Sacks are OVERRATTED!!!!!

[Gcver2ver3]

Not just this game...but our entire season has proven this...

We are at or near the bottom in the NFL in sacks....but our D clearly plays with a dominating style....

Sacks usually occur when teams get a rush with four man front...the QB is caught by surprise because one of his lineman got beat...

Other sacks can occur from a delayed blitz by a LB or a DB blitzing fromn the blind side...again catching the QB by surprise

we play differently..

When we blitz...WE BLITZ!...the QB sees us crowding the line of scrimmage and prepares for the rush...only thing is it disrupts the play and leads to incomplete passes, short completions, or picks....we get no sacks because the QB sees us coming....but teams don't score!

This game was clear example....we've play Brady and the Pats twice this year...we didn't sack him once either time...but he got hit every snap...that's more important...disrupting the entire offense is better than an occasional sack...

We are just plain physical...Brady will have nightmares about us for years to come...he hates playing us over any team...GUARANTEED

So again...screw sacks....hurries and picks and fumbles are what keeps the offenses from scoring points....and wins games...(14-3 case in point)

[yavoon]

didnt brady get decked out on that huge branch reception? and the patriots started shredding our blitzes.

but OTHERWISE I'm sure sacks are overrated:)

he also threw for 341 yards

[DB-Freak]

Sacks aren't as overrated as the board thinks.

Against cool QB's like Manning and Brady, Sacks are huge.

[enjolras]

Live by the blitz.. die by the blitz.

In most cases a sack is more or less like a turnover.. they CHANGE field position and they change games. The Broncos are a high risk defense that relies on their fast linebackers to get to the QB and their secondary to protect them while they're chasing the QB.

That works...

BETTER is what the Bears do. They're front 4 gets to the Quarterback and they actually put him down. They still force a lot of turnovers, but they also change field position with sacks.

The Broncos need to get more effective up front... and I'm hoping they use their draft picks this year to try to find a stud up front who can get to the Quarterback so the Broncos don't HAVE to blitz they way they do. Just look at how effective the screens/flats where against the D tonight... one of these days your going to have a game where those turnovers don't happen.. and then your really going to wish this team could get to the QB more reliably.

[Bronco Bob]

didnt brady get decked out on that huge branch reception? and the patriots started shredding our blitzes.

but OTHERWISE I'm sure sacks are overrated:)

he also threw for 341 yards


And Brady also got decked on Champ's inteception.

[Kaylore]

Turnovers > Sacks.

[yavoon]

Turnovers > Sacks.

sacks lead to turnovers. I dont know why u gusy have let the fact that the broncos dont have many sacks to make u think all u need to do is pressure the qb:(

[Spider]

I agree , I said it earlier this year , Pressure is better then sacks ...... giving up 341 yards yet getting 2 turnovers and holding the pats to 1 TD ..... Dont know what yavoon is thinking , but then i am not sure he does either ........

[Spider]

didnt sack brady all game , yet got 2 picks ....... and gave up only 1 TD ....

[yavoon]

And Brady also got decked on Champ's inteception.

did he? wasn't brady scrambling? anyway champ made a great play, nothing to do w/ pressure. brady's throw was a reasonable throw champ is just the man.

[Lestat]

sacks are overrated, you get a sack & that means the ball doesn't leave the QB's hands

a QB can't beat you if he's falling backwards on his butt with the ball in his hands


QB pressure is important to rattle em but a sack is a huge mental advantage cause that means he's not safe in the pocket

[enjolras]

Sacking the QB has the same effect as pressuring the QB.. they both get the QB throwing the ball earlier and earlier with less and less confidence... leading to turnovers.

So at WORST pressure == sacks.

The only difference is that merely pressuring the QB is the same as an incomplete pass, where a sack actually moves the field back.

When its 2nd and 5 whats better? Pressuring the QB and leave them with a 3rd and 5 or sacking the QB and leave them looking at 3rd and 12. 3rd and 12 gets your defense off the field... 3rd and 5 is a much riskier proposition.

[enjolras]

did he? wasn't brady scrambling? anyway champ made a great play, nothing to do w/ pressure. brady's throw was a reasonable throw champ is just the man.

Ok.. that ISN'T true. Ferguson had pressure on Brady and was right in his face. That was a panic throw by Brady, without pressure I doubt Brady even attempts it.

[yavoon]

Sacking the QB has the same effect as pressuring the QB.. they both get the QB throwing the ball earlier and earlier with less and less confidence... leading to turnovers.

So at WORST pressure == sacks.

The only difference is that merely pressuring the QB is the same as an incomplete pass, where a sack actually moves the field back.

When its 2nd and 5 whats better? Pressuring the QB and leave them with a 3rd and 5 or sacking the QB and leave them looking at 3rd and 12. 3rd and 12 gets your defense off the field... 3rd and 5 is a much riskier proposition.

sacks cause fumbles at a pretty high rate, and u can't make a first down if ur sacked, u can if ur hit or hurried.

[yavoon]

Ok.. that ISN'T true. Ferguson had pressure on Brady and was right in his face. That was a panic throw by Brady, without pressure I doubt Brady even attempts it.

I dont remember the play as a panic at all, brady had pressure moved right saw a receiver and threw it. the ball was not thrown to champ champ made a great athletic play to get it.

look its no big deal, denvers defense is good, sacks are good. there's no need to start a giant disinformation campaign to make urselves feel better about not getting sacks.

