PDA

View Full Version : Drafting a Runningback in Denver



Pages : [1] 2

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 04:47 PM
There are now a 'slew' of great running back prospects coming out in the draft. I thought Id put it up for discussion here realizing the many facets of aquiring a RB in this off season that have now opened up. It is sure to affect a number of offseason areas.

Ranking the top five RBs that would fit Denver according to WH:

1. Jonathan Stewart
2. Jamaal Charles
3. Rashard Mendenhall
4. Felix Jones
5. Darren McFadden(I havent seen him run between the tackles at all, and he fumbles)

Outside at 6: Ray Rice

Without a doubt, one of those top five backs will hit Denver at our second round selection, which brings up a number of thoughts to consider.

But not really talked about is what this will do to the free agent class this year of runningbacks.

Michael Turner
Marion Barber
Julius Jones

Those would be the top three, no? I dont think anyone will be overpaying for these guys with the crazy number of JR. RBs that have declared.

No matter what, these guys will end up SOMEWHERE, which means there will be another team that has one less spot to fill. If Dallas keeps one of the two they have, they will look to resign or draft another, somewhere.

The question is, if one of these elite prospects comes to our selection in the second, should we take him?

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 04:52 PM
I guess when it comes to thinking about possibly picking up one of the FA RBs, the thought might be, where would I have to pay the most money: To a second round pick, or the FAgent?

Would Denver pick up Turner if it could get by with paying minimal money out to him? Barber? Jones?


My thinking along these lines is due to me thinking Henry is outta here.

TXBRONC
01-12-2008, 04:53 PM
There are now a 'slew' of great running back prospects coming out in the draft. I thought Id put it up for discussion here realizing the many facets of aquiring a RB in this off season that have now opened up. It is sure to affect a number of offseason areas.

Ranking the top five RBs that would fit Denver according to WH:

1. Jonathan Stewart
2. Jamaal Charles
3. Rashard Mendenhall
4. Felix Jones
5. Darren McFadden

Outside at 6: Ray Rice

Without a doubt, one of those top five backs will hit Denver at our second round selection, which brings up a number of thoughts to consider.

But not really talked about is what this will do to the free agent class this year of runningbacks.

Michael Turner
Marion Barber
Julius Jones

Those would be the top three, no? I dont think anyone will be overpaying for these guys with the crazy number of JR. RBs that have declared.

No matter what, these guys will end up SOMEWHERE, which means there will be another team that has one less spot to fill. If Dallas keeps one of the two they have, they will look to resign or draft another, somewhere.

The question is, if one of these elite prospects comes to our selection, should we take him?

From what I understand McFadden and Jones have not declared yet, but assuming they do McFadden obviously would be be my first choice. The only problem he is out our reach. I would love have McFadden and he would be well worth the pick.

As to your question if one these prospects is available do we take and that really depends on how Shanahan's draft board lines up.

DenBronx
01-12-2008, 04:53 PM
Who do you see dropping to the second round? McFadden and Mendenhall are locks in the 1st.

My answer is no on a RB in the 2nd.

DenBronx
01-12-2008, 04:54 PM
From what I understand McFadden and Jones have not declared yet, but assuming they do McFadden obviously would be be my first choice. The only problem he is out our reach. I would love have McFadden and he would be well worth the pick.

As to your question if one these prospects is available do we take and that really depends on how Shanahan's draft board lines up.

Run DMC declared last night.

TXBRONC
01-12-2008, 05:04 PM
I guess when it comes to thinking about possibly picking up one of the FA RBs, the thought might be, where would I have to pay the most money: To a second round pick, or the FAgent?

Would Denver pick up Turner if it could get by with paying minimal money out to him? Barber? Jones?


My thinking along these lines is due to me thinking Henry is outta here.

I know you think he's outta here and I respect that however, I haven't read anything that would make me suspicious that Henry is gone. I can see a reworking of his contract yeah but not the boot.

Turner wont come cheap and he's going to want to go to a team where he's going to be the number one back. But here's the problem Turner has been a back up to this point in his career he's never had to carry the load for 16 games. Lamount Jordan was the hot free agent prospect a few years back but he has not panned out as a starting running back.

So if we're going to get a running back this offseason the draft is place to do that.

TXBRONC
01-12-2008, 05:05 PM
Run DMC declared last night.

Thanks for the update Den.

Bronco9798
01-12-2008, 05:08 PM
Running back is the least of our worries right now.

TXBRONC
01-12-2008, 05:11 PM
Running back is the least of our worries right now.

Ah it's all in good fun.

underrated29
01-12-2008, 05:12 PM
Out of all those guys i dont see a big upgrade at the Rb postition if we get one. If we take a lb,ol,dt,s,wr, i can see that player being a major upgrade over what we currently have.

I did vote for stewart if he is there. I have yet to actually see him run, but his measurables lead me to believe he will be the best back out of all of them. ANd a GREAT fit for our running game. So if he fell, yes take him. If not, then NO, not until rd 4 or 5 where we can still probably get a good one to replace bell,hall,young,henry if we were to trade/cut/ir some of them.

I have said it before but i think travis will be a dominant back next year when he is healthy.

Stargazer
01-12-2008, 05:23 PM
If Denver trades down from #12, which I hope they do, they could look to bring another RB to Denver.

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 05:25 PM
Although I acknowledge our needs in other areas, count me as one of them who definitely does not want to go into next season with the same RB situation.

Our offense with Travis Henry running the show is quite a bit different than our offense with LT in it. All Im saying is, right now, we are running off of the Denver 'sytem', and doing .........ok. But the offense is another beast with an elite back in the backfield.


As of right now, Henry has panned out as a clipboard holder. That being due to injury. I like the way he ran pretty well early in the season, but one thing I noticed that will not leave my mind: He takes big hits to the legs.


Alot.

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 05:26 PM
If Denver trades down from #12, which I hope they do, they could look to bring another RB to Denver.


Hey Stargazer, Im new around here and all but, is that you in the av and sig?


If so, youre my new favorite Freak, and Beefstew is out the door.

Stargazer
01-12-2008, 05:28 PM
Hey Stargazer, Im new around here and all but, is that you in the av and sig?


If so, youre my new favorite Freak, and Beefstew is out the door.

No, I have a pair between my legs.:cool:

Stargazer
01-12-2008, 05:29 PM
Draft history does suggest you pair a young franchise QB with a young franchise RB.

Bronco9798
01-12-2008, 05:30 PM
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- The father of Arkansas star Darren McFadden denied a report that he has sent paperwork to the NFL so his son can enter the upcoming draft.

ESPN.com, citing unidentified sources, reported that Graylon McFadden provided the relevant paperwork early this week.

"I hate to be saying anything because all these false stories and everything are floating around," Graylon McFadden told the Associated Press on Saturday. "But no I didn't -- and that's all I've got to say."

Darren McFadden, a junior tailback, was the Heisman Trophy runner-up in 2006 and 2007. His entry into the NFL Draft would come as no surprise. He's second on the Southeastern Conference's single-season and career rushing lists after running for 1,830 yards this past season and 4,590 during his three-year career.

The deadline for underclassmen to declare for the NFL Draft is next Tuesday. Felix Jones, Arkansas' other talented junior tailback, has said he'll announce his intentions Monday.

Skinny
01-12-2008, 05:32 PM
The question is, if one of these elite prospects comes to our selection in the second, should we take him?I think we can get a really good prospect in the 4th. If we don't select one on the first day. Seeing who fell to the second day will be pretty interesting with all the talent and the depth in the draft at the RB position. There's bound to be some pretty solid prospects ...

I would go WR if it's pertaining to the Offense in the second. The talent there just keeps getting better with all the Juniors declaring ...

We need some more 'players' at that position and get some depth ... something we're lacking there IMO ...

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 05:37 PM
No, I have a pair between my legs.:cool:


So does Beef, but I....................

I think.


:confused:



I think Beef has a pair of nuggets.

Not sure if he took it to the next er, um..........level.:salute:

lol! j/k beefer!

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 05:39 PM
I think we can get a really good prospect in the 4th. If we don't select one on the first day. Seeing who fell to the second day will be pretty interesting with all the talent and the depth in the draft at the RB position. There's bound to be some pretty solid prospects ...

I would go WR if it's pertaining to the Offense in the second. The talent there just keeps getting better with all the Juniors declaring ...

We need some more 'players' at that position and get some depth ... something we're lacking there IMO ...

Totally possible.

WARHORSE
01-12-2008, 05:40 PM
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- The father of Arkansas star Darren McFadden denied a report that he has sent paperwork to the NFL so his son can enter the upcoming draft.

ESPN.com, citing unidentified sources, reported that Graylon McFadden provided the relevant paperwork early this week.

"I hate to be saying anything because all these false stories and everything are floating around," Graylon McFadden told the Associated Press on Saturday. "But no I didn't -- and that's all I've got to say."

Darren McFadden, a junior tailback, was the Heisman Trophy runner-up in 2006 and 2007. His entry into the NFL Draft would come as no surprise. He's second on the Southeastern Conference's single-season and career rushing lists after running for 1,830 yards this past season and 4,590 during his three-year career.

The deadline for underclassmen to declare for the NFL Draft is next Tuesday. Felix Jones, Arkansas' other talented junior tailback, has said he'll announce his intentions Monday.



I heard he declared. Not true?

Is he in, or not?


Thats a little funky.


Not a very smart character if he didnt enter right now.


And I thought Jones was out as well.

TXBRONC
01-12-2008, 05:43 PM
I heard he declared. Not true?

Is he in, or not?


Thats a little funky.


Not a very smart character if he didnt enter right now.


And I thought Jones was out as well.


We'll know about both by next Tuesday.

Coast Guard
01-12-2008, 05:55 PM
I think we stick with what we have at RB and concentrate on Def & Off line help via the draft.

Bronco9798
01-12-2008, 05:57 PM
I heard he declared. Not true?

Is he in, or not?


Thats a little funky.


Not a very smart character if he didnt enter right now.


And I thought Jones was out as well.

Probably just his dad doing a spin job. That's my opinion.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-12-2008, 06:19 PM
I'm partial to the wait and see game. There are a few names I want to see carrying the rock in a Denver uni. If we trade back from 12, I definitely would be cool w/ a late 1st or early 2nd rd RB, because of the level of talent that should be available there. Mendenhall or Jon Stewart would be great in the Mile High City. Again...wait and see though, because we also have tradable mid rd picks and Foxxy and Ian Gold to try and get our #3 back. If James Davis lasts that long, I'd do what I could to get him at that point. It all of course hinges on henry's future in Denver. I personally know how great he is...but he does need to keep his ass on the field.

UnderArmour
01-12-2008, 06:25 PM
Hell yeah. Ray Rice or Jamaal Charles? That would rule.

DenBronx
01-12-2008, 06:46 PM
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- The father of Arkansas star Darren McFadden denied a report that he has sent paperwork to the NFL so his son can enter the upcoming draft.

ESPN.com, citing unidentified sources, reported that Graylon McFadden provided the relevant paperwork early this week.

"I hate to be saying anything because all these false stories and everything are floating around," Graylon McFadden told the Associated Press on Saturday. "But no I didn't -- and that's all I've got to say."

Darren McFadden, a junior tailback, was the Heisman Trophy runner-up in 2006 and 2007. His entry into the NFL Draft would come as no surprise. He's second on the Southeastern Conference's single-season and career rushing lists after running for 1,830 yards this past season and 4,590 during his three-year career.

The deadline for underclassmen to declare for the NFL Draft is next Tuesday. Felix Jones, Arkansas' other talented junior tailback, has said he'll announce his intentions Monday.


then why were they reporting that he declared late last night on ESPN news?

SmilinAssasSin27
01-12-2008, 07:08 PM
Maybe they aren't perfect and all knowing like some sheep believe them to be.

red98
01-12-2008, 08:15 PM
Hell yeah. Ray Rice or Jamaal Charles? That would rule.

Rice would be great with our 2nd round pick. Ran in a zone blocking scheme at Rutgers, carried it like 30 times a game, hard worker, good character.

He was told he would be a top 50 pick if he entered the draft, so he might be there when the Broncos turn comes.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2008, 08:27 PM
There are ten running backs who could do well in Denver. A bunch. Draft 'em.

broncofanatic1987
01-12-2008, 09:36 PM
There's no way I would target a running back in the first or second round this year. You just promoted a mediocre defensive coordinator to be the new defensive boss. Get him some talent to work with. Draft a defensive tackle and a linebacker. If those positions are addressed in free agency, fine, draft a running back. Heck, draft an offensive lineman too.

broncosfanscott
01-12-2008, 09:42 PM
I say no because we have Young, Hall, and Henry (if healthy and with the team) because there are more concerns/holes we need to fill first.

Scarface
01-13-2008, 01:47 AM
James Davis is an underrated back to keep an eye on:

http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070903/070903_clemson_hmed_9p.hmedium.jpg

mopatt24
01-13-2008, 01:51 AM
James Davis is an underrated back to keep an eye on:

http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070903/070903_clemson_hmed_9p.hmedium.jpg


I agree. Davis and Mendenhall are the backs I'm keeping an eye on. I believe mendenhall may slide to the second, we'll see how he does in the combine and pro day

mopatt24
01-13-2008, 02:10 AM
By not letting him see a carry in the season finale, we hear the Broncos have sent a message to RB Travis Henry that he will undoubtedly have to take a major pay cut to remain in Denver and challenge Selvin Young. If Henry does not return, the Broncos will add another back in free agency or the middle rounds of the draft to share the workload with Young.

Hawgdriver
01-13-2008, 04:28 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing the Broncos draft a RB in the second round, or even the first. I would assume they will target a DT, LB, or FS, but if their top picks are taken at their turn to select, I have no problem if they can scoop up Stewart in the first. I think McFadden will be long gone. I would be bummed if they picked up Mendenhall in the first, happy if they got him in the second. I wouldn't mind Charles in the second, he brings an element of speed that I'd be excited to see, but his size is a serious concern.

I know there is a lot of talk about how we need DT, etc., but if our targets are gone (unlikely that Connor, Clady, Phillips, and Rivers are all gone) and Stewart remains, I would be excited about the potential for a balanced attack so JC and crew can step it up a notch.

However, with the strong likelihood that we remain set with Young and Henry, I'm not holding my breath.

Any thought on Chris Johnson of ECU? 4.27 speed might give ST a boost, even if he's situational. Perhaps not a bad 2nd round gamble.

Stargazer
01-13-2008, 04:52 AM
By not letting him see a carry in the season finale, we hear the Broncos have sent a message to RB Travis Henry that he will undoubtedly have to take a major pay cut to remain in Denver and challenge Selvin Young. If Henry does not return, the Broncos will add another back in free agency or the middle rounds of the draft to share the workload with Young.

Trading down from #12 will land Denver a 3rd round pick atleast. If Henry is not coming back, Denver can easily select a RB in the top 3 rounds. I think this is the year where Shanahan trades down to acquire more selections. #12 is a hot pick and a team will offer to trade up.

Stargazer
01-13-2008, 04:54 AM
and Stewart remains, I would be excited about the potential for a balanced attack so JC and crew can step it up a notch.



Teams like to pair a franchise QB with a franchis RB. I wouldn't be shocked if Denver selects a RB in the top 3 rounds.

Bronco9798
01-13-2008, 08:07 AM
Henry will be back with a restructured deal. I think Shanny gives him one more go with Young and Hall taking the #2 and #3 spot. Then we'll draft a RB in the later rounds on day 2.

NameUsedBefore
01-13-2008, 09:10 AM
Denver should never even use a 1st-day pick on a RB until these undrafted and late round guys stop working.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-13-2008, 09:18 AM
Henry will be back with a restructured deal. I think Shanny gives him one more go with Young and Hall taking the #2 and #3 spot. Then we'll draft a RB in the later rounds on day 2.

