PDA

View Full Version : Brock Osweiler and Jack Elway "Best Friends"


Requiem
04-27-2012, 07:00 PM
Elsid, you were right. Hilarious!

“Jack (Elway) is one of my best friends,” said Osweiler about John Elway’s son. “We lived one floor away from each other back in the dorms at Arizona State. Jack and myself have become great friends over the past three years, like I said I feel this is a perfect fit, and I can’t wait to get to Denver.”

More on this ****ty pick here. (http://blog.denverbroncos.com/denverbroncos/osweiler-stands-out/)

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 07:01 PM
You have got to be ****ing kidding me...

crush17
04-27-2012, 07:02 PM
F**K THIS PICK.

Requiem
04-27-2012, 07:03 PM
I know guys, holy ****.

orinjkrush
04-27-2012, 07:03 PM
oh just great. impact player. win now. BPA.

RaiderH8r
04-27-2012, 07:03 PM
Hey Brock, my daddy can get you a job.

Rolandftw
04-27-2012, 07:03 PM
Reminds me of the Linas Kleiza pick the Nuggets made a few years back. Son of the owner is best friends with a player that just happens to get drafted.

F'ing pathetic.

That One Guy
04-27-2012, 07:04 PM
Reminiscent of the Ohio St returnman from a few years ago that went to Miami at like 8.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 07:06 PM
Seriously this news explains it all. Am I still crazy for thinking Elway has no business running this team people? Am I?

BroncoBen
04-27-2012, 07:07 PM
Well if anything.. maybe Jack's incite is good on Osweiler's character. This is no big thing.

TheReverend
04-27-2012, 07:07 PM
Johns in so far over his head in this position and Xanders may be even worse. A baaaaaaaaad combination, sadly.

yerner
04-27-2012, 07:08 PM
wow.

BroncoBeavis
04-27-2012, 07:08 PM
Seriously this news explains it all. Am I still crazy for thinking Elway has no business running this team people? Am I?

He's lost his effing mind. I need a drink.

razorwire77
04-27-2012, 07:10 PM
http://onceuponawin.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/win-pics-bff-necklaces.jpg

Where's the necklace?

OBF1
04-27-2012, 07:11 PM
I love our draft so far.....









Makes my Orangemane mock not look so damn poor.

socalorado
04-27-2012, 07:11 PM
Told you guys. But oh no. You wouldnt listen.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 07:12 PM
I love our draft so far.....









Makes my Orangemane mock not look so damn poor.

Virtually everyone's mocks look like pure genius compared to the real thing unfortunately...

That One Guy
04-27-2012, 07:13 PM
http://onceuponawin.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/win-pics-bff-necklaces.jpg

Where's the necklace?

Better than matching tats.

ThirtyDegrees
04-27-2012, 07:16 PM
He's lost his effing mind. I need a drink.

You'll need to drink fast to catch up, John's already had a few.

winstoncup bronco
04-27-2012, 07:17 PM
Good grief.

This is getting bad.

24champ
04-27-2012, 07:19 PM
Elsid, you were right. Hilarious!



More on this ****ty pick here. (http://blog.denverbroncos.com/denverbroncos/osweiler-stands-out/)

That explains it and I thought that's why we canned Shanahan and McD...too much nepotism.

Requiem
04-27-2012, 07:20 PM
That explains it and I thought that's why we canned Shanahan and McD...too much nepotism.

Yeah. It's pretty pathetic.

SureShot
04-27-2012, 07:20 PM
I won't believe it until I see the ankle tattoo to prove it.

SureShot
04-27-2012, 07:21 PM
Johns in so far over his head in this position and Xanders may be even worse. A baaaaaaaaad combination, sadly.

I think you maybe right

errand
04-27-2012, 08:40 PM
Yeah, this probably as bad as when LA Dodgers manager Tommy Lasorda drafted his God son as a personal favor......




.....Mike Piazza

UberBroncoMan
04-27-2012, 08:46 PM
Well...

If you can't live vicariously through your son because he quit.

Do it through your son's best friend!

Armchair Bronco
04-27-2012, 08:47 PM
When I saw the name "Brock", I immediately thought of Boogie Nights, Dirk Diggler and Brock Landers.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rgYKYk4GryU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Orange4Life
04-27-2012, 08:48 PM
Holy ****! Unbelievable. FML

Blart
04-27-2012, 08:49 PM
If you want a QB, you draft high in the 1st round.

Armchair Bronco
04-27-2012, 08:55 PM
The *ONLY* way this can possibly make sense is if Brock "Landers" Osweiler is an upgrade over Tim Tebow. And I am here to tell you that Brock Landers is NOT an upgrade over Tim Tebow.

Apparently the threat of a media circus was more important to Elway than having a viable backup to an injury-prone Manning.

(I would use the facepalm smiley now if one were available.)

BroncoBuff
04-27-2012, 09:07 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CZk89f5cKy8/TslpvrnzdEI/AAAAAAAAASg/-7ye4rEEnRM/s1600/catholic+facepalm.jpg

HOLY ....!

Gort
04-27-2012, 09:07 PM
(I would use the facepalm smiley now if one were available.)

you can use this in place of a facepalm smiley. it means the same thing.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2011/writers/jeff_diamond/12/15/tebow.elway/john-elway.jpg

BroncoBuff
04-27-2012, 09:08 PM
Look on the bright side, it's better than trading for Colt McCoy ... isn't it?

Kaylore
04-27-2012, 09:10 PM
Conclusive proof that Osweiler has no skill and will bust and was only selected because he is friends with Jack Elway....


.....that's where we're going with this, right?

Armchair Bronco
04-27-2012, 09:12 PM
you can use this in place of a facepalm smiley. it means the same thing.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2011/writers/jeff_diamond/12/15/tebow.elway/john-elway.jpg

Wasn't this photo taken moments after Denver upset the Pittsburgh Steelers in the playoffs? I think I remember that suit. And that scrunched up face by Elway.

socalorado
04-27-2012, 09:14 PM
Conclusive proof that Osweiler has no skill and will bust and was only selected because he is friends with Jack Elway....


.....that's where we're going with this, right?

Straight to hell man. Thats where were headed with this.

baja
04-27-2012, 09:26 PM
The *ONLY* way this can possibly make sense is if Brock "Landers" Osweiler is an upgrade over Tim Tebow. And I am here to tell you that Brock Landers is NOT an upgrade over Tim Tebow.

Apparently the threat of a media circus was more important to Elway than having a viable backup to an injury-prone Manning.

(I would use the facepalm smiley now if one were available.)

They did Tebow a big favor - good for Tim

BigPlayShay
04-27-2012, 09:30 PM
I think Elway's friendship with Dennis Erickson has a lot more to do with the pick than Brock and Jack's friendship.

The positive is John already knows a ton about the kid.

Broncoman13
04-27-2012, 09:32 PM
I don't mind the Osweiller pick at all. Elway has a lot invested in this team. If you think he would sacrifice that for a "Friendly" pick then I don't know what to tell you.

In terms of talent, Osweiller has it in spades. In terms of a honed skill, he's clearly not there yet. But he hasn't started a lot of games so there is plenty of room for growth. If RGIII had come out a year ago (not that he was eligible) he wouldn't have been a #2 pick. A lot can change with players in a short period of time. Apparently Osweiller has a pretty good head on his shoulders and is coming in knowing that he is in a learn and develop mode. If he embraces it and puts in some work, this could turn out very well for us.

broncswin
04-27-2012, 09:33 PM
...exits thread...

TonyR
04-27-2012, 09:35 PM
Apparently the threat of a media circus was more important to Elway than having a viable backup to an injury-prone Manning.

I think the "threat" went well beyond the "media circus". Anyone who's able to see beyond their nose might have noticed that there were very possibly some locker room issues as well.

Taco John
04-27-2012, 09:44 PM
People honestly believe that the Broncos made this pick because he's friends with Jack Elway?

No - I can't believe that. Surely no one can truly believe that's the truth.

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 09:44 PM
If you want a QB, you draft high in the 1st round.

he was a second rounder who with another year of seasoning could very well be a first rounder. alot of his flaws are from lack of expirence. I like the qb. I do however think we should have gone for a potential starter. but ekway did say BPA.

I hope manning can rub off on him with preparation

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 09:46 PM
I don't mind the Osweiller pick at all. Elway has a lot invested in this team. If you think he would sacrifice that for a "Friendly" pick then I don't know what to tell you.

In terms of talent, Osweiller has it in spades. In terms of a honed skill, he's clearly not there yet. But he hasn't started a lot of games so there is plenty of room for growth. If RGIII had come out a year ago (not that he was eligible) he wouldn't have been a #2 pick. A lot can change with players in a short period of time. Apparently Osweiller has a pretty good head on his shoulders and is coming in knowing that he is in a learn and develop mode. If he embraces it and puts in some work, this could turn out very well for us.I agree with you on this. look out though were about to be ridiculed

cutthemdown
04-27-2012, 09:54 PM
When Tom Coughlin took his son in law a lot earlier then most people thought a lot of Giant fans were pissed. Chris Snee, he's played well for them and it turned out to be a good pick.

Manning said one reason he came here was how the FO lured him. Basically Elway used a 2nd round pick and got Manning in FA. He totally retooled the QB spot with a young kid, and proven pro bowler. People are saying he's an idiot? Don't get caught up in what media says. These guys aren't as smart as you think. Fact is most guys end up avg NFL players, or out of the NFL, or bkup. Only what like 700 starting players in the NFL. Out of the 224 plus draft picks, plus probably another 100 or udfa not many become great players. In 2 or 3 yrs half of these first round picks will be traded, hitting the FA market, cut, etc etc.

