Anatomy of a Denver Bronco Draft Choice

[WARHORSE]

We had deals in place with two teams, and were set to go back into the first round last year.
Great article from Sundquist regarding last years draft. We can take alot from it.



Anatomy of a Draft Choice
By Andrew Mason (http://blog.denverbroncos.com/mason)
DenverBroncos.com
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- If you're not picking at the top of the NFL Draft, you have to learn to be flexible. And having never picked higher than fourth since the institution of the common AFL-NFL Draft four decades ago, the Broncos have never held such sway over their pick.
They've learned to sit and wait. But they've also learned how to make a key swap to get their desired player, which proved to be the case Saturday with their second draft-day trade of their first-round selection in as many years.
Flexibility entails willingness to make a swap -- and also the desire to target multiple players. In the Broncos' case, General Manager Ted Sundquist (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=357&contentID=496) said their first-round focus locked in on three names: Florida defensive end Jarvis Moss (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=2087), Florida State outside linebacker Lawrence Timmons (http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('page.php?id=349&videoID=1660&type=broncosTV&year=&month=','mmWindow','resizable=no,scrollbars=no,wid th=615,height=580')) and Tennessee defensive tackle Justin Harrell (http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('page.php?id=349&videoID=1647&type=broncosTV&year=&month=','mmWindow','resizable=no,scrollbars=no,wid th=615,height=580')).
"There were three guys that we had our eyes on," Sundquist said.
The question was -- could the Broncos strike twice in the first round? It nearly happened.
"The hope was this – we would get one of the three guys at 21, and I had contacted everybody from 22 to 27," Sundquist said. "I had commitments from (Philadelphia) -- who traded its first-round pick -- and I had a pretty firm commitment from Dallas, the next pick behind us. On draft day, we were sitting very, very pretty with regards to having two first-rounders. And we were committed to doing that."
Then came the revision to the plan at the 15th and 16th selections. From the first of those two picks, the Pittsburgh Steelers tapped Timmons. A selection later, the Green Bay Packers called Harrell's name.
"We didn't anticipate that," Sundquist said.
LET'S MAKE A DEAL
For every trade that transpires in the NFL, there's at least a dozen potential deals that evaporate barely seconds after the idea first floats into the air.
Sundquist hit the phones repeatedly over the weeks leading into the NFL Draft. But for every call he made, he received another offering him a deal -- many from the top of the draft. There was, of course, the early-March potential trade between the Broncos and Detroit Lions that would have sent the No. 2 overall pick to Denver.
"It's no failure on our part, by any means," Sundquist said. "It was one of those deals where we had to get up there, but we weren't going after Calvin Johnson or a particular player. No. It was to try and maximize your position – which is always what you're trying to do."
That potential trade petered out just days after the National Scouting Combine. Soon enough, other clubs would ring Sundquist's line.
"Eight of the top 10 teams approached us about trading up -- not us (coming) to them. They called us and said, 'Would you be interested in trading up?' We said, 'Well, what do you want? What are you looking for?' By that time we had been into the draft process, talked about who the players were, talked about what we thought was available in the top 10, what was available 15-20 and what was going to be available from 20 to 32. As you get a better feel for who the players are and what your needs are going to be, then the appeal of being in the top 10 might not be as much as it was as it might have been right around that time of the Combine. Now you've got a little bit better hand.
"Is it worth moving up to that point and paying that particular player that kind of money when you might be able to get a similar player to fit what you're trying to do for much less? So there was plenty of opportunity."
Sundquist said only two teams in the draft's top 10 did not call the Broncos offering to swap first-round selections.
"The Raiders didn't talk to us and the Texans did not talk to us -- not ever, not once. I don't know where that (rumor) came from," Sundquist said, "but not once did we have discussions with Houston about trading to No. 10 to take Patrick Willis (http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('page.php?id=349&videoID=1768&type=broncosTV&year=&month=','mmWindow','resizable=no,scrollbars=no,wid th=615,height=580')), which was all the rage. Where that came from, I have no idea, but certainly there was a lot of talk with teams such as Cleveland, Detroit, Tampa Bay – all those guys that were up there."
The draft arrived, and the Broncos inquired about moving up in the round to secure their chances at nabbing one of their three targeted players. But what the Broncos found for a little while was a series of dead ends.
"Green Bay had already told me, 'We're not going to trade.' Carolina had told me, 'We're not going to trade,' (although they did eventually work a deal with the New York Jets). Pittsburgh had already told me, 'We're not going to trade.'
"When you're dealing with another team, it takes two to tango," Sundquist said. "And you've got to get the other team wanting to feel like they've maximized their position, as well.
Enter the Jaguars.
"Jacksonville had talked about moving from 17 back, so I knew at that point in time that the highest we could go was 17, and it didn't make any sense to move up to 12, because we felt like that block of players was going to be down there.
"If I could have gotten Green Bay or Pittsburgh or Carolina to budge, sure, we would have moved up, and maybe we would have (opted for) Harrell or Timmons. But based on what we talked about -- there was one mock draft out of 90 that had Harrell going at 16. One. And that was the one (that became reality).
"We knew that all along; all it takes is one. But those clubs, prior to the draft, did not want to trade, and how much do you give up in order to move up?"
In the end, the cost was third- and sixth-round picks for the chance to venture northward two slots. It was a price Sundquist and the Broncos were willing to pay given their desire to emerge from the first round with at least one of their targeted players.
"You're sitting and waiting at 21, and between the 17th and 21st picks, you've got a chance to lose your third guy," Sundquist said. "Then you're sitting at 21, and now you're trying to trade back or trade out. Why not trade up and get the guy you'd targeted all along anyway? You gave up a third-round pick. Why not?
"(Some observers say) 'Well, you guys paid too much to move up.' No, we didn't. We had the guy (Moss) identified. We knew he was going to make the football team. He might have gone before 21 and now we're stuck with no one that we feel like is going to help our football team the way those three guys (the No. 21 pick and the third- and sixth-round picks traded to the Jaguars) would have helped our football team.
"The sixth-round pick that we gave up? We didn't even have that guy making our team. We had nobody we were going to take at that spot that we felt like would come in and contribute. Those picks – all along, they were going to be used as leverage. The third-round pick – that's what it's going to take to move up on the point-value chart. You've got to get people motivated to trade."
And at that point, a reasonable trade represented a far more palatable solution for Sundquist than remaining at No. 21 and waiting to see if the last of their three highlighted prospects would fall into their laps.
"To say, 'Well, you could have waited until 21 to get Moss,' well, we thought that about the other two (Harrell and Timmons being picked)," Sundquist said. "Who's to say that Moss would have been there at 21? So we went and got our guy, end of story."