Although more likely than a RB in rounds 1 or 2, I still think that if Shanny, at all, wants a RB in this draft he should really look in the late 2nd/early 3rd. The RB "value" in that area should be incredible.

Bronco Bible
01-13-2008, 09:36 AM
I would say NO they need to let a back have a chance to thrive or should I say grow into the system. + if we want in the future to sign a free agent stud they would hesitate because Denver purges there produtive backs to soon (that would be the perception IMO)

atwater27
01-13-2008, 09:37 AM
How bout

NO!!!

jrelway
01-13-2008, 11:52 AM
unless its mcfadden, dont draft a RB till the later later rounds. spend our picks on OL DL or LB. I say we wait for better safeties next year.

mopatt24
01-13-2008, 12:25 PM
I expect us to put a bid in on Turner in FA, but if we cant get him, im thinking either Jamaal Charles or Ray Rice in the later rounds. That maybe all with the RB situation this offseason.

WARHORSE
01-13-2008, 04:04 PM
Just a reminder that Denver drafted Portis the offseason following Mike Andersons 1500 yard season. The reason? He was their top rated runningback and still there in the second round.


To be honest, there may be other teams that do the same.

But either way, the more great prospects, the better the players pushed into the second round, the better chance for us to take advantage.........that includes possibly trading away next years number one.

If we have to pick at 12, once again, its Dorsey, Ellis, either of the Longs, or Phillips that Id like to see us get. If they arent there, Id rather trade back, since a LB will be available also. If they arent there and we still have to pick, Id say Clady.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-13-2008, 04:59 PM
no problem w/ that way of thinking

EMB6903
01-13-2008, 05:14 PM
There are now a 'slew' of great running back prospects coming out in the draft. I thought Id put it up for discussion here realizing the many facets of aquiring a RB in this off season that have now opened up. It is sure to affect a number of offseason areas.

Ranking the top five RBs that would fit Denver according to WH:

1. Jonathan Stewart
2. Jamaal Charles
3. Rashard Mendenhall
4. Felix Jones
5. Darren McFadden(I havent seen him run between the tackles at all, and he fumbles)

Outside at 6: Ray Rice

Without a doubt, one of those top five backs will hit Denver at our second round selection, which brings up a number of thoughts to consider.

But not really talked about is what this will do to the free agent class this year of runningbacks.

Michael Turner
Marion Barber
Julius Jones

Those would be the top three, no? I dont think anyone will be overpaying for these guys with the crazy number of JR. RBs that have declared.

No matter what, these guys will end up SOMEWHERE, which means there will be another team that has one less spot to fill. If Dallas keeps one of the two they have, they will look to resign or draft another, somewhere.

The question is, if one of these elite prospects comes to our selection in the second, should we take him?

James Davis will be a better pro then Stewart and Ray Rice and Felix jones Imo, If we could get him in the 4th it would be a complete steal.

TXBRONC
01-13-2008, 05:36 PM
Just a reminder that Denver drafted Portis the offseason following Mike Andersons 1500 yard season. The reason? He was their top rated runningback and still there in the second round.


To be honest, there may be other teams that do the same.

But either way, the more great prospects, the better the players pushed into the second round, the better chance for us to take advantage.........that includes possibly trading away next years number one.

If we have to pick at 12, once again, its Dorsey, Ellis, either of the Longs, or Phillips that Id like to see us get. If they arent there, Id rather trade back, since a LB will be available also. If they arent there and we still have to pick, Id say Clady.

Actually Portis was drafted two years later.

UnderArmour
01-13-2008, 06:06 PM
Slaton came out, he'd be pretty sweet too. I'd be happy if we took a RB in the 2nd. So much talent this year.

BeefStew25
01-13-2008, 06:58 PM
Hey Stargazer, Im new around here and all but, is that you in the av and sig?


If so, youre my new favorite Freak, and Beefstew is out the door.

You son of a......I want the ring back.

Lonestar
01-13-2008, 07:17 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing the Broncos draft a RB in the second round, or even the first. I would assume they will target a DT, LB, or FS, but if their top picks are taken at their turn to select, I have no problem if they can scoop up Stewart in the first. I think McFadden will be long gone. I would be bummed if they picked up Mendenhall in the first, happy if they got him in the second. I wouldn't mind Charles in the second, he brings an element of speed that I'd be excited to see, but his size is a serious concern.

I know there is a lot of talk about how we need DT, etc., but if our targets are gone (unlikely that Connor, Clady, Phillips, and Rivers are all gone) and Stewart remains, I would be excited about the potential for a balanced attack so JC and crew can step it up a notch.

However, with the strong likelihood that we remain set with Young and Henry, I'm not holding my breath.

Any thought on Chris Johnson of ECU? 4.27 speed might give ST a boost, even if he's situational. Perhaps not a bad 2nd round gamble.

With mikey NO ONE ever knows what he is gonna do be for he does it..

It is clear to everyone that has ANY semblance of football knowledge what they need and as you listed them yo agree wit almost everyone. Now the real question is will mikey the moron show up on DAFT day or will the 2006 Mikey show up?

Bronco9798
01-13-2008, 07:31 PM
With mikey NO ONE ever knows what he is gonna do be for he does it..

It is clear to everyone that has ANY semblance of football knowledge what they need and as you listed them yo agree wit almost everyone. Now the real question is will mikey the moron show up on DAFT day or will the 2006 Mikey show up?

Have you ever posted anything without referring to Shanahan? Just curious.

MOtorboat
01-13-2008, 07:39 PM
Have you ever posted anything without referring to Shanahan? Just curious.

Worst coach in the league. Don't you know that?

Bronco9798
01-13-2008, 07:42 PM
Worst coach in the league. Don't you know that?

I have never, ever seen a post where he don't use the word, mikey. Ever.

Lonestar
01-13-2008, 07:43 PM
Have you ever posted anything without referring to Shanahan? Just curious.



I suppose I have go look at my posts. If it means that much to you, I'm sure you can find one or two..

Lonestar
01-13-2008, 07:50 PM
Worst coach in the league. Don't you know that?

Actually he is one of the best, just a lousy GM. I have few issues with his Offensive prowess just his personnel decisions..

He came to town and built a hell of a team for the two super bowls out of FA and low draft choice OLINE guys..

But that was almost 10 years ago and since he has had up till now made poor FA choices for the most part and have cost this team almost countless millions in dead cap space over the past decade.

Now Pat says that era is over making poor FA choices. SO maybe he will realized his ONLY other option is building through the draft. Something his contemporaries figured out many many moons ago.

WARHORSE
01-14-2008, 06:47 AM
You son of a......I want the ring back.


What ring would that be? The ring in the bathtub??


PURPLE RING! PURPLE RIIINNGGGGHHHH!!!!


You dont have to be rich, to be my girl. You dont have to be cool, to rule my world.

I jess want to party like its 1999.

So this is what it sounds like, when doves cry????

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/barneyspank.gifAHEEE HEEE!

BOSSHOGG30
01-14-2008, 10:32 AM
I want one, but I think Henry takes a pay cut. He has to realize that he won't make much if anything if he goes somewhere else and with the runningback depth in the NFL draft he knows he won't be able to force a trade. I think Denver is stuck with him.

MOtorboat
01-14-2008, 11:03 AM
Alright, I finally voted...Only if its McFadden.

We need so much more talent at so many more positions, that I just don't think we can blow our wad with selecting a running back. We have Travis Henry, and bong-hitting aside, the guy was a pretty good running back until he got hurt. Then, Selvin Young stepped in and did a good job in his stead. I think we just have to stick with these guys this year, and work on finding depth at other positions, namely offensive line, defensive tackle and linebacker.

tubby
01-14-2008, 11:17 AM
The last time the Broncos did not have a 1000 yard rusher......they drafted Portis in the 2nd round.

BOSSHOGG30
01-14-2008, 12:06 PM
The last time the Broncos did not have a 1000 yard rusher......they drafted Portis in the 2nd round.

way to give us hope Tubby:beer:

Broncolingus
01-14-2008, 01:06 PM
I fundamentally believe to take the best player available...

That said, the need is so great for quality offensive and defensive linemen (and FB too), that unless it's a superstar (prob. McFadden) or the next lineman is so far down on the depth chart, I just don't see taking a RB that high.

BigDaddyBronco
01-14-2008, 01:23 PM
I'll take my chances with Shanny's history of late round and free agent rookie running backs. All you get with a high pick franchise RB is a rich, hurt, 30 year old, franchise running back (aka Edgerrin James or Shaun Alexander anyone).

mclark
01-14-2008, 04:01 PM
If we don't help ourselves in free-agency (oline or defensive core), then NO, don't draft a running back.

BOSSHOGG30
01-14-2008, 04:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AL_cF5m_jqw

G_Money
01-14-2008, 04:34 PM
I'll take my chances with Shanny's history of late round and free agent rookie running backs. All you get with a high pick franchise RB is a rich, hurt, 30 year old, franchise running back (aka Edgerrin James or Shaun Alexander anyone).

Um...

Edge and Shaun weren't 30 when they came out of college.

What you actually get is several years of tremendous production, after which you can either decide to pay the RB or let him go and try to replace his production.

Or maybe you've forgotten that TD was given 8 mil a year after his SB performance to get him to stick around. I wouldn't have paid either Edge or Alexander, but I would have done exactly what the Broncos did do and paid TD.

It doesn't matter where you were drafted - if you get a great RB, expect to pay him if you want to keep him more than 5 years.

I don't care if we get a guy in the 2nd or the 7th as long as he's the right guy to be the next great Denver back.

After he's won a coupla rushing titles and we're playoff juggernauts we can worry about whether to extend him at big bucks or let him go.

That'd be an awesome debate to be able to have, I'm thinkin. :salute:

~G

WARHORSE
01-14-2008, 04:55 PM
I forget who mentioned Matt Forte, but lookin at him now, hes not the purtiest runner, but his production speaks for itself. While acknowledging the fact that running is a team effort, some of the other backs who ran against the same opponents as Forte didnt fare as well.

Not only did he scrap over 2000 yards, he spent most of his time in the endzone.

Production over potential every time. Its what you do on the field that counts.


WHAT A DRAFT TO SPIN!!!!!


Im feelin like I can accomplish alot today, dont stop me now.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/boypeeinintoilet.gif

Astrass
01-14-2008, 04:58 PM
I think Henry will restructure. If so then I don't see an need to draft a RB untill maybe later in the rounds.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-14-2008, 05:02 PM
If Denver passed up the talent at running back in this year's draft, I don't think I could ever forgive them.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-14-2008, 05:25 PM
Agreed...there are just too many of em not to get 1..like say...i dunno..a certain Clemson Tiger?

EMB6903
01-14-2008, 05:47 PM
Slaton came out, he'd be pretty sweet too. I'd be happy if we took a RB in the 2nd. So much talent this year.

Slaton will be a bust in the NFL, a very speedy guy with no moves, hes a straight line runner whos soft... maybe in the Big East but he wont be able to get away with that in the pros

WARHORSE
01-15-2008, 01:57 AM
I never heard of Kevin Smith before I looked that the Sporting News had him ranked number 2 over everyone except McFadden.

University of Central Florida, but man this kid looks good. Reminds me of someone..............take a look and see if we hit on the same thought.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4aUuzBgVT98

By the way, he ran for over 2500 yards.
No matter what college conference you play in, 2500 yds is impressive.
Check his game totals:

217
149
124
223
147
55
170
175
188
320
177
219
284
119

fcspikeit
01-15-2008, 03:07 AM
I never heard of Kevin Smith before I looked that the Sporting News had him ranked number 2 over everyone except McFadden.

University of Central Florida, but man this kid looks good. Reminds me of someone..............take a look and see if we hit on the same thought.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4aUuzBgVT98

By the way, he ran for over 2500 yards.
No matter what college conference you play in, 2500 yds is impressive.
Check his game totals:

217
149
124
223
147
55
170
175
188
320
177
219
284
119

That is impressive! It looked like a highlight reel, instead of all 41 carries from one game. He has great moves and I love how he shoots the cap. He reminds me a bit of LJ but I think he is quicker through the hole. He juke's about like LT. One of the most impressive things was how well he was running after getting the ball 41 times and 200+ yards. I don't care how pour the D is, that guy is a work horse....

That being said..

I hate watching highlight tapes of running backs :tsk: You see them and all you can thing is,, Imagine that in Orange and Blue. Then you think of drafting a DT who you only see 4 or 5 times in the game and you think.. This guy will make more of an impact. But it just isn't the case. We have over looked the less sexy positions for far to long.

In closing, I will say this...

If we get Ellis in the first round, I wouldn't be to pissed if we grabbed Smith in the second :D But then what do we do at S :frusty:

omac
01-15-2008, 03:19 AM
No high pick rb's please.

DL first and foremost, OL next.

When healthy, few teams can match the productivity of our current rb's as a group.

Bozo Jr.
01-15-2008, 08:51 AM
I don't think drafting another RB that high would be a step in the right direction. The only possible exception would be that if we used him as trade bait for a another draft pick or an established OT. What I would like to see is protection for Cutty, and some pissed off OLB's.

Rd. 1: OT
Rd. 2: OLB
Rd. 3: DT
Rd. 4: OT
Rd. 5: SS
Rd. 6: OLB
Rd. 7: FB

SmilinAssasSin27
01-15-2008, 08:53 AM
Kevin Smith is a solid RB, but he carried the ball a LOT at UCF. It's kind of a buyer beware type of thing. Does he have enuff left in him for substantial years in the NFL or is he gonna tire out too quickly?

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 09:16 AM
Honestly, I'm leery of taking a running back. We just have so many other needs. So many.

In order of priority:
OL (Several pieces, imo...as many as three)
DT (At least one, and maybe a late-rounder for depth)
LB (Both outside linebacker positions)
S (Possibly both positions, depending on what Lynch decides to do)

I think we should try to draft quality players in the draft to fill these positions, before we look to free agency. And, that means, no running back in the draft.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-15-2008, 09:20 AM
But when you look at the draft, it depends on the level of talent available. We NEED a Safety. However, if we're in round 3 and the likes of James Davis is staring us square in the face while all the legit S and DT options (of which there are few) are gone, do we reach just cuz of a need? I say no. Need is important, but best player available will also help the team in the long run. We're not going to the SB next year. If we don't fill every spot...it's called building.

BigDaddyBronco
01-15-2008, 09:36 AM
I really think that unless there is a defesive difference maker at #12, Shanny should trade back and try and stockpile 1st day picks. I would limit my #12 pick to Ellis or Phillips (if they are what we think they are, still need combine info, etc., no 6 Wonderlics or anything). If they are not there trade down. Obviously Dorsey, McFadden, and Long would be gone by the 12th pick.
There seem to be a lot of good RB's in the draft, so they should be able to get someone decent in the 4th round or later.
With as many holes as they have, OT, DT, LB, S they need to have as many picks as possible because at least half of them will not pan out.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-15-2008, 09:57 AM
Yeah...I'm not high on afirst round OT per se, but if Ellis and KP are gone (which is a possibility since Animal is staying at OSU), I'd be cool moving back a bit to grab Clady or Otah. I LOVE Connor, but the LB depth is too good not to consider waiting on someone else while filling another need.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 10:03 AM
I want to trade back. We have too many holes to fill and too many question marks to begin the 2008 season. I'm interested in OT Michael Oher and to take him at 12 just doesn't make much sense when we can trade back add another 1st day pick and get a guy to protect Culter for a very long time. The guy is huge, but moves really well and still has plenty of potential to become one of the leagues best.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-15-2008, 10:04 AM
As asked elsewhere? Did he even declare?

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 10:07 AM
As asked elsewhere? Did he even declare?

As anwered elsewhere...yes :laugh:

Requiem / The Dagda
01-15-2008, 10:40 AM
Honestly, I'm leery of taking a running back. We just have so many other needs. So many.