Last yr we have a couple starters out of the draft, one was a stud. I will wait and watch these guys play before I get pissed.

cutthemdown
04-27-2012, 09:56 PM
People honestly believe that the Broncos made this pick because he's friends with Jack Elway?

No - I can't believe that. Surely no one can truly believe that's the truth.

If anything it's just a tidbit of info. A reliable source to what the kids personality is like, how many friends he has, what he does for fun, stuff that close friends know.

If you wanted a prospect QB and you liked the kids upside, knowing things like that could seal the deal. Knowing a kids personality is one thing teams wish they could know better pre draft.

GoHAM
04-27-2012, 09:56 PM
I love our draft so far.....









Makes my Orangemane mock not look so damn poor.

LOL! Those were my exact thoughts!!

Taco John
04-27-2012, 09:57 PM
"Listen! EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM SHUT UP! I don't care who you want Fox, this kid is friends with Jack, and that's good enough for me. We're going with Brock."

OrangeSe7en
04-27-2012, 09:58 PM
Can we just call him Brock Jackelwaysfriend?

mkporter
04-27-2012, 10:00 PM
People honestly believe that the Broncos made this pick because he's friends with Jack Elway?

No - I can't believe that. Surely no one can truly believe that's the truth.

Are you new here?

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 10:01 PM
People honestly believe that the Broncos made this pick because he's friends with Jack Elway?

No - I can't believe that. Surely no one can truly believe that's the truth.

A portrait of Taco John:
http://www.coolgizmotoys.com/images/2011/06/article-1264092-081D0A9F000005DC-144_468x3392.jpg

houghtam
04-27-2012, 10:03 PM
I wonder if Elway would want his daughter to marry Osweiler, too?

Taco John
04-27-2012, 10:05 PM
A portrait of Taco John:
http://www.coolgizmotoys.com/images/2011/06/article-1264092-081D0A9F000005DC-144_468x3392.jpg

No head in the sand here. I'm content to wait an see. Everything I've read about this guy is that he shows a lot of promise as a pocket QB with a strong arm. I'm not big on the thought of a 6-7 quarterback - he wasn't anywhere on my radar - but I see no reason to believe that he's a bust before he's even played a down.

baja
04-27-2012, 10:06 PM
he was a second rounder who with another year of seasoning could very well be a first rounder. alot of his flaws are from lack of expirence. I like the qb. I do however think we should have gone for a potential starter. but ekway did say BPA.

I hope manning can rub off on him with preparation

A 2nd rd pick for a QBOTF is never a popular pick. Realistically we get manning for 3 years and it will take 2 or 3 years before this kid is ready.

EFX are not planning on drafting high in the next few years.

Taking this kid now took a lot of dicipline and had to be done.

The easy thing to do was to take a skilled player at a position of need.


I like this draft, very balanced with attention to now and to the future after manning.

So far we got two players at positions of need that will see a lot of playing time THIS season and we got a great prospect at the most important position in the game.


...AND we got tomorrow to pick up a good O line man, there are some good corners left too.

Broncoman13
04-27-2012, 10:06 PM
I agree with you on this. look out though were about to be ridiculed

Bro, I was a Griese fan, a Cutler fan, a BMarsh fan, and a Tebow fan... and if that wasn't enough, I was a big buyer on Darrius "the claw" Watts! I'll be okay if someone wants to redicule me. ;D

Requiem
04-27-2012, 10:09 PM
No head in the sand here. I'm content to wait an see. Everything I've read about this guy is that he shows a lot of promise as a pocket QB with a strong arm. I'm not big on the thought of a 6-7 quarterback - he wasn't anywhere on my radar - but I see no reason to believe that he's a bust before he's even played a down.

Elsid had posted he wouldn't be surprised to see that Osweiler and Elway were good friends in college. I was reading DenverBroncos.com -- and that happened to come up. Sorry? Of course, it isn't the reason I think they made the pick. Osweiler has been linked to us for months now. It only made sense. It was the pick you expected, but didn't really want to happen. At any case, he is in a really good situation. He's very young and has time to develop. Him and Ronnie are both really yuong.

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 10:09 PM
No head in the sand here. I'm content to wait an see. Everything I've read about this guy is that he shows a lot of promise as a pocket QB with a strong arm. I'm not big on the thought of a 6-7 quarterback - he wasn't anywhere on my radar - but I see no reason to believe that he's a bust before he's even played a down.
isn't manning 6'6?

baja
04-27-2012, 10:10 PM
"Listen! EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM SHUT UP! I don't care who you want Fox, this kid is friends with Jack, and that's good enough for me. We're going with Brock."

LOL No shiit.

Taco John
04-27-2012, 10:11 PM
isn't manning 6'6?

Officially 6-5.

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 10:12 PM
Bro, I was a Griese fan, a Cutler fan, a BMarsh fan, and a Tebow fan... and if that wasn't enough, I was a big buyer on Darrius "the claw" Watts! I'll be okay if someone wants to redicule me. ;DI can honestly say most people in bronco land were fans of his. there just jilted ex's

Hamrob
04-27-2012, 10:13 PM
I'm not thrilled of using our #57 to get Osweiler. There were guys there that could have helped our team this year.

That being said, Osweiler, is one hell of a prospect. As good if not better than Mallet. I'm stoked that we got him. He's 6'7" and Atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe with BBall skills and mobile. 3yrs behind Manning...are you kidding me. Great pick...would have traded up in the 3rd to get him and then taken Hillman in the 4th. But, I do like both those picks.

The upside? We have 3 picks in the next 34...and there are tons (many) great prospects still available.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 10:19 PM
No head in the sand here. I'm content to wait an see. Everything I've read about this guy is that he shows a lot of promise as a pocket QB with a strong arm. I'm not big on the thought of a 6-7 quarterback - he wasn't anywhere on my radar - but I see no reason to believe that he's a bust before he's even played a down.

That isn't the point. They drafted a player they did not need at all higher than he ever should have been drafted, and it turns out that that player is best friends with Elway's son. I'm sure it was rationalized away as cronyism always is (like with Bowlen hiring Elway to run the show), but the truth is that pick doesn't happen without the the Osweiler/Elway connection. It just doesn't.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 10:20 PM
I'm not thrilled of using our #57 to get Osweiler. There were guys there that could have helped our team this year.

That being said, Osweiler, is one hell of a prospect. As good if not better than Mallet. I'm stoked that we got him. He's 6'7" and Atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe with BBall skills and mobile. 3yrs behind Manning...are you kidding me. Great pick...would have traded up in the 3rd to get him and then taken Hillman in the 4th. But, I do like both those picks.

The upside? We have 3 picks in the next 34...and there are tons (many) great prospects still available.

Wow, he's as good as a guy taken in the 3rd round last year? Awesome... Hilarious!

Hamrob
04-27-2012, 10:21 PM
Wow, he's as good as a guy taken in the 3rd round last year? Awesome... Hilarious!Man, you really are a little bitch. We took him too early. It's done. He's still a good prospect.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 10:22 PM
Man, you really are a little b****. We took him too early. It's done. He's still a good prospect.

No he isn't. He's a marginal prospect with some potential and upside at a position we didn't need.

McDman
04-27-2012, 10:25 PM
Yes,one bad pick determines whether Elway is qualified to run the team...

Get real. Shanny had his fair share of ****ty picks.

footstepsfrom#27
04-27-2012, 10:25 PM
My sole contribution to this year's draft:

Hilarious!

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 10:29 PM
Yes,one bad pick determines whether Elway is qualified to run the team...

Get real. Shanny had his fair share of ****ty picks.

Shanahan sucked at drafting. That's hardly the gold standard.

houghtam
04-27-2012, 10:31 PM
Osweiler was a worse pick than Maurice Clarett. There I said it.

Discuss.

:~ohyah!:

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 10:32 PM
That isn't the point. They drafted a player they did not need at all higher than he ever should have been drafted, and it turns out that that player is best friends with Elway's son. I'm sure it was rationalized away as cronyism always is (like with Bowlen hiring Elway to run the show), but the truth is that pick doesn't happen without the the Osweiler/Elway connection. It just doesn't.
drama queen much? I seriously don't understand you people its like the moon is on collision course with earth.

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 10:33 PM
Shanahan sucked at drafting. That's hardly the gold standard.
so cab we atleast let the last two drafts play out another two hears before we start with the lynch mob mentality?

Broncos_OTM
04-27-2012, 10:34 PM
Osweiler was a worse pick than Maurice Clarett. There I said it.

Discuss.

:~ohyah!:that's like saying compare fire to water.

bpc
04-27-2012, 10:37 PM
Actually don't mind this pick. I won't spend hours breaking it down but there is a lot to like on film. His lankiness reminds me of Brady coming out. What's not to like? The guy is inexperienced. Won't be an issue as he should be sitting for 2-3 years. There is no more important position than the QB spot and with Manning having 3-4 years at most, this will be an important pick. Hope Elway got it right.

Taco John
04-27-2012, 10:52 PM
That isn't the point. They drafted a player they did not need at all higher than he ever should have been drafted, and it turns out that that player is best friends with Elway's son. I'm sure it was rationalized away as cronyism always is (like with Bowlen hiring Elway to run the show), but the truth is that pick doesn't happen without the the Osweiler/Elway connection. It just doesn't.