[WARHORSE]

cont....

LATE-ROUND LEVERAGE
Sundquist had designs on reducing the Broncos' compliment of selections all along. The modus operandi for this year's Broncos draft was quality over quantity, and while the Broncos ended the weekend with their smallest draft class since 1997, they also concluded it with selections from each of the first four rounds.
"Knowing what we had already added, we went into the draft feeling as if there was only room for four guys," Sundquist said, "(and) knowing that the back end of the draft was going to be leveraged to help the front end of the draft."
A major reason why Sundquist and the Broncos were so amenable to parting with late-round draft selections rested in the moves made in the months prior to the draft, from unrestricted free agency to the signing of young players to future contracts back in January, before the NFL's postseason wound to a close.
An example of such a player is former UAB quarterback Darrell Hackney (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=6873), on whom the Broncos had a mid-round grade last year before he went undrafted. He was eventually signed and released by the Cleveland Browns.
"The first thing I'll say is this: Throughout the offseason, to say the only way that you build a football team is through the draft is not true -- not in today's age," Sundquist said. "There's a little bit of a misnomer that teams are built through the draft. That is one aspect of how to build a football team, and my point to that is that we have been extremely busy using the other resources that we have, a la reserve-future signings, unrestricted free agency, trades and going into the draft that there are a number of different avenues that you can take to build your football team."
And it was not only those avenues -- but what fruits they have already borne -- that helped shape the Broncos' decision to place a tight focus up front on draft weekend.
"We've been in offseason conditioning program for over a month now," Sundquist said, "and we've had an opportunity to look at a number of young players and new additions prior to the draft and have been able to answer some of those questions with regards to how they're working out for Rich Tuten (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=357&contentID=638) out there during the offseason, throwing the football, catching the football and all kinds of things.
"We had a good idea of what we already had on our football team."

[WARHORSE]

Sundquist 48 hours before the 2007 draft.