In order of priority:
OL (Several pieces, imo...as many as three)
DT (At least one, and maybe a late-rounder for depth)
LB (Both outside linebacker positions)
S (Possibly both positions, depending on what Lynch decides to do)

I think we should try to draft quality players in the draft to fill these positions, before we look to free agency. And, that means, no running back in the draft.

Well, it's too bad free agency happens before the draft. ;)

We won't be able to draft everything.

If you're content with Young and Hall being our backs, that's you're prerogative, but it's time the "never ending stable" comes to and end and Denver finds them a real talent.

Clearly, Young and Henry aren't the options this team are looking for long-term.

G_Money
01-15-2008, 10:53 AM
Yep.

Shanahan's acknowledged as much too, with his non-endorsement of Henry, his assertion that they'll definitely have to look at that contract in the off-season, and that Selvin's a great back - for 15 carries a game.

If Henry isn't the guy, and neither Hall nor Young can tote the rock 25 times a game without getting injured, then we need another back.

Those are Shanny's intimations, and I agree with them.

So I expect a back in this draft. We can get a 1st-day back on the second day there are quality backs everywhere.

I just hope Mike stops picking up merely useful backs as UFAs and gets a really good one somewhere in the middle of the draft.

A great line makes any back look good, but a good back can look good with or without a great line.

So start fixing the line, get a good back, and watch him become great as the line improves along with him.

~G

BigDaddyBronco
01-15-2008, 11:00 AM
If Henry will not rework his contract (which I think he'll do as he is running out of options for having a career, he's got to feed those 9 kids) then we'll need another big punishing back. I'm not sold on Selvin Young or Andre Hall (not seen enough game action) being able to pound it into the endzone. With all of Henry's problems he did seem to be able to fall forward and get a yard or two.

With all of the underclassmen declaring the maybe Matt Forte falls into the 4th round. He is big enough to fall forward.

mclark
01-15-2008, 11:24 AM
But when you look at the draft, it depends on the level of talent available. We NEED a Safety. However, if we're in round 3 and the likes of James Davis is staring us square in the face while all the legit S and DT options (of which there are few) are gone, do we reach just cuz of a need? I say no. Need is important, but best player available will also help the team in the long run. We're not going to the SB next year. If we don't fill every spot...it's called building.

We don't have a third round pick.

mclark
01-15-2008, 11:28 AM
I don't think drafting another RB that high would be a step in the right direction. The only possible exception would be that if we used him as trade bait for a another draft pick or an established OT. What I would like to see is protection for Cutty, and some pissed off OLB's.

Rd. 1: OT
Rd. 2: OLB
Rd. 3: DT
Rd. 4: OT
Rd. 5: SS
Rd. 6: OLB
Rd. 7: FB

I think these are the picks we have. Let me know if this is not correct.

First-Round Selection
Second-Round Selection
(2) Fourth-Round Selections
(2) Fifth-Round Selections
(2) Seventh-Round Selections

Traveler
01-15-2008, 11:30 AM
Without researching, does anyone know who's considered the best remaining RB with speed and power that might be available in the 2nd round?

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 11:43 AM
Without researching, does anyone know who's considered the best remaining RB with speed and power that might be available in the 2nd round?

Jamaal Charles, RB, Texas
James Davis, RB, Clemson

Both could be available where we pick in Round 2.

mclark
01-15-2008, 11:45 AM
Without researching, does anyone know who's considered the best remaining RB with speed and power that might be available in the 2nd round?

(Jr) Jamaal Charles, Texas;

(Jr) Rashard Mendenhal, Illinois;

(Jr) Ray Rice, Rutgers;

Mike Hart, Michigan;

(Jr) James Davis, Clemson;

Who's the best of this group, for speed and power? Mendenhall has the best combination of speed and size probably. Rice is a great inside runner. Hart has a lot of heart, is tough as nails but is not fast.

Charles is a guy with exciting potential. He did everything at Texas -- although he had a fumbling problem early this year.

James Davis. We all remember another southern running back named Davis.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 11:47 AM
Well, it's too bad free agency happens before the draft. ;)

We won't be able to draft everything.

If you're content with Young and Hall being our backs, that's you're prerogative, but it's time the "never ending stable" comes to and end and Denver finds them a real talent.

Clearly, Young and Henry aren't the options this team are looking for long-term.

So by advocating an end to the "never ending stable," you want us to change running backs again?

How do we know Young isn't the long-term solution? That may be your opinion. I'd like to see another year of him, unless he's not healthy enough to continue. I'll agree that Henry isn't the long-term solution, but I don't see how it helps end the rotating running backs by rotating them again.

Traveler
01-15-2008, 12:49 PM
(Jr) Jamaal Charles, Texas;

(Jr) Rashard Mendenhal, Illinois;

(Jr) Ray Rice, Rutgers;

Mike Hart, Michigan;

(Jr) James Davis, Clemson;

Who's the best of this group, for speed and power? Mendenhall has the best combination of speed and size probably. Rice is a great inside runner. Hart has a lot of heart, is tough as nails but is not fast.

Charles is a guy with exciting potential. He did everything at Texas -- although he had a fumbling problem early this year.

James Davis. We all remember another southern running back named Davis.


Thanks for the info.

G_Money
01-15-2008, 12:55 PM
So by advocating an end to the "never ending stable," you want us to change running backs again?

How do we know Young isn't the long-term solution? That may be your opinion. I'd like to see another year of him, unless he's not healthy enough to continue. I'll agree that Henry isn't the long-term solution, but I don't see how it helps end the rotating running backs by rotating them again.

If Selvin's injury problems carry over, we're rotating running backs by default anyway.

Much better IMO to try to draft the main guy, let Selvin be our Michael Turner, and have two really good backs backing each other up. Anything that keeps Young healthy enough to contribute in the way he is capable of and gets the onus off of Henry is good for me.

~G

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 01:01 PM
Charles and Davis are the best options. Rice is slower and doesn't have breakaway speed, Hart is small and Mendenhall just simply lacks any burst at all.

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:04 PM
Too many fans think a runningback has to be able to run 80 yards to be successful................I would prefer a back that can move the chains and convert on third downs.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:08 PM
Too many fans think a runningback has to be able to run 80 yards to be successful................I would prefer a back that can move the chains and convert on third downs.

Honestly, after watching the last couple of years, I could give a **** about first downs. We need touchdowns. We need offensive lineman that can execute in the red zone. I still don't think the running back is the problem.

G_Money
01-15-2008, 01:20 PM
I'm with Diver on this.

I don't care if the dude gets caught after 40 yards, I care if 3rd-and-2 turns into 1st-and-10 and if 1st-and-goal comes out to be 7 instead of 3 on the scoreboard.

Get a guy who can see the gap, hit it hard, and muscle it over even when the OL didn't do their jobs 100% correctly, and we might have something.

The Broncos were 9th in rush ypg this year (a slip from our normal top-5 finishes), they were 5th in ypc, but they were 15th in coverting 3rd downs and 21st in points.

They can still run it when it doesn't matter, but when it DOES matter I want conversions and points, dammit.

~G

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 01:21 PM
Too many fans think a runningback has to be able to run 80 yards to be successful................I would prefer a back that can move the chains and convert on third downs.

Fine...but he has to be able to get to and through the line before he can do that. I don't see Hart, Rice or Mendenhall doing that as successfully as James or Charles at the next level.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:23 PM
I'm with Diver on this.

I don't care if the dude gets caught after 40 yards, I care if 3rd-and-2 turns into 1st-and-10 and if 1st-and-goal comes out to be 7 instead of 3 on the scoreboard.

Get a guy who can see the gap, hit it hard, and muscle it over even when the OL didn't do their jobs 100% correctly, and we might have something.

The Broncos were 9th in rush ypg this year (a slip from our normal top-5 finishes), they were 5th in ypc, but they were 15th in coverting 3rd downs and 21st in points.

They can still run it when it doesn't matter, but when it DOES matter I want conversions and points, dammit.

~G

Undersized and under-producing offensive lineman. We need a left tackle, a right tackle and another guard, imo.

atwater27
01-15-2008, 01:23 PM
Yeah, IF we decide to pick up a runner, it needs to be a power guy. You know, like Henry but without the glass body.

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:23 PM
Fine...but he has to be able to get to and through the line before he can do that. I don't see Hart, Rice or Mendenhall doing that as successfully as James or Charles at the next level.

Mendenhall can................I have no doubts about that.................but remember what system you're picturing him in.............In Denver's backfield, we simply don't need Jim Brown................Curtis Martin would be just fine.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:24 PM
Yeah, IF we decide to pick up a runner, it needs to be a power guy. You know, like Henry but without the glass body.

...or the weed problem.

atwater27
01-15-2008, 01:24 PM
TJ Duckett would be a fine pickup. and cheap too. He is a proven goalline runner.

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:25 PM
Undersized and under-producing offensive lineman. We need a left tackle, a right tackle and another guard, imo.


What the hell is wrong with Kuper..........303 and Holland.........322?

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 01:26 PM
Mendenhall can................I have no doubts about that.................but remember what system you're picturing him in.............In Denver's backfield, we simply don't need Jim Brown................Curtis Martin would be just fine.

I'll concede on Mendenhall. What I like most about him is the lack of mileage on him from the college game

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:27 PM
What the hell is wrong with Kuper..........303 and Holland.........322?

Apparently toughness, because our offense stalled when it mattered.

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:30 PM
Apparently toughness, because our offense stalled when it mattered.


So I suppose that's the Guards fault?

G_Money
01-15-2008, 01:31 PM
Fine...but he has to be able to get to and through the line before he can do that. I don't see Hart, Rice or Mendenhall doing that as successfully as James or Charles at the next level.

I'm not as sold on Charles being the guy.

I'd take Mendenhall before Charles.

I really like Charles, but if he puts the ball on the ground he's not gonna be here for long, whatever his talent level. That's one of Rice's major selling points. Ray can tote the rock full-time, hasn't really been injured, and doesn't drop the ball.

~G

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:31 PM
Apparently toughness, because our offense stalled when it mattered.


Defensive players get paid too MB..............Dallas needs all new Guards too, right?

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:33 PM
I'm not as sold on Charles being the guy.

I'd take Mendenhall before Charles.

I really like Charles, but if he puts the ball on the ground he's not gonna be here for long, whatever his talent level. That's one of Rice's major selling points. Ray can tote the rock full-time, hasn't really been injured, and doesn't drop the ball.

~G

Charles is a more exciting back.................But don't we need a back that can be consistent? ....................Everyone talks about how SMALL Selvin Young is....LMAO..............But Charles is only 200 pounds............wtf?

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:33 PM
So I suppose that's the Guards fault?

I'm more liable to blame the offensive line than a running back. I don't care who you have running the ball, you better have five good offensive linemen, and frankly, I didn't see that this year.

So, it would be great to have Mendenhall or Charles or Davis, or even McFadden, but until we have an offensive line that decides they want to drive their opponent away from the point of attack and create holes, we aren't going to score in the red zone.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:35 PM
Defensive players get paid too MB..............Dallas needs all new Guards too, right?

Maybe they do. And they have one of your "studs" running for them, too. How did that work on Saturday?

BTW, that's a pretty bad comparison, seeing how that's probably the best defensive line in football this year in the Giants.

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:35 PM
I'm more liable to blame the offensive line than a running back. I don't care who you have running the ball, you better have five good offensive linemen, and frankly, I didn't see that this year.

So, it would be great to have Mendenhall or Charles or Davis, or even McFadden, but until we have an offensive line that decides they want to drive their opponent away from the point of attack and create holes, we aren't going to score in the red zone.

So, you don't want different Guards................You want a different scheme.................No more zone cut blocking, right?

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:38 PM
So, you don't want different Gaurds................You want a different scheme.................No more zone cut blocking, right?

Even in a zone blocking scheme you have to be able to move the defensive lineman where you want him to go, HD. Did you see that this year?

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 01:45 PM
1) OT M. Oher (trade back)
2) WR A.Bowman or WR J.Hardy
2) LB P.Wheeler (from trading back)
3) RB J.Davis (Foxworth trade)
4) DT L.Williams
4) S/CB S.Castille
5) S J.Silva
5) OLB/DE A.Studebaker
7) DT N.Robinson
7) P. M.Dragosavich

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:47 PM
Even in a zone blocking scheme you have to be able to move the defensive lineman where you want him to go, HD. Did you see that this year?

Plenty of times..................you're just pissed because we didn't have the Offense of 1998.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:48 PM
Plenty of times..................you're just pissed because we didn't have the Offense of 1998.

Well...I would have liked to see a few red zone touchdowns, that's all. I don't think that's asking for the 1998 offense, is it?

Lonestar
01-15-2008, 01:50 PM
If Selvin's injury problems carry over, we're rotating running backs by default anyway.

Much better IMO to try to draft the main guy, let Selvin be our Michael Turner, and have two really good backs backing each other up. Anything that keeps Young healthy enough to contribute in the way he is capable of and gets the onus off of Henry is good for me.

~G


mikey was quoted saying that young, stokely and hall would get less action next year to help stave off injuries..

"• Notes: Great in Moderation -- Mike Shanahan hopes to play Selvin Young, Andre Hall and Brandon Stokley fewer plays next year to keep them productive ... Joe Baker and Jim Ryan switch jobs ... and more in the season-ending notebook."

http://web1.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=7725

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 01:55 PM
Well...I would have liked to see a few red zone touchdowns, that's all. I don't think that's asking for the 1998 offense, is it?


Who wouldn't................I blame half of those failed attempts on playcalling.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 01:59 PM
Who wouldn't................I blame half of those failed attempts on playcalling.

Which still isn't fixed by drafting a running back, is it?

Requiem / The Dagda
01-15-2008, 02:14 PM
BOSS, I do like the mock - but I don't see us getting a third rounder for Foxworth. We're talking about a guy who has played "solid" football, but nothing spectacular. He has neither had the time or the ability to excel at corner or safety. Maybe your belief is that since he's still young and has versatility that helps, but I don't know man - a third rounder seems an awful lot for a guy who is really just a jack of all trades but a master of none.

Anyhoo, I think he has more value to Denver anyways. If we're in a pinch, he can help out numerous areas - I don't disagree with your desire to trade him off though. If we could get that pick for him and do the draft you just did, I'd wet myself.

Hawgdriver
01-15-2008, 02:23 PM
I'm not as sold on Charles being the guy.

I'd take Mendenhall before Charles.



Everyone would take Mendenhall before Charles. That's why Mendenhall is going to go in the first and Charles in the second. Mendenhall just won't be there at 44. If he was, there's no question which to choose.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-15-2008, 02:28 PM
Everyone would take Mendenhall before Charles. That's why Mendenhall is going to go in the first and Charles in the second. Mendenhall just won't be there at 44. If he was, there's no question which to choose.

Absolutely, and I'd be fine with Charles here in Denver.

I'd take any of these juniors, honestly. Slaton is probably the worst fit, but I'd take any of those dudes. Any of them. They're all pretty solid scheme fits.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 02:30 PM
Everyone would take Mendenhall before Charles. That's why Mendenhall is going to go in the first and Charles in the second. Mendenhall just won't be there at 44. If he was, there's no question which to choose.

I wouldn't!

HolyDiver
01-15-2008, 02:31 PM
Which still isn't fixed by drafting a running back, is it?


Nope..............And I'm not the one wanting us to draft a Runningback................Maybe in the 5th or 7th round though.

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 02:33 PM
Can't say I'd be pleased with drafting a RB early either. I have yet to see the problem with Henry/Young/Hall if those are the ones we need to go with.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 02:37 PM
Denver needs a stud runningback.... I'm sick and tired of average! We don't need to use a 1st rounder, but by all means use that 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder on a RB! I understand T.D. was a great 6th round pick up.. but a guy like T.D. is super rare!