You're thick as a brick. It blows my mind that you can rationalize this as a pick we don't need, as if Peyton Manning has 5 or 6 years in him. Pretty well everyone on this forum knew we'd be drafting a quarterback this year.

errand
04-27-2012, 10:58 PM
You're thick as a brick. It blows my mind that you can rationalize this as a pick we don't need, as if Peyton Manning has 5 or 6 years in him. Pretty well everyone on this forum knew we'd be drafting a quarterback this year.

These clowns are still butt hurt over another "reach" that we "didn't need" being traded for 4th round pick by the galactically stupid John Elway

Wes Mantooth
04-27-2012, 11:13 PM
Elway and Erricson are good friends too. Who cares now? Hope he works out.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 11:17 PM
You're thick as a brick. It blows my mind that you can rationalize this as a pick we don't need, as if Peyton Manning has 5 or 6 years in him. Pretty well everyone on this forum knew we'd be drafting a quarterback this year.

It blows me away that you can rationalize the picking of a long-term project QB in the 2nd round when we are supposedly trying to win a Super Bowl in the next few years before Manning retires. You are a very deluded person.

Taco John
04-27-2012, 11:25 PM
It blows me away that you can rationalize the picking of a long-term project QB in the 2nd round when we are supposedly trying to win a Super Bowl in the next few years before Manning retires. You are a very deluded person.

Which pick available did you imagine was going to be the difference between winning and losing the Superbowl? We had two second round picks. I certainly don't see a problem with using one of them to draft a QBOTF to put on the Aaron Rodgers plan. Frankly, I don't think there is a pick at 57 that you would have been happy with. I'm more upset with our pick at 67 than the one we made at 57, but Knowshon has kind of forced the issue with his injury and off the field problems. But I digress... It's easy to rationalize the Osweiler pick. He's a guy the Broncos think could develop into a starter in this league and run the offense that they are building with and for Peyton Manning.

John Elway is building a Superbowl team, and wants Osweiler to pick up where Manning leaves off - wherever that may be. I don't see the problem here. We're talking about the 57th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

Ratboy
04-27-2012, 11:27 PM
Which pick available did you imagine was going to be the difference between winning and losing the Superbowl? We had two second round picks. I certainly don't see a problem with using one of them to draft a QBOTF to put on the Aaron Rodgers plan. Frankly, I don't think there is a pick at 57 that you would have been happy with. I'm more upset with our pick at 67 than the one we made at 57, but Knowshon has kind of forced the issue with his injury and off the field problems. But I digress... It's easy to rationalize the Osweiler pick. He's a guy the Broncos think could develop into a starter in this league and run the offense that they are building with and for Peyton Manning.

John Elway is building a Superbowl team, and wants Osweiler to pick up where Manning leaves off - wherever that may be. I don't see the problem here. We're talking about the 57th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

Why are you making sense?

RMT
04-27-2012, 11:34 PM
This year has given new meaning to the phrase "draft BORED" ...

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 11:35 PM
Which pick available did you imagine was going to be the difference between winning and losing the Superbowl? We had two second round picks. I certainly don't see a problem with using one of them to draft a QBOTF to put on the Aaron Rodgers plan. Frankly, I don't think there is a pick at 57 that you would have been happy with. I'm more upset with our pick at 67 than the one we made at 57, but Knowshon has kind of forced the issue with his injury and off the field problems. But I digress... It's easy to rationalize the Osweiler pick. He's a guy the Broncos think could develop into a starter in this league and run the offense that they are building with and for Peyton Manning.

John Elway is building a Superbowl team, and wants Osweiler to pick up where Manning leaves off - wherever that may be. I don't see the problem here. We're talking about the 57th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

Someone would have to pay me to sort through this much bull**** and actually write a real response. Especially when your rationalization is in such high gear that you could literally explain away gravity and believe yourself right.

Agamemnon
04-27-2012, 11:36 PM
Why are you making sense?

If you think that soup of bad logic makes sense you are beyond help...

baja
04-27-2012, 11:53 PM
"Brock gives us the best chance to win", John Elway

Bacchus
04-27-2012, 11:56 PM
They did Tebow a big favor - good for Tim

They did a big favor to everyone, uh, except for the Jets.

BroncoBuff
04-28-2012, 01:15 AM
People honestly believe that the Broncos made this pick because he's friends with Jack Elway?

No - I can't believe that. Surely no one can truly believe that's the truth.

Sure it's the truth.

Look at it this way: If Jack didn't know him, would this have been the pick?

:nono:

DBroncos4life
04-28-2012, 01:19 AM
Sure it's the truth.

Look at it this way: If Jack didn't know him, would this have been the pick?

:nono:Two other guys didn't know Jack and they got drafted.

Taco John
04-28-2012, 01:49 AM
Sure it's the truth.

Look at it this way: If Jack didn't know him, would this have been the pick?

:nono:


Uh - yes. Are you kidding me?

Come on Casey, you think they drafted him because of his connection to Jack, and not because he fits Elway's vision? They're building an offense with/for Peyton Manning, and they're drafting a quarterback to learn the offense on the ground floor. How could you possibly think that drafting Osweiler is about his connection to Jack, and not how they project him?

Taco John
04-28-2012, 01:50 AM
Someone would have to pay me to sort through this much bull**** and actually write a real response. Especially when your rationalization is in such high gear that you could literally explain away gravity and believe yourself right.

You couldn't come up with a real response if you tried.

Drek
04-28-2012, 02:26 AM
Which pick available did you imagine was going to be the difference between winning and losing the Superbowl?

Take your pick of:
Rueben Randle
Lavonte David
Casey Howard

And here's why for each of them.

Randle - Immediately improves our WR corps. Decker has good slot WR skills and might be best used there, but so could Randle. Decker and DT both have health concerns, Randle insures we're likely two deep with young WR talent regardless of that fact. Now we need someone like Caldwell or Hill, guys who have never been particularly good in the NFL, to break out for us if we're going to have a good 3rd WR option.

David - Can play OLB or MLB. Would probably be our best LB in coverage from day one. DJ might get suspended and Joe Mays is a two down player that teams exposed last year in coverage. Woodyard can't cover either. The inability for our LBs to pass defend is why the Pats had field days on us in both games last year. David dramatically changes that.

Hayward - Good tackler, good man cover skills, pretty good size. You could instantly start him opposite Champ with Porter at nickel and use Chris Harris as the dime DB as well as spending time at safety, shoring up the entire backfield and not just one position in the process. We saw last year that we need DB help, in Elway's own words "you can never have enough defensive backs".

If they had taken one of those guys and then traded up to 67 for Osweiler this draft would look significantly better and we'd likely be talking about Hillman as a candidate for pick #101 still. Only one RB was selected after we moved up for Hillman and he was a 220 pound thumper.

The problem isn't the players they're selecting, the problem is that they're drafting based on crushes, not on value. I know people love to say "but if he's there guy what's the problem?" Well the problem is that then you need your FO to be smarter than everyone else, finding all the late round gems. Do you think the Broncos FO are just flat out smarter than everyone else in the league?

If instead they make sure to take players according to consensus value and use trades to move up and down for where the guys the like are "value" picks they end up with more assets and therefore more overall talent.

For example, the second tier of the RB class is not moving fast. Turbin, Polk, Miller, etc. are all still on the board. So why jump up 20 picks for Hillman? If we had instead taken one of the three mentioned above in the second, used the trade up to get Osweiler, and then waited on best RB available at #101 we'd likely still get Hillman and at worst have to "settle" for one of the three guys mentioned above.

Also, had they not gotten screwed on their trade out of the first and picked up two 4ths instead of just one they could have traded from 101 back into the 3rd, keeping a 4th in the process, to go up after Hillman if they really wanted.

We've left value on the board the last two days and you can pretty easily add up that value to be equal to a first year contributor like David, Randle, or Hayward. That is a tough way to get better as a team unless you really think you're hitting on ALL the late round gems. No one does that though, so believing that you are is a sign of delusion.

ThirtyDegrees
04-28-2012, 02:46 AM
Everything that TJ is saying might have been a valid argument if the Broncos had not decided that they didn't need to do anything other than sign Manning in Free Agency. They sat out the first week and a half because they had no intention to help the team if Tebow was going to be the starter.

Since free agency was a complete failure at building an immediate competitor, Elway needed to make several big splashes in this draft, and he decided to trade down for two rotational players and a guy that won't see the field in three years in the best case scenario.

If Elway is interested in, and trying to build an immediate contender then he's incompetent.

If he is trying to rebuild, then he is a liar.

It's actually quite simple, but due to the vehemence with which TJ defended every idiotic decision that Shanahan made over the years that led to this cluster**** in the first place I'm not surprised he's not worried.

Hotwheelz
04-28-2012, 02:53 AM
Taco John is making sense! BURN HIM

i4jelway7
04-28-2012, 03:10 AM
I'm not thrilled of using our #57 to get Osweiler. There were guys there that could have helped our team this year.

That being said, Osweiler, is one hell of a prospect. As good if not better than Mallet. I'm stoked that we got him. He's 6'7" and Atheletic. Think Drew Bledsoe with BBall skills and mobile. 3yrs behind Manning...are you kidding me. Great pick...would have traded up in the 3rd to get him and then taken Hillman in the 4th. But, I do like both those picks.

