Thread: ESPN Football Power Index - The Broncos are no longer a good football team

Originally Posted by topscribe

With the additions of Bolles, Leary, Barbre, and Watson, the return to health of Paradis, and
experience of McGovern, the O-line is far better than last year. Perhaps it is not yet top ten,
but it is improved and deeper.

The RB corps is far deeper than it was, and injury to C.J. or another will not be as devastating
as it was last year. The receivers are deeper. And Siemian is one year removed from his
rookie year now.

This is a much better offense than last year's. It won't live up to Emmanuel Sanders'
prediction (#1 in the league), but it will be improved.

The defense? So a much deeper interior line and edge amount to a decline when the rest of
the defense (ILB and DBs) remain the same?

I understand the team might be challenged to reach a 10-6 record (my prediction), but that
will be because of the brutal schedule, not a decline in talent. I just think that ESPN is way off.

Every team THINKS they got better through the draft and FA though. You just never know. We thought Stephenson and Okung would make the o-line better last year and look how that worked out. On paper do we look better? Sure. But there are still plenty of question marks and as you said, a tough schedule.

Wave is speaking a lot of truth in this thread. I have us at 8-8 as well. I always hope to be wrong, but they have to prove it to me first. After we won the Super Bowl, everyone said last year, "We can be better on offense, which will automatically make us better" and how'd that work out? The defense was otherworldly in 2015 and while the pass defense was just as good (if not better) last year, our run defense was putrid. I think we're already looking better there, but it's hard to say how all of this works together. Can we expect yet another top three defense? I sure hope so. Offense is obviously the big wild card, as others have said. It's very hard to figure where we'll end up - I could see us being much better, but I could also see us struggling through another anemic year that has people grumbling by week five.

I don't see them getting 8 wins on that schedule, I pegged them at 7-9 but maybe they can sneak one more win in there. It's not an easy schedule.

Originally Posted by weazel

I don't see them getting 8 wins on that schedule, I pegged them at 7-9 but maybe they can sneak one more win in there. It's not an easy schedule.

We'll see how it looks midway through the season. I agree, right now it doesn't look to be a favorable schedule at all, but we all know teams rise and fall. Not only during the offseason, but throughout the year as well. Some of those we're concerned about we'll walk through, some we're not we'll be lucky to win or we might get smashed.

This about where i have us, but the bigger question is, When did ESPN start talking about sports again????????

I believe that we are a ten win team, in my eyes. The offense doesn't have to get better, per se, but the line looked better. The running backs and TE's are definitely better. The defense will still be good, but I don't think that they are a top five unit, at least at the start of the year. Part of my prediction is that I think the Chiefs are slotted to take a step back, and I believe that we are getting four games as wins as the division is weaker.

The chargers are awful and their top two picks are out for the year. The Chiefs have injuries on both sides of the ball, and they're not a deep team.

The Raiders are still monsters, but the year after an ACL tear a QB typically isn't what they once were. The closest I saw to that was Brady.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

I believe that we are a ten win team, in my eyes. The offense doesn't have to get better, per se, but the line looked better. The running backs and TE's are definitely better. The defense will still be good, but I don't think that they are a top five unit, at least at the start of the year. Part of my prediction is that I think the Chiefs are slotted to take a step back, and I believe that we are getting four games as wins as the division is weaker.

The chargers are awful and their top two picks are out for the year. The Chiefs have injuries on both sides of the ball, and they're not a deep team.

The Raiders are still monsters, but the year after an ACL tear a QB typically isn't what they once were. The closest I saw to that was Brady.

I don't know about the TEs. Same old bunch. But maybe they're a bit better with experience and health.
It is good Heuerman is finally healthy. The WRs are deeper, though, which is good. It seemed last year
that after DT and E the well was fairly dry. But we've seen better things out of Fowler and Taylor, and
McKenzie shows some promise. Even Latimer has seemed to look better.

I'm thoroughly encouraged by the depth at RB. Booker was challenging for the starting spot when he
went down, and now he may be coming back to third string, thanks that Charles is showing such
promise.