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 02:39 PM
Denver needs a stud runningback.... I'm sick and tired of average! We don't need to use a 1st rounder, but by all means use that 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder on a RB! I understand T.D. was a great 6th round pick up.. but a guy like T.D. is super rare!

I won't argue with this fact, but when it becomes our primary area of need, then I'll be more concerned about it. Until then...we need a line to block for them and some defense to get the ball back for them.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 02:45 PM
I won't argue with this fact, but when it becomes our primary area of need, then I'll be more concerned about it. Until then...we need a line to block for them and some defense to get the ball back for them.

The Offensive line talent is good in this draft... using a 2nd rounder on a runningback won't hurt us. We have a lot of young and promissing talent already with Holland, Kuper, Myers, Harris and Pears. It also looks like Hamilton and Nalen will be back.

Defensive line, like it or not, we have Moss, Doom, Crowder, and Thomas.... Shanny won't give up on them this early considering Doom is almost a Pro Bowler and the other three will be coming into there 2nd year in the league. We already have decent depth with Ekuban, Engelberger, and McKinley and Harris. I can see us adding a guy or two to the D-line, but I don't see Shanny going buck wild here.

Shanny is probably more concerned with the safety position and will probably look to add another linebacker. We have plenty of picks to address the needs.

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 02:59 PM
The Offensive line talent is good in this draft... using a 2nd rounder on a runningback won't hurt us. We have a lot of young and promissing talent already with Holland, Kuper, Myers, Harris and Pears. It also looks like Hamilton and Nalen will be back.

Defensive line, like it or not, we have Moss, Doom, Crowder, and Thomas.... Shanny won't give up on them this early considering Doom is almost a Pro Bowler and the other three will be coming into there 2nd year in the league. We already have decent depth with Ekuban, Engelberger, and McKinley and Harris. I can see us adding a guy or two to the D-line, but I don't see Shanny going buck wild here.

Shanny is probably more concerned with the safety position and will probably look to add another linebacker. We have plenty of picks to address the needs.

I'm never confident in players drafted 5-7 sticking around. The talent guarantee is far less than the early rounds.

mclark
01-15-2008, 03:18 PM
I'm thinking teams won't bid as highly on Michael Turner since there are so many good running backs in the draft. I'm thinking we might be able to get him for less money than otherwise.

mclark
01-15-2008, 03:20 PM
Denver needs a stud runningback.... I'm sick and tired of average! We don't need to use a 1st rounder, but by all means use that 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder on a RB! I understand T.D. was a great 6th round pick up.. but a guy like T.D. is super rare!

I don't think we can assume we have a third round pick until we do. (We don't, right?)

mclark
01-15-2008, 03:33 PM
It's clear to me we need more depth at running back (a #1, with Young and Hall as depth). Do we get it in free agency (Turner)? If not, then we'll need to draft a running back.

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 03:35 PM
When Henry is released I'll believe we're looking for another back.

mclark
01-15-2008, 03:36 PM
When Henry is released I'll believe we're looking for another back.

Do you think we'll keep him?

Lonestar
01-15-2008, 04:15 PM
with mikeys comments for the PC last week I do not see us going after a RB if one should fall to us perhaps, but unless Thenry gets the boot for not wanting to talk turkey on his contract. then he might do something. I do not see him spending big bucks again on RB turner.

As you all think DT, OT and FS should be the first priorities

G_Money
01-15-2008, 04:19 PM
When Henry is released I'll believe we're looking for another back.

I expect to be reworking his contract significantly in the next 6 weeks. If that happens, he'll probably be around next season, but I don't mind getting a back a year early instead of a year late, and next year is NOT the year to looking for a RB.

With our whole RB corps and their various injuries, I wouldn't exactly call this year "too soon" either regardless of Henry being here or not.

LB and S 1st day, RB and OL 2nd day. Our chances of hitting on OL in rounds 5-7 is much greater than our chances with S or DL in those rounds.

I leave the DL problem for another year, honestly - we need to see if our guys are gonna work out there first. Crowder, Thomas, Moss, Doom, Peterson and McKinley could be fine in a blitz-oriented D. Let me see the scheme and see how the kids play when they're not asked to be styrofoam statues in the middle of the field first.

Fix the other defensive holes this year on the 1st day, and get some of the deeper WR and RB classes on the second day to go with our late-round OL picks.

We can make a real dent in our talent deficiencies in this draft. And I still think a real RB is a deficiency on this team. I don't need one in the 2nd round (unless we trade back and grab another 1st day pick) but I do want one by the end of the 5th.

~G

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 04:23 PM
Do you think we'll keep him?

One way or another, I think he'll be on the roster and run for 1200 yards...at least.

G_Money
01-15-2008, 04:39 PM
One way or another, I think he'll be on the roster and run for 1200 yards...at least.

Are you including the yards that come while running from the law, trailing bong-smoke in his wake?

~G

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 04:40 PM
Are you including the yards that come while running from the law, trailing bong-smoke in his wake?

~G

I'll stand by my statement. Let him focus on the season without distractions and he'll get AT LEAST 1200.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 04:44 PM
I'll stand by my statement. Let him focus on the season without distractions and he'll get AT LEAST 1200.

Distractions aren't his only problem... he has yet to stay healthy... his running style assures you of one thing... he won't stay healthy.

CoachChaz
01-15-2008, 04:46 PM
Distractions aren't his only problem... he has yet to stay healthy... his running style assures you of one thing... he won't stay healthy.

I don't disagree...but I'll still stand by my statement.

BOSSHOGG30
01-15-2008, 04:47 PM
I don't disagree...but I'll still stand by my statement.

So you are saying that a runningback who has been injury prone his whole career, who is only getting older and more wear and tear, who can't stay out of trouble will run for over 1200 yards?

RISKY!

tubby
01-15-2008, 04:49 PM
Travis Henry can easily rush for over 1200 yards next year.

Will he? Who knows.

G_Money
01-15-2008, 04:50 PM
If Henry plays all 16 games, sharing duties with Selvin Young, and is healthy, I can see 1200 yards.

I just have come to the dark side in believing that he won't be healthy.

So I'd draft a guy, let him ride the pine until Henry breaks his ribs or sprains his knee or whatever, and then Wally Pip poor Travis with the new kid.

If Travis works out and stays healthy, great - I'm not paying a lot for his understudy. If he goes down, we have a plan in place.

~G

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 04:54 PM
Travis Henry can easily rush for over 1200 yards next year.

Will he? Who knows.

Is this doubt creeping into your mind Tubby?

Retired_Member_001
01-15-2008, 05:00 PM
If Henry plays all 16 games, sharing duties with Selvin Young, and is healthy, I can see 1200 yards.

I just have come to the dark side in believing that he won't be healthy.

So I'd draft a guy, let him ride the pine until Henry breaks his ribs or sprains his knee or whatever, and then Wally Pip poor Travis with the new kid.

If Travis works out and stays healthy, great - I'm not paying a lot for his understudy. If he goes down, we have a plan in place.

~G

It's not only if Henry gets injured, it's if he has another "drug issue" or something else. In my opinion Henry isn't only injury prone, he is trouble prone as well. I think he will always have trouble the rest of his NFL career, whether it's mothers who aren't getting any support money, drug claims or whatever.

I think we need a new running back but there are too many needs to fill this off-season. I'd love us to find a secure option at running back FOR ONCE! We haven't had a long term plan at running back since Clinton Portis.

I really like Selving Young, I think he is pure talent. I have serious doubts over whether he can withstand a full season though.

One of these times we will have to fix the running back position and find a long term solution instead of using Tatum Bell, Rouben Droughn types for a year and then dumping them. Drafting Marshawn Lynch last year would have solved that problem, we also wouldn't have signed crack head Henry if we were planning on drafting Marshawn.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-15-2008, 05:02 PM
Even if Henry comes back at a reduced rate, I'd still EXPLORE getting one of these young bucks in the draft. Why the hell not? Henry will be what 29-30 next year? A couple years left in him tops. This draft is just epic. Grab a running back! This draft's running back is like pizza guys and girls, it's good any way you want it!

tubby
01-15-2008, 05:03 PM
Is this doubt creeping into your mind Tubby?

The season is over. I don't even know if Henry will be on the team next year. If he is then I will start beating the BIG HOSS drum nice and loud.

The starting tailback is always my friend. :D

G_Money
01-15-2008, 05:21 PM
I think we need a new running back but there are too many needs to fill this off-season. I'd love us to find a secure option at running back FOR ONCE! We haven't had a long term plan at running back since Clinton Portis.

I really like Selving Young, I think he is pure talent. I have serious doubts over whether he can withstand a full season though.

One of these times we will have to fix the running back position and find a long term solution instead of using Tatum Bell, Rouben Droughn types for a year and then dumping them. Drafting Marshawn Lynch last year would have solved that problem, we also wouldn't have signed crack head Henry if we were planning on drafting Marshawn.

The funny thing is, there are half a dozen guys I consider equal to or better than Marshawn was in this draft, and he was a top-two talent at RB last year.

Passing on a 1st round Marshawn is one thing. Passing on a 2nd, or 3rd or even 4th round one is a different matter.

I really hope we pick up one of these guys.

~G

Retired_Member_001
01-15-2008, 05:27 PM
The funny thing is, there are half a dozen guys I consider equal to or better than Marshawn was in this draft, and he was a top-two talent at RB last year.

Passing on a 1st round Marshawn is one thing. Passing on a 2nd, or 3rd or even 4th round one is a different matter.

I really hope we pick up one of these guys.

~G

I think the needs are bigger this year than last year. Our safeties are one year older. We've had one of our best offensive lineman retire with another one possibly retiring, Marshall and Stokely don't cut it as a WR corp and our defensive line is in a mess.

I think Marshawn Lynch is going to be a great running back to be honest. If we drafted him last year we could have saved some money and gone after someone else in FA instead of signing the Drug dealer.

We would most probably be a stronger team.

Retired_Member_001
01-15-2008, 05:28 PM
Passing on a 1st round Marshawn is one thing. Passing on a 2nd, or 3rd or even 4th round one is a different matter.

I really hope we pick up one of these guys.

~G

I think the 1st and 2nd round picks are needed to fill either OT, DT, OLB and possibly WR (with the 2nd).

I'd be all for taking someone with the 3rd.

fcspikeit
01-15-2008, 06:00 PM
I think the 1st and 2nd round picks are needed to fill either OT, DT, OLB and possibly WR (with the 2nd).

I'd be all for taking someone with the 3rd.

We don't have a 3rd

Lonestar
01-15-2008, 06:06 PM
lets see if Thenry puts up a mere 75 yards per game rushing everyone will be happy? At his price it should be a whole lot more.. IMO..

Now that he has been in DEN for 9 months does he have a another Colorado child?

fcspikeit
01-15-2008, 06:46 PM
lets see if Thenry puts up a mere 75 yards per game rushing everyone will be happy? At his price it should be a whole lot more.. IMO..

Now that he has been in DEN for 9 months does he have a another Colorado child?

Dude...

Your just full of compliments :D

You remind me of that guy on Grumpy Old Men :laugh:

WARHORSE
01-15-2008, 07:44 PM
The Offensive line talent is good in this draft... using a 2nd rounder on a runningback won't hurt us. We have a lot of young and promissing talent already with Holland, Kuper, Myers, Harris and Pears. It also looks like Hamilton and Nalen will be back.

Defensive line, like it or not, we have Moss, Doom, Crowder, and Thomas.... Shanny won't give up on them this early considering Doom is almost a Pro Bowler and the other three will be coming into there 2nd year in the league. We already have decent depth with Ekuban, Engelberger, and McKinley and Harris. I can see us adding a guy or two to the D-line, but I don't see Shanny going buck wild here.

Shanny is probably more concerned with the safety position and will probably look to add another linebacker. We have plenty of picks to address the needs.


I dont disagree. I like trading back into the first round and getting three first day picks.

A DT, OL or S in the first, and a RB possibly in the second or top of third. If we picked up a second first rounder, without trading away our second, then Id possibly look at trading down again in order to get another 2 2nd rounders and a 3rd. That would give us three 2s and a three. I would think theres alot of value there. Spend all five picks on Dts, Ols, SS, LB and RB.

WARHORSE
01-15-2008, 07:48 PM
One way or another, I think he'll be on the roster and run for 1200 yards...at least.


I dont know about anyone else, but I dont want no 1200 yards.


I want 1500 at the absolute minimum, from a back. If you cant cut those enchiladas, throw em away. A threat of a big time back will set defenses close to the LOS. Thats when possession receivers like Marshall turn small plays into big ones.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 07:51 PM
I dont know about anyone else, but I dont want no 1200 yards.


I want 1500 at the absolute minimum, from a back. If you cant cut those enchiladas, throw em away. A threat of a big time back will set defenses close to the LOS. Thats when possession receivers like Marshall turn small plays into big ones.

Considering that the leading rusher didn't even have 1500 yards this season, I think that expectation is a little out there.

WARHORSE
01-15-2008, 07:53 PM
Considering that the leading rusher didn't even have 1500 yards this season, I think that expectation is a little out there.


Yeah.

We shoot high around here in Denver.

Its a heart issue.

MOtorboat
01-15-2008, 07:55 PM
Yeah.

We shoot high around here in Denver.

Its a heart issue.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but I doubt it.

WARHORSE
01-15-2008, 11:15 PM
Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but I doubt it.

We think we can just plug in anyone in the backfield and that person will do well. The thought is our running game will be pretty good as long as we have someone who's healthy and can tote the rock 25+ times a game.


Sometimes I think that makes us think we dont need to try and get a premier RB.

We do.

It would do wonders if we had a real headknockin RB, with the whole package.

This year, undoubtedly our primary need is on the Dline first. But we should take a hard look at whether we take a second round DT, SS, LB in the first round, while passing on a first tier player simply cause we dont have as great a need.

I honestly think some of these backs can come in and start. That makes us have to look long and hard at these RBs.

Lonestar
01-16-2008, 03:58 AM
We think we can just plug in anyone in the backfield and that person will do well. The thought is our running game will be pretty good as long as we have someone who's healthy and can tote the rock 25+ times a game.


Sometimes I think that makes us think we dont need to try and get a premier RB.

We do.

It would do wonders if we had a real headknockin RB, with the whole package.

This year, undoubtedly our primary need is on the Dline first. But we should take a hard look at whether we take a second round DT, SS, LB in the first round, while passing on a first tier player simply cause we dont have as great a need.

I honestly think some of these backs can come in and start. That makes us have to look long and hard at these RBs.

but one has to wonder just how much more you can squeeze out of a RB position If we are getting 5+ ypc how much better can a stud be. There is only one ball on the field at one time and alot of players wanting it..RB, TE, 3WR's


Sorry I just do not see the value there.. When there are major holes to fill..

WARHORSE
01-16-2008, 05:09 PM
but one has to wonder just how much more you can squeeze out of a RB position If we are getting 5+ ypc how much better can a stud be. There is only one ball on the field at one time and alot of players wanting it..RB, TE, 3WR's


Sorry I just do not see the value there.. When there are major holes to fill..

All one has to do is look at Adrian Peterson.

The Vikings had Chester Taylor.


Once again, Im not disagreeing on the needs we have. I know for a fact Denver will try to walk into the draft with as little need as possible, giving us the flexibility to take the best available athlete. They will do as much as they can in the offseason to fill holes. Maybe they will try and trade Dinger(lol) Walker and a fourth for Haynesworth.......I dont know. But they will be doing something.

So the thought for discussion is this: Do you passup a Peterson, or a Steven Jackson say, for a Harrelson? (The Dt we targeted last year) Or do you take the Steven Jackson in round 1 and pick up Crowder in round two?

Those are the type scenarios that the Broncos will be looking at, purely for the reason that we know there are better prospects in the mid first round to second round at RB, than at DT.
The same goes for OT, and Safety.

Id think we would try and get more selections.