The upside? We have 3 picks in the next 34...and there are tons (many) great prospects still available.

agreed :thumbs:

scouting report on Brock

remind you guys of someone?

ANALYSIS

STRENGTHS: Osweiler has a very deliberate, quick-twitched setup which he employs on a consistent basis. His athletic ability allows him to play the position naturally and with ease. He slings the ball naturally, as well, and even though he pats the ball before throwing, his release is so compact and effective he isn't hindered by this habit in the slightest. His shining asset is his arm strength; he can hit nearly any NFL-caliber throw at this point in his career. He is a good leader and looks in control in the huddle and on the field. He is above average from an accuracy standpoint, and he really has a good grasp on when to add touch to the ball or to zip it. He has the pocket presence of a first-day pick and doesn't go down easily. He is good to extend plays with his feet.

WEAKNESSES: Osweiler had on-the-field judgment issues throughout his career at ASU and isn't reliable to protect the ball from turnovers. It seems as if he starts to get rolling in a game, and the more confidence he builds, the more of a gun-slinger mentality he adopts. This severely hinders his play. When under control, early in the game, he is athletic, accurate, and a good game manager. He will need to learn to hone in some of the competitive traits that have helped lead him to success up to this point. He is likely a developmental prospect who could struggle if forced to play early on.

elsid13
04-28-2012, 04:12 AM
I don't think that being Elway's son friend was the reason he was drafted, but I do think it was positive factor in FO's collective minds. John Elway was able to feel comfortable that he knew the kid's character and how he behaved. I don't like the pick because of his lack of experience, size, fundamental throwing motion and better player at need position were still on the board.

RaiderH8r
04-28-2012, 07:04 AM
Take your pick of:
Rueben Randle
Lavonte David
Casey Howard

And here's why for each of them.

Randle - Immediately improves our WR corps. Decker has good slot WR skills and might be best used there, but so could Randle. Decker and DT both have health concerns, Randle insures we're likely two deep with young WR talent regardless of that fact. Now we need someone like Caldwell or Hill, guys who have never been particularly good in the NFL, to break out for us if we're going to have a good 3rd WR option.

David - Can play OLB or MLB. Would probably be our best LB in coverage from day one. DJ might get suspended and Joe Mays is a two down player that teams exposed last year in coverage. Woodyard can't cover either. The inability for our LBs to pass defend is why the Pats had field days on us in both games last year. David dramatically changes that.

Hayward - Good tackler, good man cover skills, pretty good size. You could instantly start him opposite Champ with Porter at nickel and use Chris Harris as the dime DB as well as spending time at safety, shoring up the entire backfield and not just one position in the process. We saw last year that we need DB help, in Elway's own words "you can never have enough defensive backs".

If they had taken one of those guys and then traded up to 67 for Osweiler this draft would look significantly better and we'd likely be talking about Hillman as a candidate for pick #101 still. Only one RB was selected after we moved up for Hillman and he was a 220 pound thumper.

The problem isn't the players they're selecting, the problem is that they're drafting based on crushes, not on value. I know people love to say "but if he's there guy what's the problem?" Well the problem is that then you need your FO to be smarter than everyone else, finding all the late round gems. Do you think the Broncos FO are just flat out smarter than everyone else in the league?

If instead they make sure to take players according to consensus value and use trades to move up and down for where the guys the like are "value" picks they end up with more assets and therefore more overall talent.

For example, the second tier of the RB class is not moving fast. Turbin, Polk, Miller, etc. are all still on the board. So why jump up 20 picks for Hillman? If we had instead taken one of the three mentioned above in the second, used the trade up to get Osweiler, and then waited on best RB available at #101 we'd likely still get Hillman and at worst have to "settle" for one of the three guys mentioned above.

Also, had they not gotten screwed on their trade out of the first and picked up two 4ths instead of just one they could have traded from 101 back into the 3rd, keeping a 4th in the process, to go up after Hillman if they really wanted.

We've left value on the board the last two days and you can pretty easily add up that value to be equal to a first year contributor like David, Randle, or Hayward. That is a tough way to get better as a team unless you really think you're hitting on ALL the late round gems. No one does that though, so believing that you are is a sign of delusion.

:strong:

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:07 AM
You couldn't come up with a real response if you tried.

Sure, you believe that if you like. ::)

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:13 AM
Uh - yes. Are you kidding me?

Come on Casey, you think they drafted him because of his connection to Jack, and not because he fits Elway's vision? They're building an offense with/for Peyton Manning, and they're drafting a quarterback to learn the offense on the ground floor. How could you possibly think that drafting Osweiler is about his connection to Jack, and not how they project him?

Do you really think the issue is that black and white? He either 100% did not get influenced on the pick by his son, or his son is the sole reason he picked Osweiler? That's how your mind works? Did it occur to you that it simply caused him to like the kid and overvalue him relative to if he had just been another prospect? Who am I kidding, of course it didn't...

BroncoBeavis
04-28-2012, 07:27 AM
Elsid had posted he wouldn't be surprised to see that Osweiler and Elway were good friends in college. I was reading DenverBroncos.com -- and that happened to come up. Sorry? Of course, it isn't the reason I think they made the pick. Osweiler has been linked to us for months now. It only made sense. It was the pick you expected, but didn't really want to happen. At any case, he is in a really good situation. He's very young and has time to develop. Him and Ronnie are both really yuong.

In the 4th this is nothing. In the 2nd, as our 2nd overall pick. After a do-nothing FA period outside of Manning (locking this team into a 3 year window) this is a heap of ****.

I think it's Elway's way of trying to pretend he didn't just nuke a rebuild. In reality he's only undermining the whole reason he took Manning. And for what?

Did anyone watch him against Boise State in the LV Bowl? Can't remember being at all impressed.

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:32 AM
In the 4th this is nothing. In the 2nd, as our 2nd overall pick. After a do-nothing FA period outside of Manning (locking this team into a 3 year window) this is a heap of ****.

I think it's Elway's way of trying to pretend he didn't just nuke a rebuild. In reality he's only undermining the whole reason he took Manning. And for what?

Did anyone watch him against Boise State in the LV Bowl? Can't remember being at all impressed.

Apparently Elway plans on winning a Super Bowl while at the same time rebuilding with project players. He's just thinking outside the box. ::)

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 07:38 AM
Epic LOL @ people who legitimately think Elway makes picks based off of friendships.

You people are idiots.

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 07:42 AM
Well, we got rid of the Tebow trolls. Then we picked up a couple of Manning trolls. Now we have an Osweiler troll? Ha!





I kid. I kid. Welcome to the asylum. :wave:

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 07:45 AM
Hey thanks!

Kid A
04-28-2012, 07:48 AM
Apparently Elway plans on winning a Super Bowl while at the same time rebuilding with project players. He's just thinking outside the box. ::)

One of the three picks is a clear project. Wolfe will likely rotate in quite a bit (we don't have another DT with any proven ability in pass rush). Hillman is now our fastest RB, will likely be the 2nd most used RB after McGahee (assuming Willis stays healthy). So that's two guys, whether you like the picks or not, who will see be on the field a lot rookie year.

And since when does "winning now" conflict with investing in a future QB? I get the case that there are more immediate needs to address, but ignoring them for one pick isn't exactly madness.

I can see not liking the pick, but acting like it's some unprecedented thing for a FO to ignore immediate need and invest future is incorrect. When GB drafted Rodgers I guarantee they had lots of other needs. Bears fans grumbled for years as they ignored offensive needs and drafted d-line high every year. Sometimes they have a good case, sometimes you see down the road that investing a lot in one area was worth it. Either way, it's hardly a case of Elway getting too cute. NFL teams - teams with Super Bowl aspirations - consistently draft outside the list of "positions of need" when they really like a guy at any position.

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:49 AM
Epic LOL @ people who legitimately think Elway makes picks based off of friendships.

You people are idiots.

LOL at the thought of Pat Bowlen hiring a former player to run the Broncos based off a friendship...oh wait...

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 07:49 AM
You're right, Elway had zero credentials. Loving this board already.

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 07:51 AM
Hey thanks!

But the "Brockos" thing's gotta go. :puff:

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:51 AM
One of the three picks is a clear project. Wolfe will likely rotate in quite a bit (we don't have another DT with any proven ability in pass rush). Hillman is now our fastest RB, will likely be the 2nd most used RB after McGahee (assuming Willis stays healthy). So that's two guys, whether you like the picks or not, who will see be on the field a lot rookie year.

And since when does "winning now" conflict with investing in a future QB? I get the case that there are more immediate needs to address, but ignoring them for one pick isn't exactly madness.

I can see not liking the pick, but acting like it's some unprecedented thing for a FO to ignore immediate need and invest future is incorrect. When GB drafted Rodgers I guarantee they had lots of other needs. Bears fans grumbled for years as they ignored offensive needs and drafted d-line high every year. Sometimes they have a good case, sometimes you see down the road that investing a lot in one area was worth it. Either way, it's hardly a case of Elway getting too cute. NFL teams - teams with Super Bowl aspirations - consistently draft outside the list of "positions of need" when they really like a guy at any position.

We just signed Peyton Manning and were supposedly fully invested in winning a Super Bowl before he retires. How does using a 2nd round pick on a QB fit that in any way?