Three months before the Broncos signed Holdman and Lewis, they picked up Moore, who spent 2006 out of football but started under assistant head coach Jim Bates (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=357&contentID=6912) in Miami.
"You're talking about a number of guys that have been out there," Sundquist said. "I feel good about that spot. I think we're as strong -- or stronger -- than a majority of teams in the league at that spot, even with the loss of Al (Wilson)."
Safety was a position that was delineated as one of need by many observers heading into the draft, but the Broncos didn't see it as such, content with starters John Lynch (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=2240) and Nick Ferguson (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=715) and a group of backups that includes Sam Brandon returning from a torn anterior cruciate ligament and younger players in Hamza Abdullah (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=5139), Steve Cargile and Curome Cox. Domonique Foxworth (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=4341) also started at safety in 2006.
"Where (would) a (new) guy fit?" Sundquist asked.
"It's Nick and John's jobs right now. It's their jobs. Do we have an Ed Reed-type ballhawk back there? No, we don't. We don't. The emphasis has been on stopping the run first. We're probably playing with two strong-safety type guys right now."
And that, Sundquist said, was just fine with defensive bosses Jim Bates and Bob Slowik (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=357&contentID=4047).
"They didn't place an emphasis in the offseason on having to have a safety," Sundquist said. "At some point in time I've got to go off of what the defensive coaches are telling me."
FINAL RESULT
That will be determined when fall arrives. For now, Sundquist is pleased with the hand his team holds.
"We continue to say, ‘This is a year-in and year-out quest for the Super Bowl,'" he said. "We're not rebuilding; we're not changing the system. It is to get the best players to make a run at a championship each and every year."

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Nice read. Thanx

I wonder who that #2 pick would been...

[WARHORSE]

Nice read. Thanx

I wonder who that #2 pick would been...

You mean the second first rounder?


Well, in hindsight..........Alan Branch? Reggie Nelson?

Whats funny is if it were another DE, the next one taken was Turk McBride two selections ahead of us, and then Crowder.

I think they primarily wanted 2 out of the 3 they were lookin to get.


Posluszny was there too. Hmmm.........Tony Ugoh and Joe Staley.....may have taken them instead of Harris, eh?

[WARHORSE]

"It's no failure on our part, by any means," Sundquist said. "It was one of those deals where we had to get up there, but we weren't going after Calvin Johnson or a particular player. No. It was to try and maximize your position – which is always what you're trying to do."

Well, its my opinion that they were indeed going after Calvin, but after he ran that 40 in the combine, Detroit got its panties all wet over Calvin.
(along with the rest of us, mostly me)

But in any case, if it is true that Denver was trying to maximize its position, and was willing to move up to the second pick in the draft, then we must understand that if they feel its beneficial to them, they will try and do the same this year.

Last year, they didnt think there were many guys who would come in and start for us this year. I guess we could go with that same thinking this year.
The article also gave us insight into the fact that the so called defensive philosophy for us was, stop the run, first and foremost. Looking at it this year, I think Phillips could start for us. So could a couple of the runningbacks, and Dlinemen. LBers? Not sure that one could make that assumption. So who in the draft does Denver see as having an immediate impact? I think Branch had to be one of those guys they were looking at as taking with a second first round selection, since we went out and signed the fat boys.

Those are the fellas we will be lookin at.

[WARHORSE]

Im talkin to myself, or rather thinkin out loud in here, but I find this article so interesting because of all it reveals.

Like, we now know that Denver would be willing to pay for a player they drafted with the second selection of the draft, had they completed the draft trade with Detroit. Is there someone who they think is worth that this year? Quite possibly, eh? Dorsey is a fine animal, and so is Chris Long.......







HMMMMmmmmmmmmmm................

[mclark]

Interesting read, War. Thanks for posting.

[G_Money]

In the end, the cost was third- and sixth-round picks for the chance to venture northward two slots. It was a price Sundquist and the Broncos were willing to pay given their desire to emerge from the first round with at least one of their targeted players.

...

"(Some observers say) 'Well, you guys paid too much to move up.' No, we didn't. We had the guy (Moss) identified. We knew he was going to make the football team. He might have gone before 21 and now we're stuck with no one that we feel like is going to help our football team the way those three guys (the No. 21 pick and the third- and sixth-round picks traded to the Jaguars) would have helped our football team.

"The sixth-round pick that we gave up? We didn't even have that guy making our team. We had nobody we were going to take at that spot that we felt like would come in and contribute. Those picks – all along, they were going to be used as leverage. The third-round pick – that's what it's going to take to move up on the point-value chart. You've got to get people motivated to trade."


Three months before the Broncos signed Holdman and Lewis, they picked up Moore, who spent 2006 out of football but started under assistant head coach Jim Bates in Miami.

"You're talking about a number of guys that have been out there," Sundquist said. "I feel good about that spot. I think we're as strong -- or stronger -- than a majority of teams in the league at that spot, even with the loss of Al (Wilson)."

Safety was a position that was delineated as one of need by many observers heading into the draft, but the Broncos didn't see it as such, content with starters John Lynch and Nick Ferguson and a group of backups that includes Sam Brandon returning from a torn anterior cruciate ligament and younger players in Hamza Abdullah, Steve Cargile and Curome Cox. Domonique Foxworth also started at safety in 2006.