G_Money
01-16-2008, 05:32 PM
but one has to wonder just how much more you can squeeze out of a RB position If we are getting 5+ ypc how much better can a stud be. There is only one ball on the field at one time and alot of players wanting it..RB, TE, 3WR's

Sorry I just do not see the value there.. When there are major holes to fill..

But it's when we get that 5+ ypc that's an issue.

We can get it against bad rushing teams, but neither Young nor Henry had a 5+ ypc game against a decent rush defense. They feasted on Oakland, and Buffalo, and KC.

Getting 7 ypc against KC and 3.5 ypc against J-Ville doesn't cut it. We'll need to be able to run it in the playoffs against decent teams. We'll need goal-line and short-yardage improvement, and with the time it takes to break new linemen into this scheme the best chance for an immediate improvement is with a better running back.

Yes, we need to address the line, but that's only half the equation. I don't believe the back that's going to get us our next Lombardi Trophy is currently on the roster, so we should probably try to find him.

~G

WARHORSE
01-16-2008, 05:45 PM
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/Iagreewitdat.gif



But it's when we get that 5+ ypc that's an issue.

We can get it against bad rushing teams, but neither Young nor Henry had a 5+ ypc game against a decent rush defense. They feasted on Oakland, and Buffalo, and KC.

Getting 7 ypc against KC and 3.5 ypc against J-Ville doesn't cut it. We'll need to be able to run it in the playoffs against decent teams. We'll need goal-line and short-yardage improvement, and with the time it takes to break new linemen into this scheme the best chance for an immediate improvement is with a better running back.

Yes, we need to address the line, but that's only half the equation. I don't believe the back that's going to get us our next Lombardi Trophy is currently on the roster, so we should probably try to find him.

~G

WORD to ya mutha.

(cant believe I said that):tsk:

WARHORSE
01-16-2008, 06:13 PM
Agree completely. I think Bronco fans in general have gotten a little too arrogant with our 'system', forgetting it's also about the quality of players we have on the field.

The score is 27-22, season is on the line and we're facing 3rd and 3 midway through the 4th quarter. Do we want to flip the ball to a JAG (just another guy)? The line played well, but do we beat the Packers in Superbowl 32 with a 'nothing special system running back'?

Ever since the Superbowl years we keep heading into the season with a nothing special back (Clinton Portis aside), and a defense that never hits that next level despite Shanahan's effort to shore up that area. I honestly don't think a Shanahan coached team will ever hit that elite status unless the offense is scoring 30+ pts a a game.

Put the game back into the offenses hands Shanny. If you're going to burn out as Denver's coach, at least you're giving yourself a shot to control the game rather then standing there and watching the defense fold and your offense not being able to do anything about it...


And keepin them off the field has to do with running the football. Not just at five yards a clip, but having those two homeruns, or three big runs that totally demoralize defenses. Those runs get safeties thinking about their job security.

atwater27
01-16-2008, 06:18 PM
I think if you dig in to every running backs stats, including the good and elite running backs, that in most cases you will find they have less success against good defenses as well and "feast" on bad defenses. A good rushing defense is pretty universal. They can pretty much shut anybody down. So it would only be fair to "expose" our running back's stats against good defenses only if you present some league leaders into the mix.

Lonestar
01-16-2008, 06:51 PM
But it's when we get that 5+ YPC that's an issue.

We can get it against bad rushing teams, but neither Young nor Henry had a 5+ YPC game against a decent rush defense. They feasted on Oakland, and Buffalo, and KC.

Getting 7 YPC against KC and 3.5 YPC against J-Ville doesn't cut it. We'll need to be able to run it in the playoffs against decent teams. We'll need goal-line and short-yardage improvement, and with the time it takes to break new linemen into this scheme the best chance for an immediate improvement is with a better running back.

Yes, we need to address the line, but that's only half the equation. I don't believe the back that's going to get us our next Lombardi Trophy is currently on the roster, so we should probably try to find him.

~G

So we can't run against good teams with great DLines.. How would a stud RB change that?


You are more correct with getting some stud OT's that can move bodies deep in the redzone.. Right now we have not threat because the OLINE sucks at short yardage..IMO. Without fixing the OLINE a stud Rb may get you an extra 25-30 yards a game.. that means 5-6 more carries.. Are we going to be able to appease all the stud receivers into taking 5-6 less passes each game?

If we can do both great but I suspect the studs Will be gone in the first round..

WARHORSE
01-16-2008, 10:38 PM
So we can't run against good teams with great DLines.. How would a stud RB change that?


You are more correct with getting some stud OT's that can move bodies deep in the redzone.. Right now we have not threat because the OLINE sucks at short yardage..IMO. Without fixing the OLINE a stud Rb may get you an extra 25-30 yards a game.. that means 5-6 more carries.. Are we going to be able to appease all the stud receivers into taking 5-6 less passes each game?

If we can do both great but I suspect the studs Will be gone in the first round..

First of all I agree with the OTs. We do not have those types of guys across the board. I think Kuper and Holland are pretty good at the guards though.

But anyway, if the running game is going, I dont think a good receiving corp will complain at all. Running well means we are on the field. A good back with zone blocking can keep defenses guessing when you have receivers like we do. If we have the complete offense, and can keep people off the field............doesnt the defense get better by being on the sidelines rested for most of the game?

I think so. At the same time, if you have a defense that cant get off the field, its the same scenario for our opponents.

TXBRONC
01-16-2008, 11:32 PM
All one has to do is look at Adrian Peterson.

The Vikings had Chester Taylor.


Once again, Im not disagreeing on the needs we have. I know for a fact Denver will try to walk into the draft with as little need as possible, giving us the flexibility to take the best available athlete. They will do as much as they can in the offseason to fill holes. Maybe they will try and trade Dinger(lol) Walker and a fourth for Haynesworth.......I dont know. But they will be doing something.

So the thought for discussion is this: Do you passup a Peterson, or a Steven Jackson say, for a Harrelson? (The Dt we targeted last year) Or do you take the Steven Jackson in round 1 and pick up Crowder in round two?

Those are the type scenarios that the Broncos will be looking at, purely for the reason that we know there are better prospects in the mid first round to second round at RB, than at DT.
The same goes for OT, and Safety.

Id think we would try and get more selections.


I thought I heard Denver isn't going to be a major player in free agency this year. That's doesn't mean they can't change their minds but still they are not always that active in free agency.

Also in my opinion I wouldn't want to trade for Haynesworth. He's under preformed up to this year so I don't if it would good idea to bring him in. By the way he is free agent so we wouldn't to trade for him.

Scarface
01-16-2008, 11:57 PM
Drafting Marshawn Lynch last year would have solved that problem, we also wouldn't have signed crack head Henry if we were planning on drafting Marshawn.

Marshawn would have been unstoppable in our offense. He had a really good year with one of the worst offenses in the league. The year before Shanny tried to get Maroney. Henry got big bucks and ended up embarrassing the organization with all of his babies and babies mommas. Shanny will get another back this year. I just hope he's young and explosive.

G_Money
01-17-2008, 01:07 AM
I think if you dig in to every running backs stats, including the good and elite running backs, that in most cases you will find they have less success against good defenses as well and "feast" on bad defenses. A good rushing defense is pretty universal. They can pretty much shut anybody down. So it would only be fair to "expose" our running back's stats against good defenses only if you present some league leaders into the mix.

All runners definitely have less success against great Ds. That's why they're great defenses.

And yes, they all pad their stats against the lesser teams, too.

But if you want to know who the great RBs are, you look at how they do against good Rush Ds. Are they better than the norm? Normal? Worse?

Let's look at Brian Westbrook.

- He finished 3rd in the league in rushing, with 1333 yards, at 4.8 ypc.

- He did it playing the following ranked ypg rush Ds: #1 once, #4 twice, #6 twice, #8 once, #10 once.

He also missed a game, so pretty much half his games were against top 10 Ds, and he still came within a few yards of the NFC rushing title - while playing on a team not known as a rushing powerhouse. That's a pretty good year.

His stats against all those top 10 defenses:

#1 Minnesota (3.1 ypc and 74.1 ypg on the year): 2.2 ypc, 46 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.6 ypc, 96 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.0 ypc, 100 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.1 ypc, 65 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.5 ypc, 81 yards
#8 NY Giants (3.8 ypc and 97.7 ypg on the year): 5.8 ypc, 116 yards
#10 New England (4.4 ypc and 98.3 ypg on the year): 3.1 ypc, 52 yards

So he went 5-2 against the 7 best defenses he faced, with Minn and NE being the only defenses all year that chopped him down below 4 ypc. Now Westbrook is the type of back who'll get a couple of yards here and there and then break one for 20, but it's still impressive.

Coincidentally, the Eagles got 18 more first downs than we did (which is the difference between top-5 and middle-of-the-pack), all of em (and more) on the ground. Have I mentioned they're not exactly known as a running team? They were also 6 spots better on 3rd down than we were, and 5 spots better on touchdowns per drive.

Being able to get a 1st down on the ground means something. It means something on your own 20 and it means something on their 20.

And it's definitely something we need to get back, because our inability to convert 3rd downs on the ground has been killing us for a couple of years now.

~G

fcspikeit
01-17-2008, 02:00 AM
All runners definitely have less success against great Ds. That's why they're great defenses.

And yes, they all pad their stats against the lesser teams, too.

But if you want to know who the great RBs are, you look at how they do against good Rush Ds. Are they better than the norm? Normal? Worse?

Let's look at Brian Westbrook.

- He finished 3rd in the league in rushing, with 1333 yards, at 4.8 ypc.

- He did it playing the following ranked ypg rush Ds: #1 once, #4 twice, #6 twice, #8 once, #10 once.

He also missed a game, so pretty much half his games were against top 10 Ds, and he still came within a few yards of the NFC rushing title - while playing on a team not known as a rushing powerhouse. That's a pretty good year.

His stats against all those top 10 defenses:

#1 Minnesota (3.1 ypc and 74.1 ypg on the year): 2.2 ypc, 46 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.6 ypc, 96 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.0 ypc, 100 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.1 ypc, 65 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.5 ypc, 81 yards
#8 NY Giants (3.8 ypc and 97.7 ypg on the year): 5.8 ypc, 116 yards
#10 New England (4.4 ypc and 98.3 ypg on the year): 3.1 ypc, 52 yards

So he went 5-2 against the 7 best defenses he faced, with Minn and NE being the only defenses all year that chopped him down below 4 ypc. Now Westbrook is the type of back who'll get a couple of yards here and there and then break one for 20, but it's still impressive.

Coincidentally, the Eagles got 18 more first downs than we did (which is the difference between top-5 and middle-of-the-pack), all of em (and more) on the ground. Have I mentioned they're not exactly known as a running team? They were also 6 spots better on 3rd down than we were, and 5 spots better on touchdowns per drive.

Being able to get a 1st down on the ground means something. It means something on your own 20 and it means something on their 20.

And it's definitely something we need to get back, because our inability to convert 3rd downs on the ground has been killing us for a couple of years now.

~G


Why did you use Brian Westbrook?

Going into this year, was he even considered a top 5 back?

We are talking about getting a top back like LT, LJ, Steven Jackson, or Parker. It would seem to me, the best way would be to look at the #'s of the great backs and not the anomaly of Brian Westbrook.


My feeling is, if you brake down the #'s of the best backs in the league, you will find, they didn't fair much if any better then our backs did against the best defenses in the league.

Lonestar
01-17-2008, 02:05 AM
All runners definitely have less success against great Ds. That's why they're great defenses.

And yes, they all pad their stats against the lesser teams, too.

But if you want to know who the great RBs are, you look at how they do against good Rush Ds. Are they better than the norm? Normal? Worse?

Let's look at Brian Westbrook.

- He finished 3rd in the league in rushing, with 1333 yards, at 4.8 ypc.

- He did it playing the following ranked ypg rush Ds: #1 once, #4 twice, #6 twice, #8 once, #10 once.

He also missed a game, so pretty much half his games were against top 10 Ds, and he still came within a few yards of the NFC rushing title - while playing on a team not known as a rushing powerhouse. That's a pretty good year.

His stats against all those top 10 defenses:

#1 Minnesota (3.1 ypc and 74.1 ypg on the year): 2.2 ypc, 46 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.6 ypc, 96 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.0 ypc, 100 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.1 ypc, 65 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.5 ypc, 81 yards
#8 NY Giants (3.8 ypc and 97.7 ypg on the year): 5.8 ypc, 116 yards
#10 New England (4.4 ypc and 98.3 ypg on the year): 3.1 ypc, 52 yards

So he went 5-2 against the 7 best defenses he faced, with Minn and NE being the only defenses all year that chopped him down below 4 ypc. Now Westbrook is the type of back who'll get a couple of yards here and there and then break one for 20, but it's still impressive.

Coincidentally, the Eagles got 18 more first downs than we did (which is the difference between top-5 and middle-of-the-pack), all of em (and more) on the ground. Have I mentioned they're not exactly known as a running team? They were also 6 spots better on 3rd down than we were, and 5 spots better on touchdowns per drive.

Being able to get a 1st down on the ground means something. It means something on your own 20 and it means something on their 20.

And it's definitely something we need to get back, because our inability to convert 3rd downs on the ground has been killing us for a couple of years now.~G


Excellent post with stats hard to disprove your thoughts that way..

I did a comparison of OLINES sometime back and while I do not have the numbers in front of me it seemed that the top running teams out weighed us on the OLINE by about 20 pounds and that included Holland in the mix..

Also saw that the OT as a rule were in Lepsis case almost 30 pounds under weight.

I truly believe that our existing RBs will be just that much better IF we had some more meat on the line.

When the defense is stacking the OLINE on 3 rd and short and that DLINE outweighs the OLINE by 25 pounds almost across the board no matter how good you RB is they are less likely to find a crack.. I do not believe even TD would get his numbers behind this OLINE on 3rd and short.. At least not consistently

fcspikeit
01-17-2008, 03:01 AM
All runners definitely have less success against great Ds. That's why they're great defenses.

And yes, they all pad their stats against the lesser teams, too.

But if you want to know who the great RBs are, you look at how they do against good Rush Ds. Are they better than the norm? Normal? Worse?

Let's look at Brian Westbrook.

- He finished 3rd in the league in rushing, with 1333 yards, at 4.8 ypc.

- He did it playing the following ranked ypg rush Ds: #1 once, #4 twice, #6 twice, #8 once, #10 once.

He also missed a game, so pretty much half his games were against top 10 Ds, and he still came within a few yards of the NFC rushing title - while playing on a team not known as a rushing powerhouse. That's a pretty good year.

His stats against all those top 10 defenses:

#1 Minnesota (3.1 ypc and 74.1 ypg on the year): 2.2 ypc, 46 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.6 ypc, 96 yards
#4 Washington (3.7 ypc and 91.3 ypg on the year): 5.0 ypc, 100 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.1 ypc, 65 yards
#6 Dallas (4.0 ypc and 94.6 ypg on the year): 4.5 ypc, 81 yards
#8 NY Giants (3.8 ypc and 97.7 ypg on the year): 5.8 ypc, 116 yards
#10 New England (4.4 ypc and 98.3 ypg on the year): 3.1 ypc, 52 yards

So he went 5-2 against the 7 best defenses he faced, with Minn and NE being the only defenses all year that chopped him down below 4 ypc. Now Westbrook is the type of back who'll get a couple of yards here and there and then break one for 20, but it's still impressive.

Coincidentally, the Eagles got 18 more first downs than we did (which is the difference between top-5 and middle-of-the-pack), all of em (and more) on the ground. Have I mentioned they're not exactly known as a running team? They were also 6 spots better on 3rd down than we were, and 5 spots better on touchdowns per drive.

Being able to get a 1st down on the ground means something. It means something on your own 20 and it means something on their 20.

And it's definitely something we need to get back, because our inability to convert 3rd downs on the ground has been killing us for a couple of years now.