[Jason in LA]

didnt brady get decked out on that huge branch reception? and the patriots started shredding our blitzes.

but OTHERWISE I'm sure sacks are overrated:)

he also threw for 341 yards

Leave it up to yavoon...aw, forget it. Why bother?

[Finger Roll]

problem is our front 4 isn't getting the job done pressuring the qb. So we have to blitz all the time because of that. We really need a good pass rushing DL because our DE are very inconsistant

[Broncoman13]

I hate to say I told you so, but I really did tell everybody this exact same thing! Alec and I went round and round the last couple years about Turnovers. Pressure is/can be directly related to turnovers. A lot of people were happy with a solid 3 and out defense that didn't give up a lot of yards... yet we were still giving up a lot of points. This year we give up the yards but get plenty of turnovers... this equates to less points.

I take pressure any day of the week. Sacks are big as well, don't get me wrong... but if you can get consistent pressure, well the proof is in the puddin! Look at tonights game.

[Jason in LA]

341 yards passing leads to 13 points. I think our pass D was doing something right.

[yavoon]

Leave it up to yavoon...aw, forget it. Why bother?

anything wrong w/ what I said. I'm just trying to keep the wonderful broncos fans from saying dumb things:). its like a public service!

I know I should be just saying any old thing I want cuz we win and that entitles us to say anything but thats just not me.

[Broncoman13]

did he? wasn't brady scrambling? anyway champ made a great play, nothing to do w/ pressure. brady's throw was a reasonable throw champ is just the man.


Champ IS the man no doubt, but Brady didn't see the INT b/c he was on his back! He even spoke of the series during his post game interview and said that he knew something went wrong when he heard the crowd roar but he didn't see the INT! THAT'S PRESSURE!

[Spider]

I hate to say I told you so, but I really did tell everybody this exact same thing! Alec and I went round and round the last couple years about Turnovers. Pressure is/can be directly related to turnovers. A lot of people were happy with a solid 3 and out defense that didn't give up a lot of yards... yet we were still giving up a lot of points. This year we give up the yards but get plenty of turnovers... this equates to less points.

I take pressure any day of the week. Sacks are big as well, don't get me wrong... but if you can get consistent pressure, well the proof is in the puddin! Look at tonights game.
not just tonights game , but all season long .i think we are tied with the texans as far as Sacks go ........ but Pressure we are tops .... and the oskies keep rolling in

[Finger Roll]

we lead in pressures because of the amount of times we blitz. Seems like every single down, lol

[yavoon]

341 yards passing leads to 13 points. I think our pass D was doing something right.

they did ok, the low point total was because of the turnovers tho. and while champs play was amazing and huge otherwise the turnovers were not through the air(not counting after the game was over at 24-6).

maybe I'm blind deaf and dumb but brady moved the ball well against us w/ pretty much no running game. the patriots didnt win but that doesn't mean we need to pretend like everything went our way.

[epicSocialism4tw]

I would definately rather sack the QB than allow him to deliver the ball. You guarantee that the offense loses a down and some field position.

You have to wonder if the Broncos are on to something with their defensive scheming. If they are consistent with anything, its getting turnovers. Does allowing the QB to adjust to the blitzing give Coyer an advantage in switching, thus causing confusion and allowing his quick defenders to take unexpected angles? I dont know, but whatever it is, it is working.

This defense is almost identical in production to the Superbowl era defenses. The defense gives up yards, but makes plays when necessary and keeps teams out of the endzone. It's kind of a statistical oddity.

[Broncoman13]

anything wrong w/ what I said. I'm just trying to keep the wonderful broncos fans from saying dumb things:). its like a public service!

I know I should be just saying any old thing I want cuz we win and that entitles us to say anything but thats just not me.

But you're wrong and you'll try to find an excuse to prove yourself right... I bet you even go as far as saying it must hvae been a late hit or something stupid like that. Facts are facts, you say it wasn't b/c of pressure yet he was hit and laying on his keester when Champ made the catch... is that not pressure to you Yavoon?

[enjolras]

I take pressure any day of the week. Sacks are big as well, don't get me wrong... but if you can get consistent pressure, well the proof is in the puddin! Look at tonights game.

I'm certainly not arguing with that. Pressure is DEFINITELY a very good thing. But if you can take the next step and turn a few of those pressures into full blown sacks.. your even better off. That's my point.. Pressure is absolutely essential but getting the sack is better.

[Broncoman13]

I would definately rather sack the QB than allow him to deliver the ball. You guarantee that the offense loses a down and some field position.

You have to wonder if the Broncos are on to something with their defensive scheming. If they are consistent with anything, its getting turnovers. Does allowing the QB to adjust to the blitzing give Coyer an advantage in switching, thus causing confusion and allowing his quick defenders to take unexpected angles? I dont know, but whatever it is, it is working.

This defense is almost identical in production to the Superbowl era defenses. The defense gives up yards, but makes plays when necessary and keeps teams out of the endzone. It's kind of a statistical oddity.

That's exactly what is happening. Champ and Brady both talked about Champ's INT. The Pats thought they had the Broncos blitzes figured out and they were running their WR's in a way that would cross and pick the Broncos DB's. Champ and DWill talked about a switch to avoid that and allow them to make a play on the ball... that's when Champ got his pick 5.