"Where (would) a (new) guy fit?" Sundquist asked.

"It's Nick and John's jobs right now. It's their jobs. Do we have an Ed Reed-type ballhawk back there? No, we don't. We don't. The emphasis has been on stopping the run first. We're probably playing with two strong-safety type guys right now."

And that, Sundquist said, was just fine with defensive bosses Jim Bates and Bob Slowik.

"They didn't place an emphasis in the offseason on having to have a safety," Sundquist said. "At some point in time I've got to go off of what the defensive coaches are telling me."

Sundquist had designs on reducing the Broncos' compliment of selections all along. The modus operandi for this year's Broncos draft was quality over quantity, and while the Broncos ended the weekend with their smallest draft class since 1997, they also concluded it with selections from each of the first four rounds.

"Knowing what we had already added, we went into the draft feeling as if there was only room for four guys," Sundquist said, "(and) knowing that the back end of the draft was going to be leveraged to help the front end of the draft."

"The first thing I'll say is this: Throughout the offseason, to say the only way that you build a football team is through the draft is not true -- not in today's age," Sundquist said. "There's a little bit of a misnomer that teams are built through the draft. That is one aspect of how to build a football team, and my point to that is that we have been extremely busy using the other resources that we have, a la reserve-future signings, unrestricted free agency, trades and going into the draft that there are a number of different avenues that you can take to build your football team."
I know this is last year's article, but the more Ted talks, the stupider he gets.

He should really just be quiet.

Yes, you can build a football team in many ways, but it's strange how nearly all of the successful teams in the NFL are draft-built first and foremost while teams like the Redskins can throw money at the FA market year after year and struggle to achieve mediocrity.

Our talent evaluation last year very obviously failed us, if we thought we only had room on the uber-talented roster for 4 picks, and that there was NO ONE who could have made the team out of the 6th round.

We skipped on a year relatively strong in 1st-day safeties and now have to try to find one in a more shallow draft, even knowing that Nick and Sam were each coming off a major surgery and Lynch's career was winding down.

When you pre-determine that you have no use for extra draftpicks, it drives me crazy.

Draft picks are not guarantees. They are percentage chances to hit the lottery. If I have a 50% chance to hit the lottery, do I throw away a couple of extra 30% chance tickets because "Well, one's good enough. You can only win once, after all"?

DL picks are among the riskiest in the draft. Yes, all of those guys are on the team still, but none are exactly pro-bowlers, and we're still looking for DL and OL help - the only two picks we made in last year's draft.

Maybe we needed more help after all?

Nah - Ted hasn't ever admitted he was wrong about anything, why would he start now?

~G

[underrated29]

awesome read!!


With this article it leads me to believe is that we are going to look to do the same thing. Get 2 1st rd picks this year. I think they want a LB first, Malalalyuga (is he a mike?) and then get back in for a RB. I think they like stewart. But safety could be that also. One thing is for sure though, they are always looking to swing trades. Hopefully this year our guys fall, so we can move back to take them and acquire more picks.

[Lonestar]

I know this is last year's article, but the more Ted talks, the stupider he gets.

He should really just be quiet.

Yes, you can build a football team in many ways, but it's strange how nearly all of the successful teams in the NFL are draft-built first and foremost while teams like the Redskins can throw money at the FA market year after year and struggle to achieve mediocrity.

Our talent evaluation last year very obviously failed us, if we thought we only had room on the uber-talented roster for 4 picks, and that there was NO ONE who could have made the team out of the 6th round.

We skipped on a year relatively strong in 1st-day safeties and now have to try to find one in a more shallow draft, even knowing that Nick and Sam were each coming off a major surgery and Lynch's career was winding down.

When you pre-determine that you have no use for extra draftpicks, it drives me crazy.

Draft picks are not guarantees. They are percentage chances to hit the lottery. If I have a 50% chance to hit the lottery, do I throw away a couple of extra 30% chance tickets because "Well, one's good enough. You can only win once, after all"?

DL picks are among the riskiest in the draft. Yes, all of those guys are on the team still, but none are exactly pro-bowlers, and we're still looking for DL and OL help - the only two picks we made in last year's draft.

Maybe we needed more help after all?

Nah - Ted hasn't ever admitted he was wrong about anything, why would he start now?

~G


We all know that TED is mikeys yes man in personnel matters.. The whole organization marches to mikeys drum beat even though ted mouth is moving it is mikeys thoughts coming out..

One only has to wonder if ted's nose was growing when he gave this interview.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

G, I remember reading that article and I was fuming; after all this is Ted talking though -- so that's expected.