Gort
04-28-2012, 07:54 AM
But the "Brockos" thing's gotta go. :puff:

agreed. that won't go down well here. we also need a name for the influx of Arizona State fans who will swarm to this board... all 3 of them. let's call them Oswankers.

http://www.writersbench.com/blog/uploaded_images/homeydontplaythat500-746295.jpg

Rolandftw
04-28-2012, 07:55 AM
You're right, Elway had zero credentials. Loving this board already.

As a player, he has great credentials. As a front office person, he came in with zero experience at the NFL level. He has some experience with an Arena Football League team, being a former owner if that impresses people....

I dunno why people still think that being a great player makes someone great in another area of the game.

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 07:58 AM
As a player, he has great credentials. As a front office person, he came in with zero experience at the NFL level. He has some experience with an Arena Football League team, being a former owner if that impresses people....

I dunno why people still think that being a great player makes someone great in another area of the game.

Could the guy be horrible? Absolutely, no doubt about it. The story is yet to be written.

But the guy knows a thing or two about the NFL, that can't be denied. I'll take my chances with him.

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 07:59 AM
You're right, Elway had zero credentials. Loving this board already.

We should hire Alfred Williams as our head scout as well. And maybe we can get Atwater to be our head trainer. Hell, I know Romanowski wants Fox's job, and we might as well give it to him. So many credentials...

Kid A
04-28-2012, 08:01 AM
We just signed Peyton Manning and were supposedly fully invested in winning a Super Bowl before he retires. How does using a 2nd round pick on a QB fit that in any way?

Did you read a single thing I just said? There are a bunch of teams every year "fully invested in winning a Super Bowl" before their core of star players gets too old. And, consistently, you see some of those teams invest high picks in areas outside their perceived needs. Using one goddamn pick on the post-Peyton era is not backtracking on being "invested" in winning in the next couple years. It may not be what you or I wanted to see at that pick, but it's pretty standard draft strategy for NFL teams, even one working with a shrinking championship window for Manning, Champ, etc.

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 08:03 AM
agreed. that won't go down well here. we also need a name for the influx of Arizona State fans who will swarm to this board... all 3 of them. let's call them Oswankers.

It'll go down great here. If this fanbase can put up billboards for Tebow, chances are you'll ALL be Brockos sooner or later.

Gort
04-28-2012, 08:03 AM
Did you read a single thing I just said? There are a bunch of teams every year "fully invested in winning a Super Bowl" before their core of star players gets too old. And, consistently, you see some of those teams invest high picks in areas outside their perceived needs. Using one goddamn pick on the post-Peyton era is not backtracking on being "invested" in winning in the next couple years. It may not be what you or I wanted to see at that pick, but it's pretty standard draft strategy for NFL teams, even one working with a shrinking championship window for Manning, Champ, etc.

use a 4th or 5th round pick, no problem.

use a 2nd round pick, problem.

oubronco
04-28-2012, 08:06 AM
Take your pick of:
Rueben Randle
Lavonte David
Casey Howard

And here's why for each of them.

Randle - Immediately improves our WR corps. Decker has good slot WR skills and might be best used there, but so could Randle. Decker and DT both have health concerns, Randle insures we're likely two deep with young WR talent regardless of that fact. Now we need someone like Caldwell or Hill, guys who have never been particularly good in the NFL, to break out for us if we're going to have a good 3rd WR option.

David - Can play OLB or MLB. Would probably be our best LB in coverage from day one. DJ might get suspended and Joe Mays is a two down player that teams exposed last year in coverage. Woodyard can't cover either. The inability for our LBs to pass defend is why the Pats had field days on us in both games last year. David dramatically changes that.

Hayward - Good tackler, good man cover skills, pretty good size. You could instantly start him opposite Champ with Porter at nickel and use Chris Harris as the dime DB as well as spending time at safety, shoring up the entire backfield and not just one position in the process. We saw last year that we need DB help, in Elway's own words "you can never have enough defensive backs".

If they had taken one of those guys and then traded up to 67 for Osweiler this draft would look significantly better and we'd likely be talking about Hillman as a candidate for pick #101 still. Only one RB was selected after we moved up for Hillman and he was a 220 pound thumper.

The problem isn't the players they're selecting, the problem is that they're drafting based on crushes, not on value. I know people love to say "but if he's there guy what's the problem?" Well the problem is that then you need your FO to be smarter than everyone else, finding all the late round gems. Do you think the Broncos FO are just flat out smarter than everyone else in the league?

If instead they make sure to take players according to consensus value and use trades to move up and down for where the guys the like are "value" picks they end up with more assets and therefore more overall talent.

For example, the second tier of the RB class is not moving fast. Turbin, Polk, Miller, etc. are all still on the board. So why jump up 20 picks for Hillman? If we had instead taken one of the three mentioned above in the second, used the trade up to get Osweiler, and then waited on best RB available at #101 we'd likely still get Hillman and at worst have to "settle" for one of the three guys mentioned above.

Also, had they not gotten screwed on their trade out of the first and picked up two 4ths instead of just one they could have traded from 101 back into the 3rd, keeping a 4th in the process, to go up after Hillman if they really wanted.

We've left value on the board the last two days and you can pretty easily add up that value to be equal to a first year contributor like David, Randle, or Hayward. That is a tough way to get better as a team unless you really think you're hitting on ALL the late round gems. No one does that though, so believing that you are is a sign of delusion.

David would've been nice because our LB's suck in coverage so who can they get now to help

bowtown
04-28-2012, 08:06 AM
I'm glad the FO is not only looking to win now, but is also planning to keep us competitive in the future. Don't know if Brock turns out to be the right guy, but I don't fault them for making the pick if they think he will.

I hated the Hillman pick though.

Gort
04-28-2012, 08:06 AM
It'll go down great here. If this fanbase can put up billboards for Tebow, chances are you'll ALL be Brockos sooner or later.

you know that the national story about the billboard was a PR stunt by a local store, right? the guys who owned the store used their digital billboard to get some national press for themselves. the Broncos fanbase is not dumb, no matter what ESPN has told you. we just want to win. to do that, we either rebuild completely to be competitive 3 or 4 years from now, or we spend nearly $100M on an aging QB to win now. spending a 2nd on a QBOTF to have him sit on the bench for 3 or 4 years doesn't fit with either scenario. that tells me that our FO isn't really sure what to do now that they've spent all that money on Manning. Osweiler might be good. he might not. we just don't understand the urgency to get somebody like him now, with a 2nd round pick, when we have so many more pressing needs.

Denver Brockos
04-28-2012, 08:10 AM
I would argue that QB is always a need in the NFL, but I can appreciate your POV.

Kid A
04-28-2012, 08:14 AM
use a 4th or 5th round pick, no problem.

use a 2nd round pick, problem.

That's what I would have been more comfortable with, for sure. But I assume the FO feels that not many teams find there QBOTF by taking a late rounder every couple years (which is true). And they likely felt the draft board fell right for them to get a guy they liked a lot at a reasonable value, something not guaranteed in future drafts.

Assuming we get 3yrs of Manning, I'm willing to let this be what we all knew would eventually be an inevitable high QB pick during this era. It is what it is.

baja
04-28-2012, 08:22 AM
Take your pick of:
Rueben Randle
Lavonte David
Casey Howard

And here's why for each of them.

Randle - Immediately improves our WR corps. Decker has good slot WR skills and might be best used there, but so could Randle. Decker and DT both have health concerns, Randle insures we're likely two deep with young WR talent regardless of that fact. Now we need someone like Caldwell or Hill, guys who have never been particularly good in the NFL, to break out for us if we're going to have a good 3rd WR option.

David - Can play OLB or MLB. Would probably be our best LB in coverage from day one. DJ might get suspended and Joe Mays is a two down player that teams exposed last year in coverage. Woodyard can't cover either. The inability for our LBs to pass defend is why the Pats had field days on us in both games last year. David dramatically changes that.

Hayward - Good tackler, good man cover skills, pretty good size. You could instantly start him opposite Champ with Porter at nickel and use Chris Harris as the dime DB as well as spending time at safety, shoring up the entire backfield and not just one position in the process. We saw last year that we need DB help, in Elway's own words "you can never have enough defensive backs".

If they had taken one of those guys and then traded up to 67 for Osweiler this draft would look significantly better and we'd likely be talking about Hillman as a candidate for pick #101 still. Only one RB was selected after we moved up for Hillman and he was a 220 pound thumper.

The problem isn't the players they're selecting, the problem is that they're drafting based on crushes, not on value. I know people love to say "but if he's there guy what's the problem?" Well the problem is that then you need your FO to be smarter than everyone else, finding all the late round gems. Do you think the Broncos FO are just flat out smarter than everyone else in the league?

If instead they make sure to take players according to consensus value and use trades to move up and down for where the guys the like are "value" picks they end up with more assets and therefore more overall talent.

For example, the second tier of the RB class is not moving fast. Turbin, Polk, Miller, etc. are all still on the board. So why jump up 20 picks for Hillman? If we had instead taken one of the three mentioned above in the second, used the trade up to get Osweiler, and then waited on best RB available at #101 we'd likely still get Hillman and at worst have to "settle" for one of the three guys mentioned above.

Also, had they not gotten screwed on their trade out of the first and picked up two 4ths instead of just one they could have traded from 101 back into the 3rd, keeping a 4th in the process, to go up after Hillman if they really wanted.

We've left value on the board the last two days and you can pretty easily add up that value to be equal to a first year contributor like David, Randle, or Hayward. That is a tough way to get better as a team unless you really think you're hitting on ALL the late round gems. No one does that though, so believing that you are is a sign of delusion.