Siemian has a year under his belt. I'm not too thrilled by those who have been denigrating him as a
quarterback, based on what they think was a subpar performance last year. Not only are they so very
wrong about last year, as Tned has documented so well, but this year should be based on this year,
not last year. He is likely to be improved because of experience.

The O-line may disappoint us for the first handful of games because they have to gel. An O-line has to
work as a unit to be effective, and that takes a little bit. But with the infusion of talent, I look for them
to close the door on the pass rush as they do gel.

What I think is ludicrous are the predictions that the defense is going to decline. Where? The interior
line is bigger, stronger, and deeper across the board. Wolfe and Crick each have gained 20 lbs., and
Peko has shown that he knows what he's there for. Gotsis has also put on about 20 lbs., as I
understand, and he has been flashing, according to what I hear and read.

Shaq and Ray are coming back soon, and when they do, OLB will be deeper than last year. I do hope
Marshall and Davis hold up because they aren't deep there. But the No Fly Zone is still the No Fly
Zone.

So I agree they're a likely 10-win team. If they had last year's schedule, they would be 11 or 12, IMO.

I get what you're saying on the TE's. The reports were good, and they looked like they at least blocked better to me. That being said, I suppose I can't say that I definitively feel confident about them.

In regards to the documentation of QB play - we will respectfully disagree.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

I get what you're saying on the TE's. The reports were good, and they looked like they at least blocked better to me. That being said, I suppose I can't say that I definitively feel confident about them.

In regards to the documentation of QB play - we will respectfully disagree.

Numbers aren't debatable, my friend. Neither are injuries.

Originally Posted by topscribe

Numbers aren't debatable, my friend. Neither are injuries.

I agree, and the numbers didn't help TS at all. Remember that 'TS is solid on the long ball' claim? The rebuttal killed that one in the water. Some people took the totality of the situation, and others did cherry picking. And TS' injury doesn't help his argument, either. He's been hurt going back to college. He got hurt here. He showed he couldn't be effective when he was hurt. At best, we can say last year was a wash, and try to forgive his horrid completion percentage in an offense built around short passing.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

I agree, and the numbers didn't help TS at all. Remember that 'TS is solid on the long ball' claim? The rebuttal killed that one in the water. Some people took the totality of the situation, and others did cherry picking. And TS' injury doesn't help his argument, either. He's been hurt going back to college. He got hurt here. He showed he couldn't be effective when he was hurt. At best, we can say last year was a wash, and try to forgive his horrid completion percentage in an offense built around short passing.

The numbers showed he was in the top quartile of first year starters over the last decade in virtually all key statistics. On the deep passing, the numbers show he was middle of the pack on accuracy, which was better than many big name QBs.

As Top said, the numbers aren't debatable.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

I agree, and the numbers didn't help TS at all. Remember that 'TS is solid on the long ball' claim? The rebuttal killed that one in the water. Some people took the totality of the situation, and others did cherry picking. And TS' injury doesn't help his argument, either. He's been hurt going back to college. He got hurt here. He showed he couldn't be effective when he was hurt. At best, we can say last year was a wash, and try to forgive his horrid completion percentage in an offense built around short passing.

Yes, I guess he showed that his effectiveness decreased when he incurred a shoulder injury so
severe that it required surgery after the season. Ask Wolfe if he could run as fast after he sprained
his ankle and whether that makes him fragile.

But I have already said that his worst trait was his tendency to incur injury. Part of the reason, as
I have studied his films, is that he played like a fullback, not learning how to slide after a scramble.
I do hope that Musgrave has worked with him on that. We can't afford for TS to get hurt again.

Regarding the long ball, we have a before and after situation that has been conveniently ignored
by his detractors. Early last season, he had me remarking on how accurate he was with his long
passes. Later in the season, he had me wondering what happened, why he has lost so much of
that accuracy. When the truth of his injury came out, I knew. But, apparently, a lot of people still
don't know. Facts don't seem to have much effect with those who don't want to believe . . .