This is the same guy who said Clarrett was a better option than Marion Barber with our compensatory selection several years ago because Barber had an injury history (which is a lie, he had a hamstring injury once and that was it) that made him not worthy of our consideration. That's funny, Denver sent two draft choices to Jacksonville just to move up a few spots to get a guy in the first round this past year whose main concern and flag was his inexperience in college due to his injury. [Funny, that he was injured this year too.]

I asked Ted about this in his blog, and he never replied, because honestly - what could he have said? They drafted a guy in Domenik Hixon who had a broken foot. A broken foot. They drafted him in the fourth round. To this day, I still do not know if they were aware of his medical condition. Paul Toveissi, Darius Watts, Jarvis Moss. . . the lists goes on. For some reason, Denver has an affinity for injured players, or players with medical issues.

Sundquist's mouth is full of lies and deceit. He's condescending, and blatantly insulting to fans like you and I (and many others) who see through his lies.

A good friend on the Mane put it best, "I had the opportunity to talk to Ted once, and that was enough." -- I believe he cited his ego as one bigger than you could imagine. Delusions of Grandeur.

Thanks for bringing up that article again though -- despite the fact it pains me to read it.

What an effin' liar.

[G_Money]

Time to combine previous rantings about Teddy into some sort of coherence.

Because yeah, Ted's condescension is the worst.

His blog is the most ridiculous piece of smarmy spin imaginable.

I know every GM has to think he's the smartest guy in the room, but a truly smart man admits a mistake.

Not Ted.

"At the time, we made the best move imaginable. Who knows why these things don't work out?"

Um...isn't this your job, to know WHY things that "looked perfect" at the time went badly, and how not to fall into that trap again?

Apparently not.

He claims Toviessi would have been a monster without those darn injuries. Moss might be in line to get the same excuse. His blog gives excuses for Lelie still being in the league and with a superficially impressive per-catch yardage stat that apparently makes him worthwhile. Clarett should have been hungry and willing, so there's no logical reason why he wasn't (except that he's a psycho, but they apparently missed that on draft day).

2001's draft was a good example of injury issues not being taken into account enough in evaluations of equally ranked players. As Sundquist says, they've worked on correcting that.

...

Except they took an OT on the first day just this year with huge back issues (Harris) who is still undersized for the position. I really hope he's the guy we need, despite his two back surgeries before the age of 25. We can't keep flushing these 1st day guys because we underestimated their injuries, or their competence, or overestimated their talent.

The Broncos and their history with top-round draft picks is well-known. It's not just "we took a 3rd round running back, and there were only a couple of better choices at that point - and we'd already discounted those guys anyway." The point is that BECAUSE they thought Clarett was their guy and they'd take him in the 3rd if he was there they set up their draft board differently. We could have swapped 2nd and 3rd round picks in that draft, taken another CB in the 3rd and taken Frank Gore in D-Will's place.

Or maybe you draft another position because with a correct evaluation of Clarett, you now realize that there are NO backs you want in the 3rd round.

Would that have made us better, or worse? I dunno. But THOSE are the actual scenarios, not the straw-man that Sundquist sets up on his blog. Your draft is taken as a whole. You don't just look at who you can take, but who will likely still be available when your next pick comes around based on your needs. Knowing that Clarett would be there in the 3rd changed the way the Broncos drafted that year.

And Ted's kidding himself if he doesn't think that the Clarett evaluation changed more than just the last pick of the first day.

Same with Lelie.

Lelie was and is a deep threat...but that's all. He can't run actual routes. And when he says on his blog that our current receiving core is fine, it's misleading - yes, we have talent on the team now, but getting part of that talent (which we needed because Lelie was NOT a great WR even if he had stayed) required a 2nd round pick (for Walker) that could have been used to draft, say, Devin Hester. Not to mention the contract we gave to Walker that could have been used on a different position. And now we're having problems with that same injured, disgruntled, overpaid wideout. That's hurting us twice over.

When you make mistakes in the draft, they are definitely correctable. There's so much turnover on an NFL roster that making up for 3 mistakes is pretty standard.

But we don't have to like being "Standard." When the Colts lost Edge to the Cards, they went out and drafted a running back. And for their system, they picked up a remarkably effective back to fit them very well, and moved on without a borderline-HOF candidate.

Blowing 1st day picks is not excusable. And saying that blowing them has no effect on the roster because you can make up for it in FA is disingenuous at best. Teams like the Colts and the Pats build their teams through the draft. We have started doing that the last couple of years...but look at Paymah and Foxy. 4 first day picks (along with D-Will and Clarett) from the '05 draft, and we didn't hit on anybody except maybe Darrent, who was tragically lost.