My biggest disappointment with the draft so far is we did not get David

Taco John
04-28-2012, 08:27 AM
Take your pick of:
Rueben Randle
Lavonte David
Casey Howard

And here's why for each of them.

Randle - Immediately improves our WR corps. Decker has good slot WR skills and might be best used there, but so could Randle. Decker and DT both have health concerns, Randle insures we're likely two deep with young WR talent regardless of that fact. Now we need someone like Caldwell or Hill, guys who have never been particularly good in the NFL, to break out for us if we're going to have a good 3rd WR option.

David - Can play OLB or MLB. Would probably be our best LB in coverage from day one. DJ might get suspended and Joe Mays is a two down player that teams exposed last year in coverage. Woodyard can't cover either. The inability for our LBs to pass defend is why the Pats had field days on us in both games last year. David dramatically changes that.

Hayward - Good tackler, good man cover skills, pretty good size. You could instantly start him opposite Champ with Porter at nickel and use Chris Harris as the dime DB as well as spending time at safety, shoring up the entire backfield and not just one position in the process. We saw last year that we need DB help, in Elway's own words "you can never have enough defensive backs".

If they had taken one of those guys and then traded up to 67 for Osweiler this draft would look significantly better and we'd likely be talking about Hillman as a candidate for pick #101 still. Only one RB was selected after we moved up for Hillman and he was a 220 pound thumper.

The problem isn't the players they're selecting, the problem is that they're drafting based on crushes, not on value. I know people love to say "but if he's there guy what's the problem?" Well the problem is that then you need your FO to be smarter than everyone else, finding all the late round gems. Do you think the Broncos FO are just flat out smarter than everyone else in the league?

If instead they make sure to take players according to consensus value and use trades to move up and down for where the guys the like are "value" picks they end up with more assets and therefore more overall talent.

For example, the second tier of the RB class is not moving fast. Turbin, Polk, Miller, etc. are all still on the board. So why jump up 20 picks for Hillman? If we had instead taken one of the three mentioned above in the second, used the trade up to get Osweiler, and then waited on best RB available at #101 we'd likely still get Hillman and at worst have to "settle" for one of the three guys mentioned above.

Also, had they not gotten screwed on their trade out of the first and picked up two 4ths instead of just one they could have traded from 101 back into the 3rd, keeping a 4th in the process, to go up after Hillman if they really wanted.

We've left value on the board the last two days and you can pretty easily add up that value to be equal to a first year contributor like David, Randle, or Hayward. That is a tough way to get better as a team unless you really think you're hitting on ALL the late round gems. No one does that though, so believing that you are is a sign of delusion.

That's a fair take, but if it's true that the Broncos wanted Doug Martin, they couldn't risk letting Ronnie Hillman get away. And Osweiler was clearly their guy. It's easy to second guess the way the players are taken (and/or where they might have been taken) after the fact.

I think you come up with a good list - I don't agree with all of them (particularly Randle - he'd sit the bench behind Decker; and Lavonte David is undersized who is said to be eaten by blocks) - but at least it's an attempt, and not just blanket criticism. I don't see any of these picks being any more valid than the one that was made. Whether we like it or not, having a QBOTF is a team need.

baja
04-28-2012, 08:29 AM
agreed :thumbs:

scouting report on Brock

remind you guys of someone?

ANALYSIS

STRENGTHS: Osweiler has a very deliberate, quick-twitched setup which he employs on a consistent basis. His athletic ability allows him to play the position naturally and with ease. He slings the ball naturally, as well, and even though he pats the ball before throwing, his release is so compact and effective he isn't hindered by this habit in the slightest. His shining asset is his arm strength; he can hit nearly any NFL-caliber throw at this point in his career. He is a good leader and looks in control in the huddle and on the field. He is above average from an accuracy standpoint, and he really has a good grasp on when to add touch to the ball or to zip it. He has the pocket presence of a first-day pick and doesn't go down easily. He is good to extend plays with his feet.

WEAKNESSES: Osweiler had on-the-field judgment issues throughout his career at ASU and isn't reliable to protect the ball from turnovers. It seems as if he starts to get rolling in a game, and the more confidence he builds, the more of a gun-slinger mentality he adopts. This severely hinders his play. When under control, early in the game, he is athletic, accurate, and a good game manager. He will need to learn to hone in some of the competitive traits that have helped lead him to success up to this point. He is likely a developmental prospect who could struggle if forced to play early on.

Pat of the justification in signing Manning is to have a potential QBOTF to be his understudy, Brock gives us that. I love the pick.

TonyR
04-28-2012, 08:36 AM
IAOFM's take is similar to Drek's:

...But here's the thing: the draft and the scouting that leads up to it are all part of a remarkably flawed process, and it's not enough to trust your own evaluations and do whatever it costs to get a player, like the Broncos did when they moved up 20 spots to take Hillman.

It's not enough because no team should assume they're going to hit on all or most of their selections, or have you gone five minutes without hearing the draft called a crap shoot? There are only two panaceas to that:
1. Having all of your picks high in the draft, where you can have more confidence in your choices
2. Making a lot of picks

Obviously, the Broncos have done neither. They moved back from #25 to #36, and as of now they have just as many picks as they entered with. We've been charting out the chronology of Denver's picks, and this is what happened between Thursday and this moment:
• Entered with 25, 57, 87, 108, 120, 137, 188
• Picked at 36, 57, 67 and have 101, 108, 137, 188

Net net, Denver moved back those 11 spots at the top, turned the #87 pick into the #67, and the #120 pick into the #101 pick. It seems like a whole lot of movement for not much in the way of value.

We've beaten this horse to a number of deaths only manageable for a cat, but this game is about improving your odds at finding starters.

Yet what the Broncos have done instead is take three players higher than anyone saw them going. The theory here is they could have easily gotten all three of them at lower positions, and come away with more picks while doing so. Or, they could have caught a sliding prospect (value) like Brandon Thompson or Lamar Miller.

There are always the fallbacks of They know more than we do and Maybe they heard Baltimore wanted the same guys. How did that work out with prior reaches Tim Tebow, Rahim Moore, Zane Beadles, Alphonso Smith, Darcel McBath, and Richard Quinn, just to name those that have occurred under the <s>watchful</s> watering eyes of Brian Xanders?

They must love these guys.

Get used to saying that, because right now it's what we've got.

http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/the-daily-lard-4-28-12

errand
04-28-2012, 08:37 AM
Two other guys didn't know Jack and they got drafted.


...and ironically because one knew Jack, we got almost half these clowns claiming Elway "don't know Jack"......

errand
04-28-2012, 08:43 AM
Well, we got rid of the Tebow trolls. Then we picked up a couple of Manning trolls. Now we have an Osweiler troll? Ha!





I kid. I kid. Welcome to the asylum. :wave:

well at least he hasn't advocated the use of a crowbar to further Brock's career....

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 08:46 AM
This can't be good news for Adam Weber.

errand
04-28-2012, 08:51 AM
You're right, Elway had zero credentials. Loving this board already.

it's still the best bronco site in the world, however having said that, you shoulda seen these clowns reactions last 2 seasons when we had another "reach" at quarterback..... 2 seasons after drafting him, all we could get for him was a fourth round pick.... after trading up into the first round to get him, and yet the same clowns b****ing about brock, did nothing but slobber all over that guy's nuts

errand
04-28-2012, 09:02 AM
We just signed Peyton Manning and were supposedly fully invested in winning a Super Bowl before he retires. How does using a 2nd round pick on a QB fit that in any way?

well according to the douchebags like you on here , peyton manning is only one good hit away from the wheelchair remember?

......you haven't forgotton saying that have you?

BroncoBuff
04-28-2012, 09:20 AM
Come on Casey, you think they drafted him rbecause of his connection to Jack, and not because he fits Elway's vision?

No no ... I think Osweiler is a consensus 2nd-3rd round projection with a solid future in the league. I just think it's likely things would have happened differently had Brock and Dirk not known one another.

Take it to an extreme: By all accounts, Kyle Shanahan is a damn fine OC deserving of his place in the league. But what are the odds he'd be with the Redskins if Mike weren't there?

errand
04-28-2012, 09:24 AM
I wonder if jack knew omar bolden too.....

this f***** place is going to explode in a few minutes

Kid A
04-28-2012, 09:25 AM
Oh ****. I hope Jack Elway wasn't friends with Omar Bolden too!!!!!!!!!!11!!! Sun Devil conspiracy.

Drek
04-28-2012, 09:29 AM
That's a fair take, but if it's true that the Broncos wanted Doug Martin, they couldn't risk letting Ronnie Hillman get away. And Osweiler was clearly their guy. It's easy to second guess the way the players are taken (and/or where they might have been taken) after the fact.

I think you come up with a good list - I don't agree with all of them (particularly Randle - he'd sit the bench behind Decker; and Lavonte David is undersized who is said to be eaten by blocks) - but at least it's an attempt, and not just blanket criticism. I don't see any of these picks being any more valid than the one that was made. Whether we like it or not, having a QBOTF is a team need.

1. The Doug Martin thing is bull****. If we didn't let Tampa Bay in at 31 to take him the Giants would have at 32. The Giants taking a RB early is the worst kept secret in the draft and they had shown a lot of interest in Martin. So either Elway and co. are complete idiots or they like the third tier of RB talent (tier 1 = Richardson, tier 2 = Martin/Wilson, tier 3 = Miller, Turbin, Polk, Hillman, etc.). I assume they aren't complete idiots.

