Thread: Dexter McCluster to be our Welker?

Dexter McCluster said on Siruis NFL radio he is doing a private workout with Denver. Maybe McD wants him for a Wes Welker type role? Or is it more likely a Faulk role? I thought the guy played WR and Rb in college right?

Originally Posted by broncobryce

Dexter McCluster said on Siruis NFL radio he is doing a private workout with Denver. Maybe McD wants him for a Wes Welker type role? Or is it more likely a Faulk role? I thought the guy played WR and Rb in college right?

He is just one of many that Denver has seriously worked out, there is no way we can draft all the athletes the team has seriously looked at. We have looked at more then one running back, likely looking for someone to fit a dual role as an H-Back, Fullback and possible Powerback.

I'd still like to see Royal given the Welker slot role. Put BMarsh on one side, Gaff on the other, and throw Eddie in the slot.

I would love it if we drafted McCluster. Dudes got game.

I would like him in the 'Welker' role as well, but what does that say about Royal?


What was the problem with getting Royal involved more last year?

Was it Royal?

Or Orton?


Its one of those two.

Who are we going to put in the Randy Moss role so Our wes welker dude can put up all the numbers?

Originally Posted by WARHORSE

I would like him in the 'Welker' role as well, but what does that say about Royal?


What was the problem with getting Royal involved more last year?

Was it Royal?

Or Orton?


Its one of those two.

Royal IMO. He isn't good when he's jammed on the line and he isn't good once his route breaks off. He excels in plays where the QB has time and his route can develop. Teams were more physical with him last year and our lack of protection gave Royal a small window to be effective.

I don't like Royal in a Welker role, he doesn't have the explosiveness at the LOS to get off and he isn't savy at breaking off the route. I can see where the draft analsysts said he didn't run great roues. I still think he can be a very good WR in this system on the outside working the middle.

Originally Posted by claymore

Who are we going to put in the Randy Moss role so Our wes welker dude can put up all the numbers?

for that matter, who are we going to put in the tom brady role???

Originally Posted by dogfish

for that matter, who are we going to put in the tom brady role???

I'll give you a hint.... The smell of farts drive him bonkers.

Originally Posted by silkamilkamonico

Royal IMO. He isn't good when he's jammed on the line and he isn't good once his route breaks off. He excels in plays where the QB has time and his route can develop. Teams were more physical with him last year and our lack of protection gave Royal a small window to be effective.

Originally Posted by silkamilkamonico

I don't like Royal in a Welker role, he doesn't have the explosiveness at the LOS to get off and he isn't savy at breaking off the route. I can see where the draft analsysts said he didn't run great roues. I still think he can be a very good WR in this system on the outside working the middle.

I disagree with you there. Shanny drafted Royal partly because he was the best in the 08 WR class of getting off the line when jammed. He is a great route runner who can get off the line. These are facts. I think it was 1 of 2 things.......Either Orton (for some reason or another) never developed a chemistry with Orton.......Or the offense didn't have plays where he was the first read. (The first read is probably always Marshall and we all know how good Marshall is) So Orton didn't have to look towards his second progression as much

I would LOVE if we got McCluster. I watched him play in person several times and he is just electric. I honestly think he was the best player in college football last year and had Houston Nutt actually used him more he'd have gone to NY for the Heisman. He carried Ole Miss on his back to several wins over his career.

I love McCluster as much as the next fan of his and as much as i would love to see him in the orange and blue, if it was to be, i've never invisioned him as being our very own Wes Welker.

Welker's a stud who takes a serious pounding over the course of a 16 game season. I'm not so sure McCluster is up to taking that kind of wear and tear game in and game out. Atleast not right now, obviously his frame is a concern for that kind of role. I would much prefer the Faulk role with a little 'slot' sprinkled in. Or vise versa, which ever uses him to the best of his abilities while keeping him as fresh as possible over the course of a full season.