~G


Here's how our backs stacked up.

I will use the #'s of our leading rusher for each game and not the stats for the whole team.

#1 Minnesota (3.1 ypc and 74.1 ypg on the year): 4.0 ypc, 87 yards (Young)
#3 Pittsburgh (4.0 ypc and 89.9 ypg on the year): 3.0 ypc, 51 yards (Henry)
#5 Tennessee (4.0 ypc and 92.4 ypg on the year): 12.7 ypc, 89 yards (Hall)
#11 Jacksonville (4.1 ypc and 100.3 ypg on the year): 3.2 ypc, 35 yards (Henry)
#14 Green Bay (3.9 ypc and 102.9 ypg on the year): 3.9 ypc, 71 yards (Young)
#15 Indianapolis (3.8 ypc and 106.9 ypg on the year): 5.0 ypc, 131 yards (Henry)

So our top back went 3 - 2 and 1 against the 6 best defenses we faced. It's interesting that against the top 3 defenses we faced, all being in the top 5, our top backs were 2 and 1


It might be better to go off total rushing yards beings the defensive stats are off total yards given up instead of just against the top runner. Aspecialy beings we had 3 backs, while Phily mainly uses just the one. NFL.com doesn't brake down the team totals from each game. If you know of a site that does, I would appreciate the link :beer:

BOSSHOGG30
01-17-2008, 09:41 AM
Did we cut Henry yet? What is taking so long?

G_Money
01-17-2008, 12:07 PM
It might be better to go off total rushing yards beings the defensive stats are off total yards given up instead of just against the top runner. Aspecialy beings we had 3 backs, while Phily mainly uses just the one. NFL.com doesn't brake down the team totals from each game. If you know of a site that does, I would appreciate the link :beer:

I used Brian Westbrook because he did what he did without being behind potentially the greatest rushing line in the league, unlike the two guys ahead of him. The discussion was about whether having a great back can make up for not having the greatest OL.

If I use LT, then I get, "yeah, but we don't have that kind of OL so the stats are misleading."

If I use the combination of AP and Chester Taylor, then I get, "but their QB is the worst, they HAVE to run like that...and we don't have a line like that one either."

J-Ville gives many of the same issues.

Westbrook would have had the NFC rushing title if he'd cared to run against Buffalo in the final game, considering they had one of the worst run Ds in the league.

Who would you like me to use for your comparison?

All rush yds against top 15 defenses between us and the Chargers? I can do that, but then I can already hear, "But those stats are flawed, Travis Henry was running injured half the year so his pitiful 3.1 ypc post-injury is bringing down the real number..."

*shrugs* Statistics can be made to lie. They aren't "facts." The Broncos had 500 more yards of offense than the Chargers, but I don't think anyone would call us the better offense just by using that stat.

If you have a stat that says the Broncos running game is fine, then that stat is misleading because our play-calling, red-zone scoring, and overall effectiveness were all impacted by our flaws in the run game.

A nice stat with a reasonable chance of predicting offensive effectiveness is Yards Per Play.

I actually like this list from John Clayton a lot:


So what is the best way to judge efficiency?
Perhaps the best barometer is being able to rate in the top group of four statistical groups -- yards per play, gross turnovers, red-zone efficiency and third-down efficiency. Sure, NFL folks are creatures of habit. Though the cliché is defense wins championships, a good defense can't deliver a title without an efficient offense.

Here's this year's list for Yards Per Play (scratched it out w/ some number crunching, may not be entirely accurate):


1 New England 6.3
2 Dallas 6.2
3 Green Bay 6.1
4 Denver 5.9
5 Minnesota 5.8
6 Jacksonville 5.8
7 Indianapolis 5.8
8 Philadelphia 5.7
9 Cleveland 5.7
10 Detroit 5.7
11 Houston 5.6
12 Cincinnati 5.6
13 Tampa Bay 5.6
14 Arizona 5.5
15 New Orleans 5.5
16 Pittsburgh 5.5
17 Seattle 5.5
18 San Diego 5.3
19 NY Giants 5.2
20 Washington 5.2
21 Atlanta 5.1
22 Buffalo 5.0
23 Tennessee 5.0
24 NY Jets 4.9
25 Oakland 4.9
26 St. Louis 4.9
27 Miami 4.9
28 Baltimore 4.8
29 Carolina 4.8
30 Chicago 4.7
31 Kansas City 4.7
32 San Francisco 4.4

We're 4th. 4th! That's great, right?

But we were middle of the pack in turnover margin at +1 and gross turnovers w/ 29.

Also middle of the pack (15th) in 3rd down efficiency.

And for some reason I can't find red-zone numbers at the moment (meeting coming up) but I'll bet you we're middle-to-bottom in that too.

So why are we so high in ypp numbers? Was it because Cutler was throwing in short yardage instead of running because we couldn't get 2 yards on the ground when it counted? Was it the emergence of Marshall? Was it the long plays of Young and Hall?

Maybe all 3. But all stats can tell you is what happened, not why.

After watching us get stuffed too many times in the red-zone and on 3rd down, I want a new RB and a new OL.

You're certainly free to disagree, but we won had our best teams (and 2 titles) with an absolute juggernaut of a running attack and a tremendously high-scoring offensive output. :salute:

We're doing "okay" in yards, but scoring is a definite issue and nobody's afraid of our running attack any more. Nobody.

We used to be able to run the ball even when the whole stadium knew a run was coming, no matter the down or distance. In order to get those days back I think we need both an OL makeover and more than just acceptable production from the backfield.

JMO - you either believe that we have an issue at RB or you don't. That's why there's debate. ;)

~G

fcspikeit
01-17-2008, 04:46 PM
I used Brian Westbrook because he did what he did without being behind potentially the greatest rushing line in the league, unlike the two guys ahead of him. The discussion was about whether having a great back can make up for not having the greatest OL.

If I use LT, then I get, "yeah, but we don't have that kind of OL so the stats are misleading."

If I use the combination of AP and Chester Taylor, then I get, "but their QB is the worst, they HAVE to run like that...and we don't have a line like that one either."

J-Ville gives many of the same issues.

Westbrook would have had the NFC rushing title if he'd cared to run against Buffalo in the final game, considering they had one of the worst run Ds in the league.

Who would you like me to use for your comparison?

All rush yds against top 15 defenses between us and the Chargers? I can do that, but then I can already hear, "But those stats are flawed, Travis Henry was running injured half the year so his pitiful 3.1 ypc post-injury is bringing down the real number..."

*shrugs* Statistics can be made to lie. They aren't "facts." The Broncos had 500 more yards of offense than the Chargers, but I don't think anyone would call us the better offense just by using that stat.

If you have a stat that says the Broncos running game is fine, then that stat is misleading because our play-calling, red-zone scoring, and overall effectiveness were all impacted by our flaws in the run game.

A nice stat with a reasonable chance of predicting offensive effectiveness is Yards Per Play.

I actually like this list from John Clayton a lot:



Here's this year's list for Yards Per Play (scratched it out w/ some number crunching, may not be entirely accurate):



We're 4th. 4th! That's great, right?

But we were middle of the pack in turnover margin at +1 and gross turnovers w/ 29.

Also middle of the pack (15th) in 3rd down efficiency.

And for some reason I can't find red-zone numbers at the moment (meeting coming up) but I'll bet you we're middle-to-bottom in that too.

So why are we so high in ypp numbers? Was it because Cutler was throwing in short yardage instead of running because we couldn't get 2 yards on the ground when it counted? Was it the emergence of Marshall? Was it the long plays of Young and Hall?

Maybe all 3. But all stats can tell you is what happened, not why.

After watching us get stuffed too many times in the red-zone and on 3rd down, I want a new RB and a new OL.

You're certainly free to disagree, but we won had our best teams (and 2 titles) with an absolute juggernaut of a running attack and a tremendously high-scoring offensive output. :salute:

We're doing "okay" in yards, but scoring is a definite issue and nobody's afraid of our running attack any more. Nobody.

We used to be able to run the ball even when the whole stadium knew a run was coming, no matter the down or distance. In order to get those days back I think we need both an OL makeover and more than just acceptable production from the backfield.

JMO - you either believe that we have an issue at RB or you don't. That's why there's debate. ;)

~G


I believe we have an issue at RB. Meaning, there could be some improvement at that position. But do I think its the biggest need? no. do I think its the biggest need in the running game? no.

I agree with everything you said about the stats. No matter who you use, someone could disagree with your findings. My question about the use of Westbrook was simply that, he had a great year. No one would have thought he would have finished ahead of some of the best backs in the league.

Last year and the year before, people could have used his stats to show why Phily needed a great back instead of Westbrook.

I guess the question is, if we had Westbrook, would we have been that much better in the running game? Would that have translated into more wins? I am no sold on that.

IMO it was our line and lack of a true fullback that lead to the biggest problem in the short yardage running game last year. They are just not strong enough to move people off the ball. That is not our running scheme.

Should we change our running scheme? Well... it works fine inside the 20's, if we bulk up we will surly lose some of our zone blocking ability. Would the drop off inside the 20's be worth the gain inside the redzone? Many would say yes. How about if we had a true fullback that could blaze the way? That would help too. TD had a great fullback leading the way. How many times did we see HG laying someone out?

I really don't know why Shanahan went away from the blocking fullback? What did we gain from having 2 RB's in the backfield? Bell and Sapp for the most part, did nothing to help our offense. Green Bay uses a zone blocking scheme, the biggest difference is, they have 2 good blocking fullbacks to lead the way on power running downs inside the 20 and on short yardage situations.

Would having a true blocking fullback help us convert short 3rd downs? I think it would. Would having a better back help us? I also think it would help.

The question is, What position can we address this year that will help the most? From the sounds of it, this is going to be a great RB class, maybe the best ever. If that is the case, we probably should grab one if he falls to us. But that is not the end of it. We need a powerful fullback to help us out on short yardage situations. It just seems to me, all the guys behind the seen have been over looked. Who talks about getting a great fullback? Everyone wants the best RB, WR, LB, they over look the little things.

More times then not it's the guys you don't see that make the difference in getting that extra yard or 2. If we don't have HG laying someone out, do we not convert a short 3rd down and lose because of it? I think we do.

It seems to me, you look deeper then the surface. You make great points why we should grab a RB in this class. I just don't agree with everyone who blames our running backs for our troubles this year. It is a lot deeper then that. We can't just draft a guy then think our problems are solved. We have a lot of talent at our skill positions. If we take care of the less sexy positions, I believe we will see the most improvement :beer:

Lonestar
01-17-2008, 04:58 PM
Wonder if DJ would like to play blocking BACK near the goal.. Being an ex RB he might enjoy it..

G_Money
01-17-2008, 05:24 PM
Would having a true blocking fullback help us convert short 3rd downs? I think it would. Would having a better back help us? I also think it would help.

The question is, What position can we address this year that will help the most? From the sounds of it, this is going to be a great RB class, maybe the best ever. If that is the case, we probably should grab one if he falls to us. But that is not the end of it. We need a powerful fullback to help us out on short yardage situations. It just seems to me, all the guys behind the seen have been over looked. Who talks about getting a great fullback? Everyone wants the best RB, WR, LB, they over look the little things.

More times then not it's the guys you don't see that make the difference in getting that extra yard or 2. If we don't have HG laying someone out, do we not convert a short 3rd down and lose because of it? I think we do.

It seems to me, you look deeper then the surface. You make great points why we should grab a RB in this class. I just don't agree with everyone who blames our running backs for our troubles this year. It is a lot deeper then that. We can't just draft a guy then think our problems are solved. We have a lot of talent at our skill positions. If we take care of the less sexy positions, I believe we will see the most improvement :beer:

I agree with pretty much all of that (so thanks for hatcheting through that long post of mine).

Any mock draft I make adds at least one OL, A FB, and a RB. It's actually a decent class for fullbacks as well as running backs (though some of the FBs are just really big RBs in the Bettis vein). It's my hope that watching that FB monster that Kubes used to violate us in Texas will help convice Shanahan to fix the FB issue instead of using it for our #4 and #5 RBs.

There's a guy who leads the way for Beanie Wells at The Ohio State University. His dad was Pepper, his god-father is Keith Byars, and his name is Dionte Johnson. He might go undrafted, because all he does is block like a beast. He doesn't run the ball, he doesn't catch passes, all he does is kill people to let Beanie get the glory.

We can add a guy like that, a guy who isn't looking to tote the rock and who just wants to lay out defensive players whenever possible. IF we want to draft somebody a little higher (say 4th round), Owen Schmitt is a killer. He bleeds football.

There are FBs available, if Shanny wants to go back to using them.

I want a new center-in-training, because I don't think Myers is nasty enough to stick there. People forget, but Nalen is one of the nastiest centers around. He doesn't take crap from anybody down there in the scrum, and we need a guy like that. They're in the draft too. Bowling Green has a great center like that, Lichtensteiger, and just seeing that name on a jersey should convince you that he's for real. Legursky's another one. We could get a nice piece for the future at that position on the 2nd day.

But RB is a need. It's not our biggest need, but it's the quickest fix. If your line can't make a hole on 3rd down, then get a guy who can make his own hole. If they can't stop people from penetrating the backfield then get someone who doesn't go down from arm tackles. If first effort won't get it done, then find a back who has 2nd, 3rd and 4th effort.

We need OL help, and I want a rejuvenated FB position, but a better RB is still part of that equation then ends in "Championship-level ground attack."

And there are several backs in this draft who could qualify as "the next truly great Denver running back."

:beer:

~G

fcspikeit
01-17-2008, 06:00 PM
Wonder if DJ would like to play blocking BACK near the goal.. Being an ex RB he might enjoy it..

The problem I have with this is we need a full time fullback, that can roll off the block and contribute in the passing game. HG was great about that. He could stick the blitzing LB, then fade out into the endzone and catch a TD pass off the bootleg.

Its the little things that get you in the endzone. People don't really consider what HG contributed to our passing game. When he was in there, they didn't know if we were going to pass or run. If we had DJ coming in on running plays they could sell out to stop the run.

IMO, we need a Cory Hall to play Fullback for us. A guy that loves to hit people, and will do all the dirty work no one sees. Hall played LB in collage here at Boise State. He was a super tuff guy that always gave 100%. He knew he would probably go undrafted as a LB so he worked out as a Fullback.

I think the Packers took him in the 5th round?

Retired_Member_001
01-17-2008, 06:01 PM
We don't have a 3rd

I reckon we will pick up a 3rd through a trade.

In fact I see us with possibly two second rounders. If we were to trade Walker, Foxy and Ian Gold I see us picking up another second. In fact we may end up trading our #12 pick + player for two first rounders.

If we did get two first rounders I think we either draft OL + OLB in the first round and RB in the second OR we go OL + RB in the first and OLB in the second.

Just a suggestion.

Lonestar
01-17-2008, 06:04 PM
The problem I have with this is we need a full time fullback, that can roll off the block and contribute in the passing game. HG was great about that. He could stick the blitzing LB, then fade out into the endzone and catch a TD pass off the bootleg.

Its the little things that get you in the endzone. People don't really consider what HG contributed to our passing game. When he was in there, they didn't know if we were going to pass or run. If we had DJ coming in on running plays they could sell out to stop the run.

IMO, we need a Cory Hall to play Fullback for us. A guy that loves to hit people, and will do all the dirty work no one sees. Hall played LB in collage here at Boise State. He was a super tuff guy that always gave 100%. He knew he would probably go undrafted as a LB so he worked out as a Fullback.

I think the Packers took him in the 5th round?

I agree it was just a wild hare..

But some will agrue that it is a wasted slot just like every year the cut leach the TE maroons come out to play..

fcspikeit
01-17-2008, 06:14 PM
I reckon we will pick up a 3rd through a trade.

In fact I see us with possibly two second rounders. If we were to trade Walker, Foxy and Ian Gold I see us picking up another second. In fact we may end up trading our #12 pick + player for two first rounders.