[epicSocialism4tw]

they did ok, the low point total was because of the turnovers tho. and while champs play was amazing and huge otherwise the turnovers were not through the air(not counting after the game was over at 24-6).

maybe I'm blind deaf and dumb but brady moved the ball well against us w/ pretty much no running game. the patriots didnt win but that doesn't mean we need to pretend like everything went our way.

You are forgetting the most important turnover of the game...the one that Champ ran back 100 yards.

[Jason in LA]

maybe I'm blind deaf and dumb

The first time I've ever agreed with you.

Brady completed just over 50% of his passes. I'll take that.

[yavoon]

But you're wrong and you'll try to find an excuse to prove yourself right... I bet you even go as far as saying it must hvae been a late hit or something stupid like that. Facts are facts, you say it wasn't b/c of pressure yet he was hit and laying on his keester when Champ made the catch... is that not pressure to you Yavoon?

it wasn't because of pressure because the throw was a decent throw. if brady had thrown it into champs lap while getting hit then yes pressure. it also didnt look like brady was just dumping it off to anyone. he got hit but brady can throw while being hit, the throw was decent, champ made a great play.

THE CREDIT FOR THAT GOES TO CHAMP. I know sometimes in sports when something good happens everyone and their dog gets credit and u end up divying out more credit than originally existed.

[enjolras]

You have to wonder if the Broncos are on to something with their defensive scheming. If they are consistent with anything, its getting turnovers. Does allowing the QB to adjust to the blitzing give Coyer an advantage in switching, thus causing confusion and allowing his quick defenders to take unexpected angles? I dont know, but whatever it is, it is working.

The other team in recent memory playing this type of defense was the Eagles teams of the last few years. They had pretty similiar results, and their linebackers/secondary aren't as good as this Broncos D.

Again.. it can and does work, but its a risk. I would still MUCH prefer to have what the Bears have. They blitz in for strategic reasons, not out of neccesity.

[Broncoman13]

I'm certainly not arguing with that. Pressure is DEFINITELY a very good thing. But if you can take the next step and turn a few of those pressures into full blown sacks.. your even better off. That's my point.. Pressure is absolutely essential but getting the sack is better.


Really you can't go wrong with either. Sacks and pressures will both result in a QB getting happy feet and making errant throws. With a bunch of sacks you end up with a few more fumbles, with a bunch of pressures you end up with more INT's... it's arguable no doubt!

[yavoon]

You are forgetting the most important turnover of the game...the one that Champ ran back 100 yards.

no, its in the post.

[epicSocialism4tw]

That's exactly what is happening. Champ and Brady both talked about Champ's INT. The Pats thought they had the Broncos blitzes figured out and they were running their WR's in a way that would cross and pick the Broncos DB's. Champ and DWill talked about a switch to avoid that and allow them to make a play on the ball... that's when Champ got his pick 5.

I figured that it has to be something like that because I remember 4 specific examples off hand: Champs v. SD (game1), Champs v. Dallas, Champs v. NE, Darrant's v. Oakland.

On all of these picks, the defender read the route and jumped it on a blitz of some sort.

[Merlin]

did he? wasn't brady scrambling? anyway champ made a great play, nothing to do w/ pressure. brady's throw was a reasonable throw champ is just the man.
Actually you are wrong (and your hating some times seems to lead you to statements that are just stupid). Brady himself in the after-game interview stated he was being pressured from the right side (his left), and had to throw quickly. Brady himself did not think the O had a good game and did not 340 yds passing as being good. Why not you ask? Yavoon how can you ignore the most important stat. THEY COULD NOT SCORE WHEN IT COUNTED. The pressure affected their game and they only scored 13 points. NE is held to 13 freaking points and you actually have the gall to imply their O had good game against Denver's D. Give your hate a rest, or at least wait until they lose next yr. You are beginning to sound like a troll.

[yavoon]

The first time I've ever agreed with you.

Brady completed just over 50% of his passes. I'll take that.

55% isnt just over 50%. it was a down day %wise but that often happens when behind.

[Gcver2ver3]

anything wrong w/ what I said. I'm just trying to keep the wonderful broncos fans from saying dumb things:). its like a public service!

I know I should be just saying any old thing I want cuz we win and that entitles us to say anything but thats just not me.



dude chill out with the insults....there is nothing dumb at all about my post..

in fact many experts say the same thing....our record clearly indicates validity to my insight...

defenses can be dominant because of many things...some do it with sacks..like seattle who led the league...others do it with pressure which leads to turnovers...if we get a sack great...but our style of football won't lead to many sacks...

this is common sense...shame you don't understand something so simple

[Broncoman13]

it wasn't because of pressure because the throw was a decent throw. if brady had thrown it into champs lap while getting hit then yes pressure. it also didnt look like brady was just dumping it off to anyone. he got hit but brady can throw while being hit, the throw was decent, champ made a great play.

THE CREDIT FOR THAT GOES TO CHAMP. I know sometimes in sports when something good happens everyone and their dog gets credit and u end up divying out more credit than originally existed.


Okay, I'll keep this real simple for you. After the game Tom Brady had an interview. When asked about that play he said that he didn't see the INT b/c he was on his backside. He said that he thought he had Brown open and if he had more time he would have seen him open to the corner of the endzone rather than throwing it on a more direct path. He was rushed in his throw...