He was higher on accuracy because he rarely threw those deep passes. The stat site I linked you to had a lot of those guys ranked higher in overall production on those numbers even though some of them were worse in completion percentage because they threw those passes a lot more. And when compared to his peers, as I pointed out, via the guys that you choose, he was middle or worse than them in TDs, yards, etc. He was ranked third in INTS, iirc. He wasn't ranked well, overall for those types of passes. If TS actually flashed what some propose he did, people would be much higher on our chances as a team. Just about everyone around the league says the guy is a game manager, or serviceable. They saw the same things we did.

In regards to the rest of his numbers, not only are you still trying to compare him to guys who were rookies, his completion percentage was worse than just about all the first rounders who panned out. So, I'm not, nor is anyone else, clamoring over a sub 60% total over busts, or doing worse than true rookies on completions.

http://www.nfl.com/player/marcusmari...66/careerstats Compare him second year to second year and see how far away TS was/is. And then, if you want, compare their 'first years starting'. Note that MM beat him in TD's, INTS, % and the like. Then note that had Mariota got hurt, too. TS had him beat in yards, but MM made plays with his legs, and stressed defenses that way.

Here's another contemporary - http://www.nfl.com/player/carsonwent...59/careerstats

More TDs, yards, and %. The INT ratio was bad. But Wentz was also asked to do more, and was a true rookie. And PPF had Wentz ahead of TS for overall production. Wentz wins the comparison.

Here's another one. https://www.pro-football-reference.c...W/WinsJa00.htm

If you compare their second years, TS gets slaughtered. But, I'll still cede you the 'first year starting' argument. Winston gives me a slightly worse % with an offense built on deeper throws, I might add. But I'll get almost 700 more yards and 4 more TD's.

The closer we get in that decade to now the worst TS is in comparison. I agree, the numbers don't lie.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

I think the defense is more of a wild card than people want to admit as well. As the guys who do these analytics said, defense is harder to maintain year to year than offense. We don't really know yet what the impact will be of losing Wade's coaching or Ware's leadership. And with rumors of Ward being shopped, his potential replacement would be another wildcard. I still think it will be a really good unit, but it wasn't as good in 16 as 15, and if it's the same as 16 or worse this year (which is very possible), then it will be tough to win more than 8 even if the offense is better than we think.

The reason they are reportedly shopping TJ is that they have Will Parks and Justin Simmons behind him. Simmons particularly is their future. They've already made the decision not to renew TJ's contract after this year, and this move would simply be to give Simmons a chance to start. They believe he is a potential pro-bowl S and they want him on the field more. He's also on his rookie deal so he's vastly cheaper than TJ.

S Justin Simmons: 5/16/2016: Signed a four-year, $3.027 million contract. The deal includes a $645,420 signing bonus. 2017: $540,000 (+ $13,000 workout bonus), 2018: $630,000 (+ $14,000 workout bonus), 2019: $720,000 (+ $15,000 workout bonus), 2020: Free Agent

NBC Denver reports the Broncos are expected to "part ways" with SS T.J. Ward by Saturday's cut-down deadline. Reporter Mike Klis says the move will come "preferably by trade." That means release is on the table if a deal can't be worked out. Due a non-guaranteed $4.5 million, Ward missed most of training camp with a hamstring issue. In that time, the Broncos apparently grew comfortable with second-year pro Justin Simmons as 30-year-old Ward's successor. Ward would quickly and easily find a new home if cut loose.

Reports on 104.3 the Fan this AM the Raiders and Patriots are expected to have some interest in Ward if he's released on Saturday. I think it's a mistake to get rid of him this season rather than just letting him play out his contract. But, they're not going to get anything for him now. Every team in the league knows they just have to wait until Saturday and pick him up off waivers. And if nobody picks him up and he clears waivers, (100% certain because the team that picked him up would have to compensate the Broncos), then he's a FA and can negotiate his own contract with anybody.

And the Raiders (whose defense would be immeasurably stronger with Ward in the secondary) and the Patriots (because they love to troll the Broncos) are expected to be interested in signing him as a FA.

I would seriously barf in my mouth if he winds up on the Pats or especially the Raiders. I think I could live with it if he went to the Pats, because they're so good anyway that it probably wouldn't change much. But, Ward could give the Raiders a serious boost to their defense.

And that's the last thing we need!