If we did get two first rounders I think we either draft OL + OLB in the first round and RB in the second OR we go OL + RB in the first and OLB in the second.

Just a suggestion.


I hope we do end up with more picks...

My dad always said.. Don't count your chickens before they hatch..:D

Scarface
01-19-2008, 09:21 AM
James Davis decides to stay in school. Smart decision. With all these stud junior rb's declaring their stock won't be as high as they think.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fsports%2Fcolle ge%2Ffootball%2Facc%2F2008-01-18-clemson-davis_N.htm&ei=7AaSR4DhNpzuigGchoHwDw&usg=AFQjCNG5ChZHZhYshjvSnNmU9ByagxxIdA&sig2=wFk8e2tnd-cgQMAmpufVvw

lex
01-19-2008, 09:37 AM
I really want them to draft a RB. I said in another thread that Im an advocate of trading up to 6 if McFadden is still there. However, if not McFadden, I think Mendenhall is the best of the rest in terms of fitting what we do. Then Id say Felix Jones. Then Stewart, followed by Jamaal Charles. So its:
1. McFadden
2. Mendenhall
3. Felix Jones
4. Jon Stewart
5. Jamaal Charles

I know a lot of people think that Stewarts ideal for Denver but E!SPN did a piece on him this year about how Stewart improved his peripheral vision by doing exercises to improve his eye muscles. And they were saying it really helped him. Other RBs can see this without having to go through all that, Mendenhall and Jones for example. And both Mendenhall and Jones have better feet/body control, which along with vision would help in not missing out on long runs. I have Mendenhall higher too because while he's not as strong as Stewart, he is around 220 and does run behind his pads well. Plus I think Jones and Mendenhall are faster than Stewart.

But regardless of which is better, I think it would be a good idea to draft a RB the first day. It would make it easier on Cutler and also there seems to be two schools of thought on our RBs. There seems to be those who think we can plug anyone in there and then there are those who think, if just anyone would do well in Denver, imagine how well an elite RB would do. Im in the latter camp. And yes, we need to improve the Oline but thats a given.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 11:20 AM
I really like Davis. Smart decision by him, but I was really hoping he'd have been sitting there for us in round 3 or 4 to make a move on.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 08:45 PM
Mendenhall or bust! Plus I already think he is their main target in the first round, even though many will disagree...

;)

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 08:47 PM
I'm not against Mendenhall, but we must trade back to do it. At 12, it'd be stupid. Although most don't want a #1 RB, we would get another pick if we traded back so ease the "pain." I like him...or Stewart.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 08:58 PM
I'm not against Mendenhall, but we must trade back to do it. At 12, it'd be stupid. Although most don't want a #1 RB, we would get another pick if we traded back so ease the "pain." I like him...or Stewart.

Expect Mendenhall to climb come the combine, he is currently rated as a top 20 pick, others and myself agree that is because of the system he ran in which made him look a bit lackluster then he really is, come the end of the combine I would not be surprised if he is rated overall above Stewart and is considered a top 15 pick!

Mendenhall will be a beast at the next level, he is already been compared to Chester Taylor by Sports Weekly and others have compared him to Portis. I think he becomes a top 15 pick and Denver may pull the trigger even at 12.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 09:03 PM
I doubt 12. The only way they go RB in round 1 is if they trade back for an extra. WAY to many other holes...oh, and Henry is still getting paid as we speak.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 09:08 PM
I doubt 12. The only way they go RB in round 1 is if they trade back for an extra. WAY to many other holes...oh, and Henry is still getting paid as we speak.

Henry may be cut come March 1st, Shanahan may even wait till June 1st to spread the hit of the contract, Henry being on the roster means very little...and say what you will, but Shanahan being friends with Zook former HC of Florida St. and now HC of Illinois will play a factor, there are teams interested in Mendenhall from 15th overall down, think Shanahan would risk it if he does not have to? Risking it is what lost him two picks he liked above Moss last year - Per Shanahan himself.

;)

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 09:11 PM
Assuming Mendenhall is the guy he wants. The D was AWFUL last year and we have gaping holes in all 3 levels...either of which could be addressed at 12 (if Sedrick Ellis makes it there). Shanny has plenty of friends. I doubt his relationship w/ Zook will be a deciding factor in an NFL draft.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 09:18 PM
Assuming Mendenhall is the guy he wants. The D was AWFUL last year and we have gaping holes in all 3 levels...either of which could be addressed at 12 (if Sedrick Ellis makes it there). Shanny has plenty of friends. I doubt his relationship w/ Zook will be a deciding factor in an NFL draft.

It plays a factor because Shanahan likes to scout outside the box, Turner the running back coach is a huge fan of that specific conference and a well respected fomer coach from the Big Ten. There are several facts that point to Mendenhall being the top favored back by Denver. Ellis will not fall to us, nor will Phillips and Clady has a small chance, but Shanahan seems to like the offensive linemen we have and will more then likely will add depth and possible starters to the line in the second day of the draft as usual.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 10:09 PM
Of the 3, I only see Ellis as the one who may not make it to us. I really think KP will be there and unless KC takes Clady at #5, he should be there too. The remaining teams prior to us have different needs than S and OT.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 10:58 PM
Of the 3, I only see Ellis as the one who may not make it to us. I really think KP will be there and unless KC takes Clady at #5, he should be there too. The remaining teams prior to us have different needs than S and OT.

So I guess it is surprising to you that it has been mentioned by a few sources that the Patriots, Jets and Saints are interested in Phillips! Cincinnati, Oakland will also look into taking Ellis, there is a very slim chance either falls to us, and even if Clady does fall, do not be surprised if Denver passes on him! Phillips is expected to raise his stock come the combine, Ellis is secure...with offensive depth many of those with high picks will secure defense right away since most have high picks in the second, Denver will not get a defensive player in round one because lack of talent defensively worth the pick - the only two sure fire top ten offensive players will be Jake Long and Darren McFadden.

;)

SmilinAssasSin27
01-19-2008, 11:07 PM
The QBs will go. They always do. Maybe not all 3, but I'm betting at least 2 of em. And I don't believe that NE will go Safety. They will need CB help and their LBs are ancient. They have Merriweather, do they not? As appealing as it would be to team them up, the Pats are smarter than that.

I'm not gonna say the Saints don't go after Phillips because they are one of the dumbest franchises in the league, BUT their CBs have been the worst in the NFL for almost 5 years now. They have ANY CBs worth a dam in 2006...they win the SB. But they don't...so they didn't. They NEED Jenkins or Talib. If NE takes 1, NO should take the other.

The Jets...If they take Phillips at 6, I will be in shock...but they are the Jets.

As far as Cincy and Oakland...I already said I think Ellis would be the one not to make it to us.

lex
01-19-2008, 11:08 PM
Henry may be cut come March 1st, Shanahan may even wait till June 1st to spread the hit of the contract, Henry being on the roster means very little...and say what you will, but Shanahan being friends with Zook former HC of Florida St. and now HC of Illinois will play a factor, there are teams interested in Mendenhall from 15th overall down, think Shanahan would risk it if he does not have to? Risking it is what lost him two picks he liked above Moss last year - Per Shanahan himself.

;)


Try Florida.

Lancane
01-19-2008, 11:34 PM
Try Florida.

Woops...typing too fast, thanks Lex! ;)

Lancane
01-19-2008, 11:37 PM
The QBs will go. They always do. Maybe not all 3, but I'm betting at least 2 of em. And I don't believe that NE will go Safety. They will need CB help and their LBs are ancient. They have Merriweather, do they not? As appealing as it would be to team them up, the Pats are smarter than that.

I'm not gonna say the Saints don't go after Phillips because they are one of the dumbest franchises in the league, BUT their CBs have been the worst in the NFL for almost 5 years now. They have ANY CBs worth a dam in 2006...they win the SB. But they don't...so they didn't. They NEED Jenkins or Talib. If NE takes 1, NO should take the other.

The Jets...If they take Phillips at 6, I will be in shock...but they are the Jets.

As far as Cincy and Oakland...I already said I think Ellis would be the one not to make it to us.

I agree that the Patriots need a corner, if they do not re-sign some of their current corners especially, but they are interested in Phillips, Bell-Cheat-N-Check will look at Phillips and Jenkins I believe, so I would not count out either players going there.

Simple Jaded
01-19-2008, 11:55 PM
Unless, for some reason, Clady checks in at about 280LB's, Shanahan will not draft him.

Coincidentally, that's probably the only way he gets past the Chefs......

broncogirl7
01-20-2008, 01:53 AM
No way...we don't need a running back until we take care of the line.
I say we can always pick one up much later and he be just as good. We don't want to waste our top picks on a RB.

lex
01-20-2008, 09:38 AM
No way...we don't need a running back until we take care of the line.
I say we can always pick one up much later and he be just as good. We don't want to waste our top picks on a RB.

It cuts both ways. You could also take a RB in the 1st and then an Olinemen in the next few rounds and they would upgrade the line. And youre crazy if you think the running back doesnt matter.

Stargazer
01-21-2008, 04:45 AM
Draft the gifted talented RB if it is there. This team has been lacking an elite RB since Clinton Portis.

Npba900
01-21-2008, 12:41 PM
I'd like to see Denver go against traditional thinking and draft the top rated RB in the draft.......just like Denver did when Cutler was drafted in the first round, despite the fact that Plumber led Denver to a 13-3 season, an AFC West Title, and w/i one game of the Super Bowl.

Shanahan knew Plumber was not the answer, and more than likely Shanahan now realizes that the current group of RBs do not equal a Clinton Portis nor a Terrell Davis and are therefore not the answer!!!

So I would say the setting and climate is right for Denver to not draft a RB in the late rounds and use their 1st rnd pick on one of the top 5 RB's who would fit best in their running system.

Getting a RB that can take it to the house from 55 yards out.....sure will help us out in the Red Zone......b/c we won't be in the Red Zone every single time b/c Denver now has a RB that's a threat to take it to the house. Denver needs to target either Mendenhall or Stewart with their 1st pick!!!

MENDENHALL, RASHARD
Pros: Great size for the position with a very strong lower body. Physical back who fights for extra yards and rarely goes down on first contact. Great burst through the hole and a big play threat that can accelerate in a hurry once he sees daylight. Nice agility in the open field showing the ability to make defenders miss. Very productive in the passing game especially in the screen game where he does an exceptional job setting up his blockers. Good blocker who is willing in pass protection and understands blitz pickup.Cons: Struggled with ball security early throughout portions of his career. Didn't always run out of the shotgun but will still have to adjust to playing in traditional sets a lot more. Tends to be too content at times running north/south as opposed to searching for open cutback lanes.

Draft Exchange Analysis:
Mendenhall, the catalyst to Illinois' first winning season and BCS bowl in years is a very versatile back. He pretty much does everything you'd want your feature back to do and his ability to block and catch should make him a 3 down player at the next level. It's tough to watch him play and not see a bigger version of Marshawn Lynch. Both guys battle for yards refusing to go down and make defenders miss even in the smallest spaces. Mendenhall should be one of the top backs taken in April and there's no reason why he shouldn't start right away and make an impact.

JONATHAN STEWART:
Pros: Very powerful, thick build with an unusually low center of gravity. Has tremendous balance and superb agility. Played against some of the top defenses in the country. Very difficult to bring down in the open field. Powers between the tackles and turns the edge outside with equal prowess. Very quick feet. Good hands catching the ball. Deceptively fast and is not often caught from behind. Sets up his blockers well. Has experience returning kicks.
Cons: Ran out of a spread set and may take some time to adjust to a pro or I set. Has never been a true workhorse back, but certainly has the build to be one. At his size, he doesn't make major cuts without slowing up a step, but he accelerates back to full speed quickly.

Draft Exchange Analysis:
Watching Stewart run the ball this season has been a real treat. This is one of my favorite prospects in the draft: I keep likening him to a young Jerome Bettis though the comparison is anything but exact. Still, I see the same stocky build, superb balance, and uncanny footwork that Jerome had as Rookie of the Year in LA. One of the things that really stands out at you watching him is just how hard it is to actually tackle this guy. A typical Stewart run has him coming off tackle, getting slammed by the LB 4 yards down field. His momentum is stopped, but he's NOT GOING DOWN. He grinds forward a couple more yards before two or three more defenders arrive on the scene and escort him out of bounds after a six yard gain. Stewart is still standing and walks back to the huddle for the next play. On the stat sheet its just a 6 yard run, but to me its poetry in motion...

I'd even go one step further and take one of the athletic-bigger lead blocking FB's available in the draft...like Owen Schmitt in the 2nd or 3rd round also! A FB like Schmitt at 6'3-270 who's fast athletic and powerful, will open holes for our 1st rnd RB, as well as be a beast in short yardage inside the red zone RB, b/c Schmitt runs with such power! and will not go down with the first hit!

Owen Schmitt would also be a beast in short yardage situations in the 4th qtr when Denver needs to convert crucial 3rd downs to run out the clock; Should Denver have a lead!

Pros: Outstanding lead blocker. Has some ability with the ball in his hands. Could play as a second blocking tight end or a H-back. Weight room warrior. Would be a demon on special teams as well if needed. Could also serve as a short yardage guy.

Cons: Hasn't played in a pro style system. Needs to work on pass routes out of the fb position. Hasnt had to do much pass blocking. Hands could be better.

Draft Exchange Analysis:
Owen is a throwback fullback. A punishing lead blocker with no fear. Owen is a guy who gets by on hard work and guts, as evidenced by going from a D-3 player to a starter on a BCS team. Would best be suited for a team who runs predominately power I sets. I view Owen as a Mike Sellers type, not going to be a star player but will always find a way to help his team.

Simply put.....getting a stud RB and a stud FB in the 2008 draft will address some of the following weaknesses that plagued Denver in 2007.

1) Improve the running game and scoring ability in the red zone!

2) Add a Clinton Portis type RB who can go the distance and defenses must respect, thus allowing Cutler time to throw the ball to already talented receiving corp, b/c now defenses can't rush our QB with reckless abandon.

3) Add a monster lead blocking and hard to bring down FB to our offense!

4) A FB who can keep the chain moving with his power running and impact-full lead blocking ability!

5) With exceptions of the Detroit games and the two games against the Chargers......Denver was competitive enough win the other 6 games they lost! The 6 loses came down to not being able to score and run the ball inside the Red Zone. Denver's offense is really close to becoming explosive! Shanahan just needs to think outside the box and have the vision to address the RB and FB positions in the draft btwn the first and third rounds.

MOtorboat
01-21-2008, 12:45 PM
A couple of things:

Drafting either at No. 12 is a reach, imo.

We need to fix the offensive line, and now we have a gaping hole at left tackle to fill too.

I would be good with a second-round choice of a running back. But, unless it's McFadden, I don't think we should waste a No. 1 pick on a running back when we have so many more glaring holes.

BOSSHOGG30
01-21-2008, 01:11 PM
I would take Jonathon Stewart in the 1st round and I would be happy as all hell. He is the only back I would take in the first round. I do think the Bengals will take him before we get a chance though. Plus I would pick up Caulcrick as a fullback in the later rounds.

MOtorboat
01-21-2008, 01:23 PM
Do we really want to take a running back coming out of a spread offense?

tubby
01-21-2008, 01:26 PM
I would take Jonathon Stewart in the 1st round and I would be happy as all hell. He is the only back I would take in the first round. I do think the Bengals will take him before we get a chance though. Plus I would pick up Caulcrick as a fullback in the later rounds.

Caulcrick is a fricken HOSS! He has thighs the size of MO.

BOSSHOGG30
01-21-2008, 01:27 PM
Do we really want to take a running back coming out of a spread offense?

In Stewarts case...yes... plenty of speed, agility, kick return experience, good hands, #1 recruit coming out of high school, powerful, good vision... he has it all. He is just too talented. I bet you the Bengals take him. I know everyone thinks they will go defense, but I just have a feeling that they want to keep talent around Palmer and he would be a good fit.