[yavoon]

dude chill out with the insults....there is nothing dumb at all about my post..

in fact many experst say the same thing....our record clearly indicates validity to my insight...

defenses can be dominant because of many things...some do it with sacks..like seattle who led the league...others do it with pressure which leads to turnovers...if we get a sack great...but our style of football won't lead to many sacks...

this is common sense...shame you don't understand somehting so simple

u r correct that denver has a good defense u r incorrect that denver has a good defense because it gets pressures instead of sacks.

[Jason in LA]

55% isnt just over 50%. it was a down day %wise but that often happens when behind.

55% is not good.

[yavoon]

Okay, I'll keep this real simple for you. After the game Tom Brady had an interview. When asked about that play he said that he didn't see the INT b/c he was on his backside. He said that he thought he had Brown open and if he had more time he would have seen him open to the corner of the endzone rather than throwing it on a more direct path. He was rushed in his throw...

throw still looked decent to me, very few players besides champ would have picked that off. if the throw was decent and it was champ that made a great player then thats just how I see it.

[Broncoman13]

u r correct that denver has a good defense u r incorrect that denver has a good defense because it gets pressures instead of sacks.


If you have a QB that has to get rid of the ball before he's ready you're doing something right. Only a fruit-loop like you could complain after a brilliant win like this. Classic yet expected...from you!

[yavoon]

55% is not good.

its not great, brady is around 60% normally, a little higher this year. so u figure while winning he can be more careful and complete around 65% and while losing he has to take more chances and completes around 55%.

[yavoon]

If you have a QB that has to get rid of the ball before he's ready you're doing something right. Only a fruit-loop like you could complain after a brilliant win like this. Classic yet expected...from you!

I'm not complaining I'm just trying to achieve an accurate asessment of what happened besides WE OWN EVERYONE IS GOD WE ARE BEST EVER!

and besides who's even complaining I'm just giving the credit to champ.

[-Slap-]

Its clearly better to record a lot of sacks, but pressure is key. The best single season defense ever, the 85 Bears, racked up a League leading 64 sacks. They also led the League with 54 forced turnovers.

The 2000 Ravens get a lot of pub for being an all time great defense. They weren't nearly as dominating as Buddy Ryan's original 46, though. The 2000 Ravens only recorded 35 sacks, not just middle of the road, but eight fewer than they allowed on the season.

[Gcver2ver3]

Let me help for anyone that doesn't seem to get it....


I'm not saying sacks are not good to have...

I'm not even saying that pressure on 1 play is better than a sack on one play....

what i'm saying is that sacks are overrated...

some people judge our defense as lackluster against the pass because we give up a lot of passing yards and don't have a lot of sacks...

stats can deceive people.....

I'd rather have a team that pressured Brady the way they did today rattling him and making him second guess on where to go with the football...then to get pressure once every now and then and bag a few sacks while doing it...

Jax sacked Brady 4 times last week...which defense do you think played better?....

Screw sacks...so as long as we get constant pressure and continue to hold our opponents under 14 points...

CLEARLY sacks are overrated if the offense isn't scoring points...at the end of the day it is the number of points allowed that means most

and we are #3

[-Slap-]

Let me help for anyone that doesn't seem to get it....


I'm not saying sacks are not good to have...

I'm not even saying that pressure on 1 play is better than a sack on one play....

what i'm saying is that sacks are overrated...

some people judge our defense as lackluster against the pass because we give up a lot of passing yards and don't have a lot of sacks...

stats can deceive people.....

I'd rather have a team that pressured Brady the way they did today rattling him and making him second guess on where to go with the football...then to get pressure once every now and then and bag a few sacks while doing it...

Jax sacked Brady 4 times last week...which defense do you think played better?....

Screw sacks...so as long as we get constant pressure and continue to hold our opponents under 14 points...

CLEARLY sacks are overrated if the offense isn't scoring points...at the end of the day it is the number of points allowed that means most

and we are #3

I don't believe sacks are overrated. I think consistent quarterback pressure is underrated.

[yavoon]

Let me help for anyone that doesn't seem to get it....


I'm not saying sacks are not good to have...

I'm not even saying that pressure on 1 play is better than a sack on one play....

what i'm saying is that sacks are overrated...

some people judge our defense as lackluster against the pass because we give up a lot of passing yards and don't have a lot of sacks...

stats can deceive people.....

I'd rather have a team that pressured Brady the way they did today rattling him and making him second guess on where to go with the football...then to get pressure once every now and then and bag a few sacks while doing it...

Jax sacked Brady 4 times last week...which defense do you think played better?....

Screw sacks...so as long as we get constant pressure and continue to hold our opponents under 14 points...

CLEARLY sacks are overrated if the offense isn't scoring points...at the end of the day it is the number of points allowed that means most

and we are #3

I think the fault in ur logic comes from the way u seemed to imply that ppl who get sacks are less good at causing turnovers and somehow denvers idea of not getting sacks is better at it.

its the turnovers that are so good, its what denver is good at. if denver got more sacks we'd still be good at turnovers, we'd just also be better at sacking the qb.

[Gcver2ver3]

Its clearly better to record a lot of sacks, but pressure is key. The best single season defense ever, the 85 Bears, racked up a League leading 64 sacks. They also led the League with 54 forced turnovers.