Originally Posted by Skinny

I love McCluster as much as the next fan of his and as much as i would love to see him in the orange and blue, if it was to be, i've never invisioned him as being our very own Wes Welker.

Welker's a stud who takes a serious pounding over the course of a 16 game season. I'm not so sure McCluster is up to taking that kind of wear and tear game in and game out. Atleast not right now, obviously his frame is a concern for that kind of role. I would much prefer the Faulk role with a little 'slot' sprinkled in. Or vise versa, which ever uses him to the best of his abilities while keeping him as fresh as possible over the course of a full season.

just smack me if i'm wrong, but i'm GUESSING by the "faulk role" you must mean the kevin faulk role. . . and i suspect there's a guy who used to wear #28 for the rams who might object to that characterization. . .




if we're going to get a guy to play the faulk role, i want a guy to play THAT faulk role!

Originally Posted by dogfish

just smack me if i'm wrong, but i'm GUESSING by the "faulk role" you must mean the kevin faulk role. . . and i suspect there's a guy who used to wear #28 for the rams who might object to that characterization. . .




if we're going to get a guy to play the faulk role, i want a guy to play THAT faulk role!

Most definitely. One should never EVER get those two mixed up. You could lose man points.

But you sure are'nt asking much are ya?


Don't worry dog, knowshon will ease your mind this year. I can feel it in my bones. :breakout:

Originally Posted by Skinny

Most definitely. One should never EVER get those two mixed up. You could lose man points.

But you sure are'nt asking much are ya?


Don't worry dog, knowshon will ease your mind this year. I can feel it in my bones. :breakout:

lol

yea, good point-- knew it when i posted that, but i couldn't resist. . .

marshall's one of my all-time favorite RBs, the guy was incredibly sick-- i know we aren't gettin' anyone like that, and quite probably neither will anyone else this year. . . there are always good backs, but those HOF guys don't come around that often. . .

and honestly, i'm not sweatin' it too much about knowshon yet-- i thought he was a quality talent and the right pick at #12 given the draft board. . . obviously i wasn't crazy about his season any more than anyone else, but i want to see us beef up the interior line and see what he can really do before we worry about getting another top prospect at the position. . .

as for mccluster. . . i certainly like what he can do, but my general objection to that type of pick is that if you have to get him in the 2nd or 3rd, i'd typically prefer to get a full time starter instead of a guy that'll contribute part time in multiple roles. . . if you draft well, you can often find guys who can maybe excell at one or two of those roles at a much lower cost. . . almost every year there are undersized, fast RBs and WRs you can take a chance on as a return specialist or scat back. . .

i always liked eddie royal, but i hated the pick before i realized that we was capable of being a full time starter. . . i do understand the kind of impact a player like mccluster can have, but it still feels like a luxury pick to me-- we have waaay more needs than the vikes did when they took harvin. . . besides which, we never block worth a shit for returns anyway. . .

and i'm also wary of drafting 170 pound players that high-- not that the big hogs can't get hurt too, but i'd rather invest our picks in that 2nd-3rd range on linemen. . . guys like lamarr houston, mike jonson, JD walton, cam thomas, terrance cody, alex carrington. . .

those waterbug types are exciting to watch, and there's no doubt they can turn the tide of a game with an explosive play. . . but too many of those guys just don't last very long-- they're so one dimensional, when they lose even a little bit of their speed they've lost pretty much everything. . . look how quick dante hall fell off the map. . . i thought hester was easily the best i've ever seen, and they started playing him on offense and cutting back his ST touches some, and he's never been quite the same. . .

good linemen, on the other hand, often play at a high level very (comparatively) late into their careers if they can avoid/survive injuries (look how many times stink went under the knife, and was still puttin' dudes on their asses 'til the day he quit). . .

i won't crap my pants or anything if we take mccluster, i wouldn't object to having him on the team. . . but if i had the choice i'd rather look at OLs, defensive front seven players or even a developmental quarterback before i'd take mccluster. . .