2. David is 233 pounds. He's a little undersized as a MLB, he's optimal size as a 4-3 OLB. Despite that, John Fox has routinely fielded undersized, fast LBs at all three positions. David would have completely changed the complexion of our pass pro.

3. Manning will be running 3 WR sets probably 85% of the time. Right now who is our #3? Stokley? Hill? Cladwell? Willis? All mediocre at best. I'd argue that Decker profiles better as a slot (he's quicker than fast, a hands catcher, jumps for the ball well, doesn't create deep separation well or track the ball well deep), and so Randle would be the optimal outside guy to pair with DT and Decker.

4. A QBOTF was a need, we created it with a bad value trade and then filled our #2 QB with a total scrub. But the FO obviously viewed their 4th round value as trade bait and Osweiler would have been available in the early 3rd.

What I am saying isn't that we shouldn't have taken Osweiler. What I'm saying is that David, Randle, and Hayward are better players who can contribute sooner at bigger need positions. We would have gotten more value out of any of them over Osweiler. We also had the value to trade back up and likely still get Osweiler.

So does anyone think Osweiler is such a stud prospect that we absolutely couldn't afford to lose him? If that was what they thought they would have taken him at #36. So we could have taken a very slight risk for potentially HUGE gain if we had taken David/Randle/Hayward and traded up to get Osweiler who likely would have still been on the board.

See my point? The FO is unwilling to take a risk of losing "their guys" in order to go BPA. This is not a BPA front office. This is a "we're smarter than everyone else so we can burn up value to get our guys" front office. That is what Mike Shanahan did until the Goodmans took over. Did you enjoy the results from those drafts?

errand
04-28-2012, 09:33 AM
No no ... I think Osweiler is a consensus 2nd-3rd round projection with a solid future in the league. I just think it's likely things would have happened differently had Brock and Dirk not known one another.

Take it to an extreme: By all accounts, Kyle Shanahan is a damn fine OC deserving of his place in the league. But what are the odds he'd be with the Redskins if Mike weren't there?

it would be naive to think that relationships don't matter in the nfl..... but you just said kyle is a pretty good oc.... why should it matter that he's mike shanahan son, a good guy is a good guy, no?

look at the Schottenheimers or the Phillips, or the Ryans..... sure having famous fathers helped.... but they all turned out to be pretty damn good at doing their jobs.

as I pointed out, mike piazza was drafted as a favor to a friend, who had named tommy lasorda as mike's godfather.... tommy knew mike personally....

who doesn't feel better about knowing about a person's character when you know them personally?

Rolandftw
04-28-2012, 09:58 AM
Could the guy be horrible? Absolutely, no doubt about it. The story is yet to be written.

But the guy knows a thing or two about the NFL, that can't be denied. I'll take my chances with him.

That's the issue. He's a big unknown... many are confident he's terrible, and many have faith in him. I'm in the middle, although I would have rather we hired a front office exec with some experience.

You can't really judge last year's draft yet, especially on a lock out season. Rahim Moore, Nate Irving, and Julius Thomas will have to show more to justify their pick from last year tho.

Rolandftw
04-28-2012, 10:05 AM
it's still the best bronco site in the world, however having said that, you shoulda seen these clowns reactions last 2 seasons when we had another "reach" at quarterback..... 2 seasons after drafting him, all we could get for him was a fourth round pick.... after trading up into the first round to get him, and yet the same clowns b****ing about brock, did nothing but slobber all over that guy's nuts

That's an interesting revisionist history of Tebow's time in Denver. I think there were just as many people that hated the pick, as there were that loved it.

I don't really see what Tebow has to do with it, anyways. I'm sure there's some 'fans' that want to see Elway fail, and Tebow have success so they could say they were right... but I'd like to think that the majority of fans that criticize the moves we've made in the draft are doing so because they genuinely hate the moves, not some other agenda.

houghtam
04-28-2012, 10:10 AM
That's an interesting revisionist history of Tebow's time in Denver. I think there were just as many people that hated the pick, as there were that loved it.

I don't really see what Tebow has to do with it, anyways. I'm sure there's some 'fans' that want to see Elway fail, and Tebow have success so they could say they were right... but I'd like to think that the majority of fans that criticize the moves we've made in the draft are doing so because they genuinely hate the moves, not some other agenda.

Yes. A simple search will show a completely different result with the Tebow pick. I was livid when they drafted him. Many people here were.

BroncoBuff
04-28-2012, 10:27 AM
When I saw the name "Brock", I immediately thought of Boogie Nights, Dirk Diggler and Brock Landers.

Nice catch. When we drafted Osweiler, Elway and the Broncos literally became- - Brock Landers.


http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/1337/brockg.jpg


I'm calling the kid Dirk Elway at least until Brock makes the final roster.

t-diddy
04-28-2012, 11:26 AM
it would be naive to think that relationships don't matter in the nfl..... but you just said kyle is a pretty good oc.... why should it matter that he's mike shanahan son, a good guy is a good guy, no?

look at the Schottenheimers or the Phillips, or the Ryans..... sure having famous fathers helped.... but they all turned out to be pretty damn good at doing their jobs.

as I pointed out, mike piazza was drafted as a favor to a friend, who had named tommy lasorda as mike's godfather.... tommy knew mike personally....

who doesn't feel better about knowing about a person's character when you know them personally?

I've seen you use this Mike Piazza comparison a couple of times now and i feel compelled to point out how terrible that argument is. You are correct that the reason Piazza got drafted was as a family favor. However, he got drafted in the 62nd round! It was a throw away pick done as a favor. I don't think there would be any complaining about the Osweiler pick if it was done in the 7th round as a pick with no expectations. You should find a better example to support your point of view.

That being said, i happen to like the pick. Had he stayed one more year, he would probably have been a number one pick next year (barring injury of course). So... i think there is "value" in the pick, its just that "value" won't be realized for a couple of years. "Win now" is not mutually exclusive from "building for the future", imo, so grabbing a future first round QB isn't that big of a reach.

Also, i think the relationship with Jack Elway actually means that they (EFX) were completely sold on the guy as a QB. Think about it, since they knew the pick would be scrutinized because of the friendship they had to be damn sure that the guy can play. Essentially, Elway is putting his professional credibility on the line with by selecting a BFF of his son. I don't think you take that big of a chance, with millions of dollars at stake, as a favor. Just my two cents...

errand
04-28-2012, 12:10 PM
agreed. that won't go down well here. we also need a name for the influx of Arizona State fans who will swarm to this board... all 3 of them. let's call them Oswankers.



When they start promoting the idea that a crowbar will further his development or defending Brock and blaming everyone but him for hitting on 46% of his passes and defending his being practically one dimensional like you're fighting a bobcat in a phone booth, then yeah, they'll get a nickname.

errand
04-28-2012, 12:21 PM
I'm glad the FO is not only looking to win now, but is also planning to keep us competitive in the future. Don't know if Brock turns out to be the right guy, but I don't fault them for making the pick if they think he will.

I hated the Hillman pick though.

you're entitled to your opinion, but please explain to those of us of opposing opinion what you don't like about a RB that put up these kind of numbers in two seasons of starting?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/14895/type/college/ronnie-hillman

Over 3,200 yards and 38 total TD's...with runs of 93 and 99 yards to boot, and a career average of 5.65 yards per pop.

Gort
04-28-2012, 12:26 PM
you're entitled to your opinion, but please explain to those of us of opposing opinion what you don't like about a RB that put up these kind of numbers in two seasons of starting?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/14895/type/college/ronnie-hillman

Over 3,200 yards and 38 total TD's...with runs of 93 and 99 yards to boot, and a career average of 5.65 yards per pop.

because the one thing that guy supposedly brings to the table is the ability to catch the screen pass. but we have a guy whose only asset is that skill. he's just going to replace that guy. why not keep Knowshon and use the 3rd round pick on defense? i think this is the argument against the Hillman pick in the 3rd.

anon
04-28-2012, 12:36 PM
because the one thing that guy supposedly brings to the table is the ability to catch the screen pass. but we have a guy whose only asset is that skill. he's just going to replace that guy. why not keep Knowshon and use the 3rd round pick on defense? i think this is the argument against the Hillman pick in the 3rd.

Knowshon can't stay on the field and his production has been inconsistent. RB is a position that needed more depth and talent upgrades.

houghtam
04-28-2012, 12:37 PM
because the one thing that guy supposedly brings to the table is the ability to catch the screen pass. but we have a guy whose only asset is that skill. he's just going to replace that guy. why not keep Knowshon and use the 3rd round pick on defense? i think this is the argument against the Hillman pick in the 3rd.

Also please color me unimpressed by that type of production in a terrible conference.

errand
04-28-2012, 12:38 PM
you know that the national story about the billboard was a PR stunt by a local store, right? the guys who owned the store used their digital billboard to get some national press for themselves.

and it worked, good for them...but there was also a faction that wanted to do the same thing to further the player of their choice....not as extreme as wanting to use a crowbar on the incumbent QB, but you get the idea.

the Broncos fanbase is not dumb, no matter what ESPN has told you.