It's an issue. Because Foxy wasn't up to snuff we added Bly once Darrent was lost. If Foxy or Paymah had been capable, we would have had that money for another need.

The drafting inadequacies of past years have caused us to spent FA money on stopgaps and Pancake House guys who aren't moving us toward a championship.

If we drafted better we wouldn't have to tread water in FA while wasting Mr. Bowlen's dollars. Missing with Watts required us to get Walker. Missing with Tatum forced us to go pay Travis Henry. Our draft mistakes DO cost us - and in the case of Walker and Henry are still costing us. In cap space, in team unity, in production and in missed free agents, they are definitely costing us.

When you do things like draft 3 CBs (or 3 DL, or whatever) with first day picks and trade-ups hoping to get a hit, it causes ripples throughout your team makeup. We're still missing LBs and OL and RBs because of it that we have to try to hit on in this draft, because we threw away some picks and spent the rest on the trenches for better or worse.

We can't afford to spend a whole lot more picks on the DL this year. The ones we got last year have to pan out. We have OL holes and backfield holes and safety holes and LB holes.

The '06 draft was great. Last year's draft wasted a lot of picks to get guys who might still work out - we'll see this year and next.

But now we need another excellent draft. And unfortunately Sundquist is the guy we have to rely on to give it to us. Here's hoping he really did learn something from the failures of past years, regardless of what he'll admit publicly.

Because otherwise we're in trouble.

~G

[CoachChaz]

When did we start listening to Ted and taking him seriously?

[G_Money]

Sadly, Bowlen is the one who takes him seriously.

If he didn't have the ear of the owner (the same owner who now says we MUST build through the draft) I'd feel better.

At least this way his mistakes should get cheaper, at least, and he can't fall back on Bowlen's money in the FA market as a way to try to recoup his annual April losses.

Maybe we're about to get some accountability in the FO. We'll see what this year brings. I don't need 'Quist to get fired, just to get better.

~G

[Watchthemiddle]

Good read and good insight. At this point, he must be telling the truth. Why not? He really doesn't have anything to gain or lose by doing so.

[Lonestar]

Good read and good insight. At this point, he must be telling the truth. Why not? He really doesn't have anything to gain or lose by doing so.


Lets see make mikey look bad is a gain or a loss of job?

[WARHORSE]

We all know that TED is mikeys yes man in personnel matters.. The whole organization marches to mikeys drum beat even though ted mouth is moving it is mikeys thoughts coming out..

One only has to wonder if ted's nose was growing when he gave this interview.

Excerpt from Coyers interview a week or so ago:

There has been talk Shanahan was put off by Coyer standing up for certain players who performed poorly.

Coyer acknowledged that could have been a factor but insisted he didn't pull punches in his assessments.

"We had some guys who didn't fulfill all their potential and I thought it was part of our job in the future to correct that and that we could fix that," he said. "But the fact is, it was a pretty solid defense, and if we stayed together, I believe we might have been a really salty defense. That was just my opinion. We had to tighten it up.

"But I don't know there was a great disagreement. We were honest in our evaluations. And Mike's always honest with his. That's his strength, is taking everybody's evaluations, whatever it is in his program, and he's able to sort through it and come to a final evaluation."


If you attribute the bad to Shanny, you must attribute the good.

[WARHORSE]

Time to combine previous rantings about Teddy into some sort of coherence.

Because yeah, Ted's condescension is the worst.

His blog is the most ridiculous piece of smarmy spin imaginable.

I know every GM has to think he's the smartest guy in the room, but a truly smart man admits a mistake.

Not Ted.

"At the time, we made the best move imaginable. Who knows why these things don't work out?"

Um...isn't this your job, to know WHY things that "looked perfect" at the time went badly, and how not to fall into that trap again?

Apparently not.

He claims Toviessi would have been a monster without those darn injuries. Moss might be in line to get the same excuse. His blog gives excuses for Lelie still being in the league and with a superficially impressive per-catch yardage stat that apparently makes him worthwhile. Clarett should have been hungry and willing, so there's no logical reason why he wasn't (except that he's a psycho, but they apparently missed that on draft day).

2001's draft was a good example of injury issues not being taken into account enough in evaluations of equally ranked players. As Sundquist says, they've worked on correcting that.

...

Except they took an OT on the first day just this year with huge back issues (Harris) who is still undersized for the position. I really hope he's the guy we need, despite his two back surgeries before the age of 25. We can't keep flushing these 1st day guys because we underestimated their injuries, or their competence, or overestimated their talent.