BOSSHOGG30
01-21-2008, 01:29 PM
Caulcrick is a fricken HOSS! He has thighs the size of MO.

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff295/balla95_2007/Jehuu.jpg
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff295/balla95_2007/caulcrick.jpg

MOtorboat
01-21-2008, 01:42 PM
In Stewarts case...yes... plenty of speed, agility, kick return experience, good hands, #1 recruit coming out of high school, powerful, good vision... he has it all. He is just too talented. I bet you the Bengals take him. I know everyone thinks they will go defense, but I just have a feeling that they want to keep talent around Palmer and he would be a good fit.

That would be a heck of a reach there Boss...

Npba900
01-21-2008, 01:57 PM
That would be a heck of a reach there Boss...

The draft is always a reach. However, a RB like Stewart with the additions of drafting FB's like Schmitt or Caulcrick will give Denver both size, power and speed in the back field to enhance the zone blocking of our lighter-quicker-athletic O Linmen; Especially in the RED ZONE!

If Denver can't get Stewart in the 1st round, then I'd try and get Mendenhall in the 2nd round, as well as drafting either Caulcrick or Owens on the second day!!!

MOtorboat
01-21-2008, 02:28 PM
OK, I posted a stat last week about left tackles that was a little off. I thought he had said the last 22 winning Super Bowl teams, and he said the last 22 Super Bowl teams, so the last 11 Super Bowls, 17 have drafted their left tackle. 14 of those were in the first round, 18 of them in the first two rounds, regardless of which team drafted them.

(Research not mine, but that of Soren Petro of WHB in Kansas City)

Winning teams:

Season SB Winning LT Tm Year Rd Pick School
2007 XLII
2006 XLII Glenn, Tarik Ind 1997 1 19 Cal
2005 XL Smith, Marvel Pit 2000 2 38 Arizona St.
2004 XXXIX Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2003 XXXVIII Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2002 XXXVII Oben, Roman TB 1996 3 66 Louisville FA
2001 XXXVI Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2000 XXXV Ogden, Jonathon Bal 1996 1 4 UCLA
1999 XXXIV Pace, Orlando StL 1997 1 1 Ohio St.
1998 XXXIII Jones, Tony Den 1988 RFA W.Carolina FA
1997 XXXIII Zimmerman, Gary Den 1984 1* 3 Oregon
1996 XXXI Michels, John GB 1996 1 27 USC

And Losing teams:

Losing LT Tm Year Rd Pick School

Tait, John Chi 1999 1 14 BYU FA
Jones, Walter Sea 1997 1 6 Florida St.
Thomas, (Tra) Phi 1998 1 11 Florida St.
Steussie, Todd Car 1994 1 19 Cal
Sims, Barry Oak 1999 RFA Utah
Pace, Orlando StL 1997 1 1 Ohio St.
Brown, Lomas NYG 1985 1 6 Florida FA
Hopkins, Brad Ten 1993 1 13 Illinois
Whitfield, Bob Atl 1992 1 8 Stanford
Verba, Ross GB 1997 1 30 Iowa
Armstrong, B. NE 1987 1 23 Louisville

Verba was a USFL Supplemental Draft choice.

I just really think we should go after a tackle.

BOSSHOGG30
01-21-2008, 03:06 PM
OK, I posted a stat last week about left tackles that was a little off. I thought he had said the last 22 winning Super Bowl teams, and he said the last 22 Super Bowl teams, so the last 11 Super Bowls, 17 have drafted their left tackle. 14 of those were in the first round, 18 of them in the first two rounds, regardless of which team drafted them.

(Research not mine, but that of Soren Petro of WHB in Kansas City)

Winning teams:

Season SB Winning LT Tm Year Rd Pick School
2007 XLII
2006 XLII Glenn, Tarik Ind 1997 1 19 Cal
2005 XL Smith, Marvel Pit 2000 2 38 Arizona St.
2004 XXXIX Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2003 XXXVIII Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2002 XXXVII Oben, Roman TB 1996 3 66 Louisville FA
2001 XXXVI Light, Matt NE 2001 2 48 Purdue
2000 XXXV Ogden, Jonathon Bal 1996 1 4 UCLA
1999 XXXIV Pace, Orlando StL 1997 1 1 Ohio St.
1998 XXXIII Jones, Tony Den 1988 RFA W.Carolina FA
1997 XXXIII Zimmerman, Gary Den 1984 1* 3 Oregon
1996 XXXI Michels, John GB 1996 1 27 USC

And Losing teams:

Losing LT Tm Year Rd Pick School

Tait, John Chi 1999 1 14 BYU FA
Jones, Walter Sea 1997 1 6 Florida St.
Thomas, (Tra) Phi 1998 1 11 Florida St.
Steussie, Todd Car 1994 1 19 Cal
Sims, Barry Oak 1999 RFA Utah
Pace, Orlando StL 1997 1 1 Ohio St.
Brown, Lomas NYG 1985 1 6 Florida FA
Hopkins, Brad Ten 1993 1 13 Illinois
Whitfield, Bob Atl 1992 1 8 Stanford
Verba, Ross GB 1997 1 30 Iowa
Armstrong, B. NE 1987 1 23 Louisville

Verba was a USFL Supplemental Draft choice.

I just really think we should go after a tackle.

If Clady is there we might, but since Oher is out that just hurts our chances of getting someone quality at the #12 pick.

WARHORSE
01-21-2008, 03:44 PM
In Stewarts case...yes... plenty of speed, agility, kick return experience, good hands, #1 recruit coming out of high school, powerful, good vision... he has it all. He is just too talented. I bet you the Bengals take him. I know everyone thinks they will go defense, but I just have a feeling that they want to keep talent around Palmer and he would be a good fit.


I could see them taking a RB, but many in the top of the rounds like Cincy, will undoubtedly be thinking they can get a very good back in the top of the second.

I think a lot of our draft will depend on what the Broncos think of Ryan Harris. So far, they like what they see. But how much? Enough to be confident going into next season?

Most of our answers will be coming in the next two months. All of us watching what happens once free agency opens up, and the combine kicks in.

The biggest thing I desire, is that we get play for years to come from our selections.

G_Money
01-21-2008, 03:54 PM
Most of our answers will be coming in the next two months. All of us watching what happens once free agency opens up, and the combine kicks in.

The biggest thing I desire, is that we get play for years to come from our selections.

Precisely.

I hear lots of, "I would NEVER draft..." X or Y position in the 1st (including from me re: the DT position we need) but I don't care if the Broncos listen to me or not as long as they get the RIGHT guys.

If we drafted Mendenhall and Owen Schmitt as our 1st day picks some people would go ballistic - but if the Broncos were right and they were getting a 10,000 yard runner and Mike Alstott to block for him, would that be the all-time worst thing?

Yes, we have other needs as well. But I'm far more interested in getting impact players than I am in filling Position X with any warm body.

Get impact players with our 1st two picks, and then we have many more picks on the second day to try to address our remaining problems. I don't think that's too much to ask.

~G

SmilinAssasSin27
01-21-2008, 08:21 PM
Cincy isn't drafting a RB in the top 10.

If we want a OT at 12 it will be Clady or Otah.

EMB6903
01-21-2008, 08:27 PM
this Runningback class is way to deep for Denver to draft a rb in the 1st round, I could maybe see it in the 2nd, but the 1st? unless its Darren Mcfadden.. I dont see it.

Scarface
01-21-2008, 08:52 PM
I'm doubting that we take a tackle in RD1 since the staff seems confident in Harris.

HolyDiver
01-22-2008, 08:42 AM
We've been hearing the same talk.....probably from the same people..........that we need an O-linemen or Runningback in the 1st round...............I guess our Defense does not need a #1 pick wasted there then?

BeefStew25
01-22-2008, 08:43 AM
We've been hearing the same talk.....probably from the same people..........that we need an O-linemen or Runningback in the 1st round...............I guess our Defense does not need a #1 pick wasted there then?

As usual, HD, you are spot on. How is your knee?

HolyDiver
01-22-2008, 09:03 AM
As usual, HD, you are spot on. How is your knee?

My knee is F'ed................Not all that much better.................I really screwed it up. But walking without a limp now anyway......after 1 month.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-22-2008, 10:03 AM
Get a cane, some fishbowl platforms and you can just play it off like yer a pimp...it's gonna be all good Diver.

tubby
01-22-2008, 11:32 AM
We've been hearing the same talk.....probably from the same people..........that we need an O-linemen or Runningback in the 1st round...............I guess our Defense does not need a #1 pick wasted there then?

It was all Bates fault remember? It had nothing to do with personnel.

mclark
01-22-2008, 11:38 AM
In a lot of ways Stewart was impeded by the spread offense, as well as he played at Oregon. He's really a straight ahead runner. The spread pulls a lot of lineman to one side or the other and the back has to follow the lineman, waiting for a gap to appear. It's not a real sweep, because it has the run, pass, handoff option built in on every play.

As good as Stewart was in the spread, he'll be better when he has some serious straight-ahead blocking to deal with.

One benefit of the spread, for Stewart, however, was that he was playing in a high-powered passing game, until Dixon got hurt. The versatility of the offense kept the opposing defenses off balance.

Stewart also averaged 30 yards per kickoff, which is another skill he has -- with about 5 touchdowns on kickoff returns.

HolyDiver
01-22-2008, 11:38 AM
It was all Bates fault remember? It had nothing to do with personnel.


I wish that was so...................

WARHORSE
01-22-2008, 01:14 PM
Its not about not drafting a defensive player HD. We all know that the primary need is at defensive tackle. But if both Ellis and Dorsey are gone, which they should be, and Phillips is gone as well, should we take a second tier DT in round one just to satisfy the need, or take the best player and draft DT in round two.

WORSE than not getting a DT in round one, would be drafting a DT in round one that doesnt start. No thanks. Id rather take someone that improves our team with an impact player no matter what the position than draft a bench warmer.

If we want developmental prospects, let em come from the later rounds.

There are backs in the draft that can come in here and play. Not saying its gonna happen, but theres alot of talent at the RB position in the draft.

MOtorboat
01-22-2008, 01:48 PM
Its not about not drafting a defensive player HD. We all know that the primary need is at defensive tackle. But if both Ellis and Dorsey are gone, which they should be, and Phillips is gone as well, should we take a second tier DT in round one just to satisfy the need, or take the best player and draft DT in round two.

No...and we shouldn't be reaching for running backs either..

HolyDiver
01-22-2008, 01:59 PM
Its not about not drafting a defensive player HD. We all know that the primary need is at defensive tackle. But if both Ellis and Dorsey are gone, which they should be, and Phillips is gone as well, should we take a second tier DT in round one just to satisfy the need, or take the best player and draft DT in round two.

WORSE than not getting a DT in round one, would be drafting a DT in round one that doesnt start. No thanks. Id rather take someone that improves our team with an impact player no matter what the position than draft a bench warmer.

If we want developmental prospects, let em come from the later rounds.

There are backs in the draft that can come in here and play. Not saying its gonna happen, but theres alot of talent at the RB position in the draft.

If all those guys are gone.........we simply trade back................no use just doing the same with a Runningback or O-lineman that you are saying not to do with a D-lineman.

EMB6903
01-22-2008, 03:40 PM
If Phillips or Ellis is gone by 12, I'd love to Draft Clady I dont think we should trade down.

Lonestar
01-22-2008, 05:34 PM
You all know that mikeys history pre 2005 was to fall in love with someone and have permaturedrafulation on someone that could have been had two rounds later..

Hopefully he has learned his lesson from screwing the pooch in the 1999-2005 drafts.. Maybe Pat will be setting in this year since he no longer has Dinger or Bates around to calm him down..

WARHORSE
01-22-2008, 07:45 PM
If all those guys are gone.........we simply trade back................no use just doing the same with a Runningback of O-lieman that you are saying not to do with a D-lineman.


If Ellis, Dorsey, Long, Long and Phillips are not there, I am definitely among those hoping we can trade back and pick up selections. I already happen to think if thats the case, then Chicago may be a prime candidate to pick up a third rounder from.

I would not want to pick up a back in the first round that I can get in the second or third, thats for sure. :tsk:

But as I said, impact is the most important thing to me. Can they come in and help our team right now.


Thats the players Im lookin for.

If the only thing they are going to do for us is join the Dline rotation, then lets take those guys in the later rounds.........:coffee:

SmilinAssasSin27
01-22-2008, 07:54 PM
Stewart was a top 2 RB out of HS his senior year cuz he has SKILLZ! Tennessee and Oregon were his final 2...and UT don't run no spread. He wanted to be closer to home. can't blame him. He just HAPPENED to end up in a spread O. Dude will be a beast in the NFL...flat out.

Stargazer
01-23-2008, 04:22 AM
If Ellis, Dorsey, Long, Long and Phillips are not there, I am definitely among those hoping we can trade back and pick up selections. I already happen to think if thats the case, then Chicago may be a prime candidate to pick up a third rounder from.

I would not want to pick up a back in the first round that I can get in the second or third, thats for sure. :tsk:

But as I said, impact is the most important thing to me. Can they come in and help our team right now.


Thats the players Im lookin for.

If the only thing they are going to do for us is join the Dline rotation, then lets take those guys in the later rounds.........:coffee:


I think the 12th position is a prime position to trade down and teams definately will be calling to make a deal. I think it depends on if Shanny will want to acquire more selections and the multiple players he has targeted he has targeted are there. This is definately a year where trading down would make more sense than trading up.

Npba900
01-24-2008, 12:00 AM
I'm doubting that we take a tackle in RD1 since the staff seems confident in Harris.

I'd go slow with Harris due to his 2 consecutive years of back surgery. Denver should at least wait and see if Harris can make thru the season w/o his back giving him any problems; before we raise expectations about him.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-24-2008, 06:07 PM
I have had no expectations of Harris for some time now. I've seen him "play" at Notre Dame. He was garbage then. he's garbage now.

tubby
01-24-2008, 06:28 PM
I have had no expectations of Harris for some time now. I've seen him "play" at Notre Dame. He was garbage then. he's garbage now.

One word.....SOFT!

SmilinAssasSin27
01-24-2008, 06:43 PM
One word.....SOFT!

one word...poop

Scarface
01-24-2008, 11:27 PM
one word...poop

Poop that the staff seems to like.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-25-2008, 12:14 AM
They also liked MoC, George Foster, Marcus Nash........

Cutler6MVP
01-25-2008, 12:17 AM
I really think a back like mendenhall would dominate in our system. He runs the ball strong, and he can catch the ball very well.

Stargazer
01-25-2008, 03:37 AM
I expect this thread to reach 50+ pages by draft day. Glad I can contribute.

Scarface
01-26-2008, 01:37 AM
They also liked MoC, George Foster, Marcus Nash........

And that's the only point I'm making. The staff likes him.

Scarface
01-27-2008, 12:00 PM
If they don't really like him this might happen:

12 OT Ryan Clady Boise State Jr. 6-6 317
With the retirement of Matt Lepsis, finding a replacement at offensive tackle rises to the top of the Broncos' need list. Clady has tremendous size, but is still nimble enough in pass coverage thanks to his quick feet.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/don_banks/01/23/mock.draft1.part2/index.html

SmilinAssasSin27
01-27-2008, 01:51 PM
As much as I want D, I'd have no choice but to giggle like a lil girl if we called his name at the podium.

tubby
02-13-2008, 11:23 AM
In light Boss's Stewart man love thread I thought I'd bump this. :D

Rex
02-13-2008, 11:30 AM
In light Boss's Stewart man love thread I thought I'd bump this. :D

Does he love him as much as Tony Hunt?

BOSSHOGG30
02-13-2008, 11:30 AM
In light Boss's Stewart man love thread I thought I'd bump this. :D

Post 209 says it all