The 2000 Ravens get a lot of pub for being an all time great defense. They weren't nearly as dominating as Buddy Ryan's original 46, though. The 2000 Ravens only recorded 35 sacks, not just middle of the road, but eight fewer than they allowed on the season.

Sorry Slap but we disagree here....if

you are saying that the Raven 2000 team's D wasn't as dominant because of the lack of sacks...

It is all about points allowed....nothing else matters over that...judge a D by how many points they allow...and the Ravens had one of if not the lowest points allowed ever...

as i said earlier...there are a lot of ways to play great defense..some do it with sacks...others do it other ways...but at the end of the day what matters most is points allowed...

to me that's not even debatable

[Jason in LA]

its not great, brady is around 60% normally, a little higher this year. so u figure while winning he can be more careful and complete around 65% and while losing he has to take more chances and completes around 55%.

The guy blew it. Pure and simple. That pick in the endzone killed them. That's on him. Tom wasn't so terrific. He was below average.

When most QBs go for 55% and two picks they are blasted by the media and fans. Brady shouldn't be any different.

[yavoon]

Sorry Slap but we disagree here....if

you are saying that the Raven 2000 team's D wasn't as dominant because of the lack of sacks...

It is all about points allowed....nothing else matters over that...judge a D by how many points they allow...and the Ravens had one of if not the lowest points allowed ever...

as i said earlier...there are a lot of ways to play great defense..some do it with sacks...others do it other ways...but at the end of the day what matters most is points allowed...

to me that's not even debatable

really? wouldn't a d w/ a great supporting running game and a safe qb allow fewer points than a d w/ say favre's ass at qb and no running game?

[Gcver2ver3]

I think the fault in ur logic comes from the way u seemed to imply that ppl who get sacks are less good at causing turnovers and somehow denvers idea of not getting sacks is better at it.

its the turnovers that are so good, its what denver is good at. if denver got more sacks we'd still be good at turnovers, we'd just also be better at sacking the qb.


amazing....

did you read my post at all?

i just said that sacks are certainly good to have....but the way we play d...we won't get as many...we broadcast our blitzes..they can see us coming so they rush the play...this usually will not result in a sack...

denver gets TO's from pressure

i never said people getting sacks are less effective...that would be dumb to say...what i said is that there is more than one way to skin a cat...understand?

some do it with sacks...we happen to do it another way...

and our way works....what i said is screw sacks so as long as we don't let our opponents to score....you don't need SACKS to hold a team scoreless

[Jason in LA]

It's not like they were down by 20 points early and had to play catch up. They were in passing mode all night. Even when they were down by a score they were in passing mode. Even when it was 0-0 they were in passing mode. Dude sucked ass tonight. A big part of it was the pressure he was under. Simple as that.

[Gcver2ver3]

really? wouldn't a d w/ a great supporting running game and a safe qb allow fewer points than a d w/ say favre's ass at qb and no running game?


that argument can go both ways...that would keep a defense from getting more sacks too....

bad example...

[yavoon]

The guy blew it. Pure and simple. That pick in the endzone killed them. That's on him. Tom wasn't so terrific. He was below average.

When most QBs go for 55% and two picks they are blasted by the media and fans. Brady shouldn't be any different.

really? when vick goes for 200 yards, 50% and 1 pick he thinks he's joe montana.

but in all seriousness brady did alright at qb, he moved his offense, was hampered heavily by turnovers. his great mistake was champs pick but that was awesome play by champ. hey why hate on brady when u can give the credit to champ!

[yavoon]

that argument can go both ways...that would keep a defense from getting more sacks too....

bad example...

it was in response to the points allowed post not the sacks ones.

[Gcver2ver3]

It's not like they were down by 20 points early and had to play catch up. They were in passing mode all night. Even when they were down by a score they were in passing mode. Even when it was 0-0 they were in passing mode. Dude sucked ass tonight. A big part of it was the pressure he was under. Simple as that.



exactly

[yavoon]

amazing....

did you read my post at all?

i just said that sacks are certainly good to have....but the way we play d...we won't get as many...we broadcast our blitzes..they can see us coming so they rush the play...this usually will not result in a sack...

denver gets TO's from pressure

i never said people getting sacks are less effective...that would be dumb to say...what i said is that there is more than one way to skin a cat...understand?

some do it with sacks...we happen to do it another way...

and our way works....what i said is screw sacks so as long as we don't let our opponents to score....you don't need SACKS to hold a team scoreless

u dont need turnovers to hold a team scoreless either. ur not really saying anything besides "denver rocks, we're just bad at sacking the qb."

[yavoon]

It's not like they were down by 20 points early and had to play catch up. They were in passing mode all night. Even when they were down by a score they were in passing mode. Even when it was 0-0 they were in passing mode. Dude sucked ass tonight. A big part of it was the pressure he was under. Simple as that.

so behind w/ no running game constantly getting smacked by turnovers brady put up 341 yards and made one crucial mistake. brady, sans the dispraportionate severity of his mistake was not the reason they lost.

[Gcver2ver3]

it was in response to the points allowed post not the sacks ones.


i know that......

the argument still can apply both ways....

i say you judge a defense by points allowed...not sacks....

if pressure and little sacks gets us fewest points allowed...i'll take that

you say that a good run team that good time of possesion can contribute to points allowed..

i say that same thing can be applied to my argument....good run team keeps our defense from having as many shots at sacks...

meanwhile a flashy run and gun team like cincy can get sacks because they score quickly and their d is on the field more...and playing with a lead...

that's why i say just leave what the offense does out of the equation because it supports both arguments

[TomServo]

Bottom Line.....Knock Peyton Gump on his ass and he folds. the boy complains and he points fingers more than marino and we all know how many SB rings he has.
we already beat the best QB in the afc. we just have to finish ther job.