The Broncos and their history with top-round draft picks is well-known. It's not just "we took a 3rd round running back, and there were only a couple of better choices at that point - and we'd already discounted those guys anyway." The point is that BECAUSE they thought Clarett was their guy and they'd take him in the 3rd if he was there they set up their draft board differently. We could have swapped 2nd and 3rd round picks in that draft, taken another CB in the 3rd and taken Frank Gore in D-Will's place.

Or maybe you draft another position because with a correct evaluation of Clarett, you now realize that there are NO backs you want in the 3rd round.

Would that have made us better, or worse? I dunno. But THOSE are the actual scenarios, not the straw-man that Sundquist sets up on his blog. Your draft is taken as a whole. You don't just look at who you can take, but who will likely still be available when your next pick comes around based on your needs. Knowing that Clarett would be there in the 3rd changed the way the Broncos drafted that year.

And Ted's kidding himself if he doesn't think that the Clarett evaluation changed more than just the last pick of the first day.

Same with Lelie.

Lelie was and is a deep threat...but that's all. He can't run actual routes. And when he says on his blog that our current receiving core is fine, it's misleading - yes, we have talent on the team now, but getting part of that talent (which we needed because Lelie was NOT a great WR even if he had stayed) required a 2nd round pick (for Walker) that could have been used to draft, say, Devin Hester. Not to mention the contract we gave to Walker that could have been used on a different position. And now we're having problems with that same injured, disgruntled, overpaid wideout. That's hurting us twice over.

When you make mistakes in the draft, they are definitely correctable. There's so much turnover on an NFL roster that making up for 3 mistakes is pretty standard.

But we don't have to like being "Standard." When the Colts lost Edge to the Cards, they went out and drafted a running back. And for their system, they picked up a remarkably effective back to fit them very well, and moved on without a borderline-HOF candidate.

Blowing 1st day picks is not excusable. And saying that blowing them has no effect on the roster because you can make up for it in FA is disingenuous at best. Teams like the Colts and the Pats build their teams through the draft. We have started doing that the last couple of years...but look at Paymah and Foxy. 4 first day picks (along with D-Will and Clarett) from the '05 draft, and we didn't hit on anybody except maybe Darrent, who was tragically lost.

It's an issue. Because Foxy wasn't up to snuff we added Bly once Darrent was lost. If Foxy or Paymah had been capable, we would have had that money for another need.

The drafting inadequacies of past years have caused us to spent FA money on stopgaps and Pancake House guys who aren't moving us toward a championship.

If we drafted better we wouldn't have to tread water in FA while wasting Mr. Bowlen's dollars. Missing with Watts required us to get Walker. Missing with Tatum forced us to go pay Travis Henry. Our draft mistakes DO cost us - and in the case of Walker and Henry are still costing us. In cap space, in team unity, in production and in missed free agents, they are definitely costing us.

When you do things like draft 3 CBs (or 3 DL, or whatever) with first day picks and trade-ups hoping to get a hit, it causes ripples throughout your team makeup. We're still missing LBs and OL and RBs because of it that we have to try to hit on in this draft, because we threw away some picks and spent the rest on the trenches for better or worse.

We can't afford to spend a whole lot more picks on the DL this year. The ones we got last year have to pan out. We have OL holes and backfield holes and safety holes and LB holes.

The '06 draft was great. Last year's draft wasted a lot of picks to get guys who might still work out - we'll see this year and next.

But now we need another excellent draft. And unfortunately Sundquist is the guy we have to rely on to give it to us. Here's hoping he really did learn something from the failures of past years, regardless of what he'll admit publicly.

Because otherwise we're in trouble.

~G

Now tell us what he did right. There are tons of draft picks that had huge question marks going into a draft. Look at Willis McGahee. Was that a smart evaluation of a player, a huge credit to some Buffalo scout, or did someone just get lucky that the injury didnt hold him back towards being a total bust? They have McCargo over there from last year, and he didnt do squat. Same talent evaluators.

In ALL of these cases, youre taking chances. Should you use a fourth round pick on a guy that may or may not work out, or do you take the guy with first round talent and an injury history? So much at stake here. Its only natural to defend your moves...........Ted is no different. Some picks pan out...............some dont. That s life in the NFL draft.

There is luck involved here. Definitely. But the good guys overcome.
I hope thats us.:beer:

[Lonestar]

Excerpt from Coyers interview a week or so ago:

There has been talk Shanahan was put off by Coyer standing up for certain players who performed poorly.

Coyer acknowledged that could have been a factor but insisted he didn't pull punches in his assessments.

"We had some guys who didn't fulfill all their potential and I thought it was part of our job in the future to correct that and that we could fix that," he said. "But the fact is, it was a pretty solid defense, and if we stayed together, I believe we might have been a really salty defense. That was just my opinion. We had to tighten it up.