Really? Then can you explain the gazzillion times Bronco fans have called each other "idiots"... "dumb asses" or "stupid"? and sorry, but the majority of those calling other fans those names believed the same **** you do

we just want to win.

this we agree on

to do that, we either rebuild completely to be competitive 3 or 4 years from now, or we spend nearly $100M on an aging QB to win now.

Or we can do both...get the aging but still plays the game at a high level QB, keep the veteran core of good players we have, and infuse some youth and speed to challenge for the title while drafting what will hopefully be a key contributor to our team's success 3-4 years down the road


spending a 2nd on a QBOTF to have him sit on the bench for 3 or 4 years doesn't fit with either scenario.

How so? We got Manning for the next 3-4 years depending on his health and our success (he might retire if we win it all) and will need the young gun to take over...just like the Packers did with Rodgers


that tells me that our FO isn't really sure what to do now that they've spent all that money on Manning. Osweiler might be good. he might not. we just don't understand the urgency to get somebody like him now, with a 2nd round pick, when we have so many more pressing needs.

OK...first off that is your opinion...then again you were so butt hurt that you didn't understand why we signed Manning in the first place. And Brock could flop like the others before him have as well, but we won't know until that day comes 3 years from now if/when Manning retires. Besides you have already stated your concerns that Manning was one good hit away from being a paraplegic, so why not address that possibility you might be right for once?

And again, you don't understand the urgency...but yet you were willing to give an even bigger project at QB another 2-3 years to see if he could hit the broad side of the barn. As for more pressing needs, every team needs a good back-up QB....look at the Jet's, they gave up a 4th round pick for a punt protector/back-up QB. Hell the Chargers drafted a QB #1 overall even though they had Drew Brees on the roster. The urgency is to win it all in the next few seasons....





in bold

errand
04-28-2012, 12:43 PM
This can't be good news for Adam Weber.

No it isn't...but then again he might be content forging a Kubiak kind of career...not a bad way to earn a living.

broncosteven
04-28-2012, 12:44 PM
I was not happy with the pick at 1st but we do need a guy to groom and if Manning has setbacks with his recovery we need a guy to get something out of the season with, Hanie is just a guy to fill a spot with.

errand
04-28-2012, 12:58 PM
I've seen you use this Mike Piazza comparison a couple of times now and i feel compelled to point out how terrible that argument is. You are correct that the reason Piazza got drafted was as a family favor. However, he got drafted in the 62nd round! It was a throw away pick done as a favor. I don't think there would be any complaining about the Osweiler pick if it was done in the 7th round as a pick with no expectations. You should find a better example to support your point of view.

That being said, i happen to like the pick. Had he stayed one more year, he would probably have been a number one pick next year (barring injury of course). So... i think there is "value" in the pick, its just that "value" won't be realized for a couple of years. "Win now" is not mutually exclusive from "building for the future", imo, so grabbing a future first round QB isn't that big of a reach.

Also, i think the relationship with Jack Elway actually means that they (EFX) were completely sold on the guy as a QB. Think about it, since they knew the pick would be scrutinized because of the friendship they had to be damn sure that the guy can play. Essentially, Elway is putting his professional credibility on the line with by selecting a BFF of his son. I don't think you take that big of a chance, with millions of dollars at stake, as a favor. Just my two cents...

The point being is Tommy knew mike's character and he turned out to be a very good player for several seasons....nothing more.

However hindsight being what it is, what if he had drafted Piazza in the 3rd or 4th round...or what if Mike had drafted TD in the 1st or 2nd....according to the draft boards and guru's, draftnicks, etc... TD or Piazza would have been considered low round prospects or priority FA's...

however their professional production, awards and accolades suggest that someone screwed the pooch when evaluating their ability to play the game at a high level. Basically on draft day they were barely worthy of being drafted...but once they started playing, everyone wondered WTF?

as for the "value" stuff...the value of a selection is based on a person's belief that it is worth this or that...kind of like buying a stock...the more people believe something is worth more than it is, it rises....and the more people don't believe in it it drops.

alot of people on this board think they're the smartest person in the room...and some are very intelligent, but to say a player drafted here or there is a wasted pick before he has even played a solitary down is pretty ridiculous in my humble opinion, especially given some of the clowns they have defended vehemently that have proven to be nothing much more than an amateur drawing pay

errand
04-28-2012, 01:04 PM
because the one thing that guy supposedly brings to the table is the ability to catch the screen pass. but we have a guy whose only asset is that skill. he's just going to replace that guy. why not keep Knowshon and use the 3rd round pick on defense? i think this is the argument against the Hillman pick in the 3rd.

I'd argue that a guy putting up 1,600 yards and 19 TD's per season can do more than just catch a screen pass or two...

why keep knowshon? More than half this board thinks he too was a wasted pick, remember? Not to mention he's coming off injury and facing a possible suspension for his DUI bull****....

again it is your perceived value of the pick, not EFX's....maybe you can get a job with Broncos before next april's draft and do things your way...until then, why not sit back and see how the kid pans out...if he sucks, the OM will still be online for you to thump your chest like you're Metta World Peace

errand
04-28-2012, 01:12 PM
Also please color me unimpressed by that type of production in a terrible conference.

Marshall Faulk would like to take this time to say you're an idiot.....and that conference played in doesn't mean as much as clowns like you think it does.

OrangeSe7en
04-28-2012, 01:15 PM
Marshall Faulk would like to take this time to say you're an idiot.....and that conference played in doesn't mean as much as clowns like you think it does.

Of the first 23 posts on page 6, you have 11 of them.

Stop posting already!

t-diddy
04-28-2012, 01:19 PM
alot of people on this board think they're the smartest person in the room...

You're projecting...

and some are very intelligent, but to say a player drafted here or there is a wasted pick before he has even played a solitary down is pretty ridiculous in my humble opinion, especially given some of the clowns they have defended vehemently that have proven to be nothing much more than an amateur drawing pay

You've been on this board for a while, this is how every draft discussion goes. Football forums = serious business. I'm actually disappointed that there hasn't been a more entertaining meltdown. But you are right, no player is a wasted pick before they've taken the field.



In bold

Armchair Bronco
04-28-2012, 01:32 PM
Nice catch. When we drafted Osweiler, Elway and the Broncos literally became- - Brock Landers.


http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/1337/brockg.jpg


I'm calling the kid Dirk Elway at least until Brock makes the final roster.

Good one! I'm in. :)

Our new QBOTF is Dirk "Diggler" Elway.

errand
04-28-2012, 02:34 PM
Of the first 23 posts on page 6, you have 11 of them.

Stop posting already!

So?

I read a post, then reply to it if i feel the need to do so....it sometimes leads to serial posting....sorry, just exercising my right to free speech. and keep in mind it's just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

However if you're that irritated by my posts, the ignore feature would eliminate 11 of those 23 posts on page six.....

BroncoBeavis
04-28-2012, 04:12 PM
In bold

How about the pick that CAN'T take the field unless your brand new $20 million free agent acquisition is on the sidelines?

Fail through and through.

Agamemnon
04-28-2012, 04:15 PM
How about the pick that CAN'T take the field unless your brand new $20 million free agent acquisition is on the sidelines?

Fail through and through.

If he turns out to be an elite QB, it will still end up being a good pick, but people who believe Osweiler has a good chance to become an elite QB are smoking crack. Chances of that happening are extremely slim.

BroncoInferno
04-28-2012, 04:20 PM
If he turns out to be an elite QB, it will still end up being a good pick, but people who believe Osweiler has a good chance to become an elite QB are smoking crack. Chances of that happening are extremely slim.

Unfortunately, I agree. Look at the QBs taken in the 2nd round the last 10 years or so, and the list is pretty dismal. Dalton is the only guy I can recall off the top of my head picked in 2nd in the last 10 years or so who is worth a damn. Hopefully, Osweiler will be another Dalton. He does have an intriguing skill set.

BroncoBeavis
04-28-2012, 04:33 PM
Unfortunately, I agree. Look at the QBs taken in the 2nd round the last 10 years or so, and the list is pretty dismal. Dalton is the only guy I can recall off the top of my head picked in 2nd in the last 10 years or so who is worth a damn. Hopefully, Osweiler will be another Dalton. He does have an intriguing skill set.

And of course Oz was a reach in the 2nd round. Yeah, you can find some outliers who called him in the 2nd. But I can find more who predicted 4th round.

And I don't think he's done anything on the field to justify a 2nd round pick. Seems to be completely based on the fact that he's tall and young.

TonyR
04-28-2012, 05:09 PM
Second round QB's over the last several years:

2004
none

2005
none

2006
(49) N.Y. Jets (from Dallas) - Kellen Clemens, QB Oregon
(64) Minnesota (from Pittsburgh) - Tarvarius Jackson, QB Alabama State

2007
36. Philadelphia (from Cleveland thru Dallas) - Kevin Kolb, QB Houston
40. Miami - John Beck, QB BYU
43. Detroit (from Buffalo) - Drew Stanton, QB Michigan State

2008
(56) Green Bay (From Browns) - Brian Brohm, QB Louisville
(57) Miami (From Chargers) - Chad Henne, QB Michigan

2009
44 Miami (from Washington) - Pat White, QB West Virginia

2010
48. Carolina - Jimmy Clausen, QB Notre Dame

2011
35 Cincinnati - Andy Dalton, QB Texas Christian
36 San Francisco (from Denver) - Colin Kaepernick, QB Nevada

Rolandftw
04-28-2012, 05:13 PM
Andy Dalton looks to be a good QB. Rest of that list is horrible tho