[Jason in LA]

really? when vick goes for 200 yards, 50% and 1 pick he thinks he's joe montana.

but in all seriousness brady did alright at qb, he moved his offense, was hampered heavily by turnovers. his great mistake was champs pick but that was awesome play by champ. hey why hate on brady when u can give the credit to champ!

That's a totally different situation, because Vick runs around and makes plays. That's a poor comparison.

Brady didn't do alright. 55% and 2 picks isn't alright. He moved the offense to 13 points. He shouldn't have thrown at Champ. That was the mistake. I give Champ credit, but it wasn't his toughest pick. He was probably shocked that Brady threw it. I swear I heard him say "thank you" as he picked it off. Really, he said that. I have special speakers that allows me to hear she it like that.

[Gcver2ver3]

u dont need turnovers to hold a team scoreless either. ur not really saying anything besides "denver rocks, we're just bad at sacking the qb."



it's official...you're a troll

if after all the logical explanation i've given you...this is what you got from it...it means you're not even being rational...you're just being a troll

[yavoon]

i know that......

the argument still can apply both ways....

i say you judge a defense by points allowed...not sacks....

if pressure and little sacks gets us fewest points allowed...i'll take that

you say that a good run team that good time of possesion can contribute to points allowed..

i say that same thing can be applied to my argument....good run team keeps our defense from having as many shots at sacks...

meanwhile a flashy run and gun team like cincy can get sacks because they score quickly and their d is on the field more...and playing with a lead...

that's why i say just leave what the offense does out of the equation because it supports both arguments

yes and I was pointing out that points allowed isnt entirely controlled by the defense.

[yavoon]

it's official...you're a troll

if after all the logical explanation i've given you...this is what you got from it...it means you're not even being rational...you're just being a troll

I assure u I'm not trolling but if it makes u feel better then I really dont care.

[TomServo]

and how many games has "big ben" won w/he had to throw more than 30 times?m btw

[Jason in LA]

it's official...you're a troll

if after all the logical explanation i've given you...this is what you got from it...it means you're not even being rational...you're just being a troll

That pretty much sums it up right there. Only yavoon can have an argument with other Bronco fans over the biggest win for this franchise in six year.

Dude, get the stick from up your ass and enjoy the win. I'm getting drunk right now. I'm feeling pretty good. yavoon, for once, join the party.

[yavoon]

That's a totally different situation, because Vick runs around and makes plays. That's a poor comparison.

Brady didn't do alright. 55% and 2 picks isn't alright. He moved the offense to 13 points. He shouldn't have thrown at Champ. That was the mistake. I give Champ credit, but it wasn't his toughest pick. He was probably shocked that Brady threw it. I swear I heard him say "thank you" as he picked it off. Really, he said that. I have special speakers that allows me to hear she it like that.

the 13 pts wasnt all brady's fault, 55% isnt a bad completion % when behind and 1 of the picks was after the game was decided.

there's really nothing more to say, I thot brady besides one amazingly costly mistake moved the ball well against denver. he had no running game whatsoever and was behind most of the way and if the patriots didnt operate w/ crisco on their jersey's they might have held onto enough balls to let them score more.

[yavoon]

That pretty much sums it up right there. Only yavoon can have an argument with other Bronco fans over the biggest win for this franchise in six year.

Dude, get the stick from up your ass and enjoy the win. I'm getting drunk right now. I'm feeling pretty good. yavoon, for once, join the party.

I did enjoy the win, I just dont celebrate it much w/ u guys. can u blame me? my reasonable even handed approach isnt appreciated much here. like u so succintly implied, it was a big win we should all be using hyperbole.

[Jason in LA]

the 13 pts wasnt all brady's fault, 55% isnt a bad completion % when behind and 1 of the picks was after the game was decided.

there's really nothing more to say, I thot brady besides one amazingly costly mistake moved the ball well against denver. he had no running game whatsoever and was behind most of the way and if the patriots didnt operate w/ crisco on their jersey's they might have held onto enough balls to let them score more.

He had no running game because the Broncos stuffed it, like they did all year. Dillion got most of his yards off of two runs.

Brady sucked.

I'm extended the branch here. For once don't be the prick around here and join the party. The gin is starting to warm me up. So much that I'm giving you the invite. For once, dude, be a part of the group.

[Broncoman13]

Did you happen to notice what the Pats 3rd down pct was? Did you happen to notice that Brady had most of his success between the 20's? I don't know what your beef is with the Broncos, but seriously you should either have a drink with Jason or go for something a little more potent with Alec!

[Jason in LA]

I just made a run to the liquor store. I've got drinks to go around.

[Broncoman13]

I did enjoy the win, I just dont celebrate it much w/ u guys. can u blame me? my reasonable even handed approach isnt appreciated much here. like u so succintly implied, it was a big win we should all be using hyperbole.


It's not your approach that presents problems, it's your delivery and the fact that you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You act like you're better than everybody and know everything, then when it's proven wrong you can't take it... yet still can't admit that you're wrong. That's why people can't stand you, you're like a troll that's trolling on his home forum. It's sickening!