"But I don't know there was a great disagreement. We were honest in our evaluations. And Mike's always honest with his. That's his strength, is taking everybody's evaluations, whatever it is in his program, and he's able to sort through it and come to a final evaluation."


If you attribute the bad to Shanny, you must attribute the good.

you do not think that the coaches know what mikey wants, if they know what is good for them they make sure that they do it his way..

you should know that by now..
he did not get where he is with out having a good sense in the qualities of his players.

if that is the case how could he be so wrong about the FA's he has brought in and all the wasted draft choices over the past 13 years.

Something in not right in dove valley you know that in your heart. while he is s superb offensive coach IMO his player lusts get int eh way of solid judgment.

BTW coyer was a brilliant tactician given a week to game plan. just sucked at spontaneity during games..
You can believe what you wish about mikey I will continue to have my beliefs and we will have to agree to disagree. As I said before something smells in dove valley and I think it starts at the top where one man has total control of the team has the direction it has been taken. SO far until the past two drafts the vast majority of picks have been busts.. What changed there, I think it was humdinger in 06 and bates in 07 having allot of influence in those choices.
This team ha been in downward spiral since all his HOF players retired culminating in this years performance.

mikey thought this team was a ten win team. Everyone that is not a blind homer could plainly see at best it was 8-8 more like a 6-9 team tat got lucky in a couple of games..

[WARHORSE]

you do not think that the coaches know what mikey wants, if they know what is good for them they make sure that they do it his way..

you should know that by now..
he did not get where he is with out having a good sense in the qualities of his players.

Actually, I would be of the mind that if Mike Shanahan operates like that, where people walk around on their tiptoes so to speak so as not to upset him, afraid to go against him, then people wouldnt like him very much. No one thrives under that kind of leadership and likes it. But as far as I know, people love being in Denver, from the players to the coaches, with the exception of a turd here and there like Simeon Rice. The Denver Broncos are a first class orginization that people have loved being involved with, and have even gone out of their way to get back here from other clubs once theyve played here. Guess thats just me.

if that is the case how could he be so wrong about the FA's he has brought in and all the wasted draft choices over the past 13 years.

Talk about how wrong he has been. Are you saying there are coaches out there who have never made a bad decision personelwise or other? All I know is, Shanahans teams have been winning here since forever. How much does that count for? How many other teams had a draft like we did two years ago in Cutler, Dumerville, Scheff and Brandon? Who can make that claim? No one is perfect, and if theres anyone to blame about it at this point, then its Pat Bowlen, isnt it? He is the one who says Shanny stays. I kinda like him myself.

Something in not right in dove valley you know that in your heart. while he is s superb offensive coach IMO his player lusts get int eh way of solid judgment.

BTW coyer was a brilliant tactician given a week to game plan. just sucked at spontaneity during games..
You can believe what you wish about mikey I will continue to have my beliefs and we will have to agree to disagree. As I said before something smells in dove valley and I think it starts at the top where one man has total control of the team has the direction it has been taken.

At the top sits Pat Bowlen. Funny thing happens when youre the guy paying out all the money. You like things to get done YOUR way. That would be Pat Bowlen, and the way he likes it is the Mike Shanahan way. Fire Shanny, and there wont be an available soul out there who can come in here with half of what Shanny got on his resume.


SO far until the past two drafts the vast majority of picks have been busts.. What changed there, I think it was humdinger in 06 and bates in 07 having allot of influence in those choices.

First you accuse Shanny as bringing in yes men all over the place, then you say the yes men are the smart ones. From above: (......you should know that by now. he did not get where he is without having a good sense in the qualities of his players.........) For you to say it was Dinger and Bates is pure guessing on your part. How come Shanny gets the blame for Sam Adams and not credit for a draft? It has already been stated by the Broncos that Bates was pulling the strings on guys like Adams.........but ultimately, it falls on Shanny, and Shanny said so himself, and he said so to Pat Bowlen. Bowlen knows though, ultimately? HE, not Shanny is the man pulling the strings.

This team ha been in downward spiral since all his HOF players retired culminating in this years performance.

Right after they won two superbowls, setting multiple NFL records.

mikey thought this team was a ten win team. Everyone that is not a blind homer could plainly see at best it was 8-8 more like a 6-9 team tat got lucky in a couple of games..

I think we do disagree, and thats cool. I appreciate you sticking to your guns. Im one of the blind homer guys, cause I definitely think we should have won 10 games. It is my opinion that if we did not change defensive coordinators, and been in a flux for much of the first half of the season, then we would have been a different team. That, comes down to coaching, and when it came to Bates, Shanny didnt do his homework, cause his defenses dont stop the run.

Lesson learned.:coffee: