the Broncos had a succession plan in place for 2016 and Talib and Wade could have kept the defense (and the team) on the rails...maybe you return to the playoffs...

And that's why it's hard to totally blame John. Because a reasonable person, even a very sharp and astute one, could have done the same thing.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 12:21 PM
I get what you're saying, but I don't think that is a good analogy. The performance of the stock market is overly complex with numerous variables that the average Joe likely doesn't understand.

With football players, the only complex issue is determining if a player is willing to work hard/cares about the game. So, to the extent there is any real skill involved, I guess that is where folks make their money, but even that is a crap shoot.

I guess I feel like just about anyone could run a draft for 5 straight years and hit on about half of their picks over that period. I wonder if anyone keeps stats on that? I guess the problem would be defining what a 'hit' is.

I think there is another important one--ability to process the pro game. I bet you could develop some kind of VR ASVAB or something like that...something that measures mental ability (not IQ bullshit).

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:23 PM
Slim, you're secretly smart.

I'm onto you...but Val is into you...and wants to be into you, literally.

Godspeed.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 12:27 PM
I guess I feel like just about anyone could run a draft for 5 straight years and hit on about half of their picks over that period. I wonder if anyone keeps stats on that? I guess the problem would be defining what a 'hit' is.

I've wasted hours doing this. It is difficult, in particular with the definition of a 'hit'. My gut feeling is that we are looking at the whole process incorrectly, it needs to include more than just picking players. Has to include multiple-relationship factors like coaching, other players on roster, so on. Super mathy, I'd do it if they paid me. :lol:

Shazam!
09-24-2019, 12:38 PM
Elway gets a lotta input from personnel dept and Russell maybe hes the one that gtg Elway doesnt make all the Draft decisions on his own

slim
09-24-2019, 12:45 PM
Slim, you're secretly smart.

I'm onto you...but Val is into you...and wants to be into you, literally.

Godspeed.

Nah, I'm average at everything and Dave hates me.

But it's good to be alive!

slim
09-24-2019, 12:47 PM
I've wasted hours doing this. It is difficult, in particular with the definition of a 'hit'. My gut feeling is that we are looking at the whole process incorrectly, it needs to include more than just picking players. Has to include multiple-relationship factors like coaching, other players on roster, so on. Super mathy, I'd do it if they paid me. :lol:

I agree it's important to determine how a player will fit into an organization, but that is mostly basic HR stuff. Based on my experience, it's not that difficult to figure out.

I bet they would pay you. Have you asked?

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:50 PM
Nah, I'm average at everything and Dave hates me.

But it's good to be alive!

Everything?

My god...you're literally a ham sandwich!

slim
09-24-2019, 12:54 PM
Everything?

My god...you're literally a ham sandwich!

Good point. I am average at an average number of things and below average at most things.

Thanks for the clarity!!

Poet
09-24-2019, 12:57 PM
Good point. I am average at an average number of things and below average at most things.

Thanks for the clarity!!

You've always given me excellent advice. Well, except that time with the cactus...that was not nice.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 01:33 PM
I agree it's important to determine how a player will fit into an organization, but that is mostly basic HR stuff. Based on my experience, it's not that difficult to figure out.

I bet they would pay you. Have you asked?

I think I reached out to Sundquist when he was still on staff. But I can't remember for sure. Being a numbers guys for a sports team might be fun until you realize you are doing a bunch of numbers for a sports team.

Hawgdriver
09-24-2019, 01:35 PM
I agree it's important to determine how a player will fit into an organization, but that is mostly basic HR stuff. Based on my experience, it's not that difficult to figure out.

I bet they would pay you. Have you asked?

Maybe. What I'm getting at is why the same player might do well in one situation but not another.

Cugel
09-24-2019, 03:09 PM
I dont think you even have to have a Mahomes or Brady, you can find some guys who are close to that tier and still be very successful. We just cant even find that at this point and are continuing to settle for projects. Its that last part that is killing us right now. Maybe Lock changes that but we shall see.

The problem is that the Broncos are in a division with Pat Mahomes for the next 10 years. Which means that if they want to win the division they have to have a QB who can compete (won't be as good but competes) with Mahomes or else they have little chance of winning the division.

If they can't win the division, at best they are a wild-card team. And that's a very tough route to the SB. A few teams do that, but it's not easy winning playoff games on the road all the time. There's a reason the Patriots keep going to SBs other than Tom Brady. They are in a suck ass division where they are guaranteed 6 wins a season due to the crappy other teams. Just go 6-4 in the non-divisional games and they are 12-4 and probably the #1 seed, forcing teams to play them in Gillette Stadium all the time.

With Peyton the Broncos dominated the division and won 13 or 12 games each year giving them home field advantage. They used this to (barely) beat the Patriots twice in the AFC Championship. Without it, they probably don't get to a single Super Bowl.

Elevation inc
09-24-2019, 04:28 PM
It would have looked better than the Siemian/Lynch/Keenum years, but still not good enough to justify paying him. If he was making Siemian money, sure. But at 15m a year?

It really comes down to how 2016 would have looked--could Oz work with Kube after his hissy fit? It didn't work in Houston on account of the same issue.

idk

Spitballing.