[yavoon]

He had no running game because the Broncos stuffed it, like they did all year. Dillion got most of his yards off of two runs.

Brady sucked.

I'm extended the branch here. For once don't be the prick around here and join the party. The gin is starting to warm me up. So much that I'm giving you the invite. For once, dude, be a part of the group.

so now the patriots lack of a running game is brady sucking?

=DD

[yavoon]

It's not your approach that presents problems, it's your delivery and the fact that you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You act like you're better than everybody and know everything, then when it's proven wrong you can't take it... yet still can't admit that you're wrong. That's why people can't stand you, you're like a troll that's trolling on his home forum. It's sickening!

what have I been wrong on? the only reason I seem incapable of being wrong is if u really read my posts I dont say anything all that astonishing or daring.

[Gcver2ver3]

Did you happen to notice what the Pats 3rd down pct was? Did you happen to notice that Brady had most of his success between the 20's? I don't know what your beef is with the Broncos, but seriously you should either have a drink with Jason or go for something a little more potent with Alec!


No way he's a bronco fan....

i explained to him many things....everytime i debate with someone..i always get them to concede at least some because my points are always good ones...

he's not paying any attention to it....he can't possibly be a Broncos fan...

he must be an underground chiefs/raider/charger fan...or maybe a pats fan i don't know...

but he's the only one that is actually down on denver and their defense..

he's a troll...gotta be.....:troll:

[epicSocialism4tw]

It's not your approach that presents problems, it's your delivery and the fact that you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You act like you're better than everybody and know everything, then when it's proven wrong you can't take it... yet still can't admit that you're wrong. That's why people can't stand you, you're like a troll that's trolling on his home forum. It's sickening!

You beat me to it.

Yavoon, you have a logical mind and sometimes can provide solid insight, but have the social skills of a child. Anyone who thinks that it is their civil duty to talk down to football fans about their perception of a game that they watch for entertainment needs to take a step back and look at some things.

Where is it your place to determine for them how they like to fit the game into their neural ATP usage? It's just a game, and these are people that you are talking to.

[Gcver2ver3]

It's not your approach that presents problems, it's your delivery and the fact that you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong. You act like you're better than everybody and know everything, then when it's proven wrong you can't take it... yet still can't admit that you're wrong. That's why people can't stand you, you're like a troll that's trolling on his home forum. It's sickening!



perfect post.....

[Jason in LA]

so now the patriots lack of a running game is brady sucking?

=DD

I don't even know what you're trying to say at this [point. I knocked out half the half pint of gin, and I'm knocking out the other half right now. The Gennis, Genis, Ge...wait, I gotta get the bottle, the Guinness is next.

Brady sucked on his own.

[yavoon]

You beat me to it.

Yavoon, you have a logical mind and sometimes can provide solid insight, but have the social skills of a child. Anyone who thinks that it is their civil duty to talk down to football fans about their perception of a game that they watch for entertainment needs to take a step back and look at some things.

Where is it your place to determine for them how they like to fit the game into their neural ATP usage? It's just a game, and these are people that you are talking to.

they dont have to, but it doesn't mean I can't reply to them. honestly look back at what I said, more often than not u guys get ur panties in a twist over not much.

[yavoon]

No way he's a bronco fan....

i explained to him many things....everytime i debate with someone..i always get them to concede at least some because my points are always good ones...

he's not paying any attention to it....he can't possibly be a Broncos fan...

he must be an underground chiefs/raider/charger fan...or maybe a pats fan i don't know...

but he's the only one that is actually down on denver and their defense..

he's a troll...gotta be.....:troll:

I have done nothing but praise denvers defense for their overall performance. see this is often the problem, u simply dont have the recollection to even know what I said. the only thing I said bad about denvers defense is that they are bad at sacking the qb. I also said that ur logic is bad. but instead of responding or remembering either u simply call me a troll and makeup what i said.

[Gcver2ver3]

what have I been wrong on? the only reason I seem incapable of being wrong is if u really read my posts I dont say anything all that astonishing or daring.


how about the fact that you won't admit that regardless of sacks or pressure...as long as points allowed is down that is what's important?

plus...you gotta lot of nerve saying that i only think "Denver Rocks" and that i'm just covering up on us sucking at sacking the qb....


that's like saying the colts throw a lot because they suck at running....

who cares as long as they score points...

look at that glass as 7/8th full.....versus 1/8th empty


if you did that then maybe i'd be convinced you aren't a troll


but as it stands...you have troll like symptons...

[epicSocialism4tw]

they dont have to, but it doesn't mean I can't reply to them. honestly look back at what I said, more often than not u guys get ur panties in a twist over not much.

I think that you could contribute alot more to the board by being cordial. If someone doesnt agree with you, dont insult their inteligence with a lazy and biting response. If you think they arent understanding you well, take a little time to explain things stepwise and include your data. It takes some time, but it will get you better results. If you dont feel like you are intellectually challenged by certain posters, respectfully move on and find something else to talk about without making them feel insulted. There is nothing in your brain that makes you more worthy of respect than anyone else on this board. You have to earn that by treating people the right way and coming up with some good takes.