He would have looked better then flacco at 19 mil a year and wasted time. He was the perfect example of a the groomed behind a legit vet qb scenario. He looked good in Kubes system. In fact had kubes not been left with Trevor and Paxton he might have been better off as well. The whole thing was setup perfectly for him. He f’ed it up but had talent, was a good worker and showed he could win games in Denver....in fact he might not have been all world but we could have won a playoff game with him because the team liked him and he had cred with the defense for making plays at key times during that run. Him leaving was a catalyst of so much more. I had no issues paying him 15 mil. As mentioned without him playing how he did, we don’t even get to SB 50.....

Elevation inc
09-24-2019, 04:31 PM
At a certain point a big contract becomes reasonable again. Flacco's deal was huge, but after the third or fourth year (I can't remember) Baltimore was no longer strangled by it. They just happened to be over a barrel because of a few uncharacteristically bad draft classes and free agent signings.

Oz in the right situation would have been on the same side of the 'good' Cousins and Dalton barometer. His career year would have looked great, his worst year would have been frustrating. The rest of his career would have looked like he was arguably best case scenario top 12, and worst case 15-17.


I would, take top 12 or 15 over our last 3 bum’s and current one post manning

Simple Jaded
09-24-2019, 08:25 PM
The SI article is half right, Elway is also looking for Gary Kubiak, which needs to stop.

elsid13
09-25-2019, 04:44 AM
I think there is another important one--ability to process the pro game. I bet you could develop some kind of VR ASVAB or something like that...something that measures mental ability (not IQ bullshit).

They already have a VR tank and some teams are using it with mix results. The tech hype of VR is still 3 to 5 years from reality.

Hawgdriver
09-25-2019, 08:49 AM
They already have a VR tank and some teams are using it with mix results. The tech hype of VR is still 3 to 5 years from reality.

Maybe they are doing it wrong?

Davii
09-25-2019, 10:20 AM
They already have a VR tank and some teams are using it with mix results. The tech hype of VR is still 3 to 5 years from reality.

Depends. There is some amazing, purpose built, VR out there that is ready today.

Cugel
09-25-2019, 02:04 PM
Depends. There is some amazing, purpose built, VR out there that is ready today.

I guess the problem is that the Broncos are not facing virtual opponents?

15023

Hawgdriver
09-25-2019, 02:15 PM
They already have a VR tank and some teams are using it with mix results. The tech hype of VR is still 3 to 5 years from reality.


I guess the problem is that the Broncos are not facing virtual opponents?

Listen, nothing is going to make a player grind and grind the mental reps that they need to be the mental assassins like Manning or Chris Harris besides an unquenchable inner fire for greatness.

VR or whatever technology won't create that inner fire.

But if you have that inner fire, VR (properly used) is currently the best tool for developing mental perfection per unit of time spent preparing.

I'm sick of the nonsense that disputes this, and tired of the stodgy reluctance to embrace it headlong as a core philosophy.

NightTerror218
09-25-2019, 02:54 PM
Who serious thought we would beat Packers in GB or thought we would beat Chicago? Raiders in black hole is never easy. We are not being blown out. But team is not playing up to it ability which is what pisses me off. I know this team is better than it’s record and was hoping to be be 1-2 but 0-3 was very realistic which schedule. Now if this team loses to jags then people can lose their heads.

NightTrainLayne
09-25-2019, 03:01 PM
Who serious thought we would beat Packers in GB or thought we would beat Chicago? Raiders in black hole is never easy. We are not being blown out. But team is not playing up to it ability which is what pisses me off. I know this team is better than it’s record and was hoping to be be 1-2 but 0-3 was very realistic which schedule. Now if this team loses to jags then people can lose their heads.

We're going to lose to the Jags.

But I won't lose my head.

elsid13
09-25-2019, 05:19 PM
Depends. There is some amazing, purpose built, VR out there that is ready today.

You right, but they are extremely expensive.

Nomad
09-25-2019, 05:43 PM
Broncos beat themselves in the Packers game. Jags going down in Denver.
15024

Cugel
09-26-2019, 12:35 AM
Listen, nothing is going to make a player grind and grind the mental reps that they need to be the mental assassins like Manning or Chris Harris besides an unquenchable inner fire for greatness.

VR or whatever technology won't create that inner fire.

But if you have that inner fire, VR (properly used) is currently the best tool for developing mental perfection per unit of time spent preparing.

I'm sick of the nonsense that disputes this, and tired of the stodgy reluctance to embrace it headlong as a core philosophy.

If the technology really helps, fine use it. But, whatever they have been doing with VR doesn't really seem to be helping one bit this season.

Cugel
09-26-2019, 12:38 AM
Quote Originally Posted by NightTerror218 View Post
Who serious thought we would beat Packers in GB or thought we would beat Chicago? Raiders in black hole is never easy. We are not being blown out. But team is not playing up to it ability which is what pisses me off. I know this team is better than it’s record and was hoping to be be 1-2 but 0-3 was very realistic which schedule. Now if this team loses to jags then people can lose their heads.

They really should have won both the Raiders and Bears games. The Raiders flat suck, and the Bears they had actually won before giving up a huge drive and last second FG -- to Mitch Trubisky of all people. He's not exactly a great QB either.

Admittedly losing to GB in GB is not a surprise. But, they should be 2-1 at this point.

Hawgdriver
09-26-2019, 08:57 AM
If the technology really helps, fine use it. But, whatever they have been doing with VR doesn't really seem to be helping one bit this season.

It's unclear what they are doing.

Davii
09-26-2019, 09:46 AM
It's unclear what they are doing.

Grumble grumble complain

Long post many paragraphs

Grumble grumble complain