[Gcver2ver3]

I have done nothing but praise denvers defense for their overall performance. see this is often the problem, u simply dont have the recollection to even know what I said. the only thing I said bad about denvers defense is that they are bad at sacking the qb. I also said that ur logic is bad. but instead of responding or remembering either u simply call me a troll and makeup what i said.



if you read my ENTIRE post from the start.....there is no way you could not see that i have a point....just no way...

that's what upsets me...everytime i post....your reply is almost as if you didn't even read it...or that you misinterpreted it

it's like debating with a wall...or a child or something

[Gcver2ver3]

I think that you could contribute alot more to the board by being cordial. If someone doesnt agree with you, dont insult their inteligence with a lazy and biting response. If you think they arent understanding you well, take a little time to explain things stepwise and include your data. It takes some time, but it will get you better results. If you dont feel like you are intellectually challenged by certain posters, respectfully move on and find something else to talk about without making them feel insulted. There is nothing in your brain that makes you more worthy of respect than anyone else on this board. You have to earn that by treating people the right way and coming up with some good takes.


good post....let's see if he just ignores the fact that you made a good point...and just continues to wonder what our problem is...

[yavoon]

how about the fact that you won't admit that regardless of sacks or pressure...as long as points allowed is down that is what's important?

plus...you gotta lot of nerve saying that i only think "Denver Rocks" and that i'm just covering up on us sucking at sacking the qb....


that's like saying the colts throw a lot because they suck at running....

who cares as long as they score points...

look at that glass as 7/8th full.....versus 1/8th empty


if you did that then maybe i'd be convinced you aren't a troll


but as it stands...you have troll like symptons...


I think everyone else does an admirable job of pointing out what denver is good at in excruciating detail. but if that doesn't suffice then u can look back and see that I give champ great credit and give credit to the defense overall.

points allowed is important, its not the end all. like i said the overall team can affect how many points are scored against it not just the defense.

[Jason in LA]

I know what my problem is. The gin is about to run out, and the liquor store closes in 4 minutes. No way I make it. Well, I've got the Guinness.

[Jason in LA]

points allowed is important, its not the end all. like i said the overall team can affect how many points are scored against it not just the defense.

Yes it is. It's the most important stat, next to points scored. No more winning on the stats sheet but losing on the score board.

The O isn't shooting the D in the foot. Even with the yard given up, which is expected from a team that passes just about every down, points given up is still on the low end.

[yavoon]

I think that you could contribute alot more to the board by being cordial. If someone doesnt agree with you, dont insult their inteligence with a lazy and biting response. If you think they arent understanding you well, take a little time to explain things stepwise and include your data. It takes some time, but it will get you better results. If you dont feel like you are intellectually challenged by certain posters, respectfully move on and find something else to talk about without making them feel insulted. There is nothing in your brain that makes you more worthy of respect than anyone else on this board. You have to earn that by treating people the right way and coming up with some good takes.

possibly but its unlikely to happen. I dont feel the need of anyone's respect(which is good cuz I get almost none).

[yavoon]

Yes it is. It's the most important stat, next to points scored. No more winning on the stats sheet but losing on the score board.

The O isn't shooting the D in the foot. Even with the yard given up, which is expected from a team that passes just about every down, points given up is still on the low end.

its the most important result, that doesn't make it the end all of stats:).

[yavoon]

good post....let's see if he just ignores the fact that you made a good point...and just continues to wonder what our problem is...

I dont wonder what ur problem is.

[Gcver2ver3]

points allowed is important, its not the end all. like i said the overall team can affect how many points are scored against it not just the defense.

well the pats owned the time of possession battle and we still only allowed 13 points so the offense can't take credit here....brady threw for 341 yds and we still only allowed 13 points...


points allowed is the best way to judge a defense....period

most everyone knows that

if you can't admit that then we're done here.......

[Jason in LA]

its the most important result, that doesn't make it the end all of stats:).

Yes, it does. Ask Pats fans the past three out of four years. It's all that really matters.

[yavoon]

Yes, it does. Ask Pats fans the past three out of four years. It's all that really matters.

like i said, most important result.

[Jason in LA]

And end all be all.

[yavoon]

well the pats owned the time of possession battle and we still only allowed 13 points so the offense can't take credit here....brady threw for 341 yds and we still only allowed 13 points...


points allowed is the best way to judge a defense....period

most everyone knows that

if you can't admit that then we're done here.......

no, the best way to judge a defense is w/ an encompassing approach that utilizes the skills talented football ppl have to interpret both statistics and film.

but yes otherwise listing defenses in order of pts allowed is dandy.

[-Slap-]

Sorry Slap but we disagree here....if

you are saying that the Raven 2000 team's D wasn't as dominant because of the lack of sacks...

It is all about points allowed....nothing else matters over that...judge a D by how many points they allow...and the Ravens had one of if not the lowest points allowed ever...

as i said earlier...there are a lot of ways to play great defense..some do it with sacks...others do it other ways...but at the end of the day what matters most is points allowed...

to me that's not even debatable

I guess we do disagree, to an extent. I concede the 2000 Ravens were a great defense, but I don't put them in the same class as the 1985 Bears and one reason is because the Bears utterly terrorized quarterbacks all game long. Hell, Otis Wilson knocked like five QBs out of games all by himself that season. How many QBs did the Ravens knock out in 2000? Goose dropping his tonnage on Gannon in the playoffs and that's about it.

I also disagree about points allowed being the gold standard for measuring defenses. Do you realize the 1977 Atlanta Falcons set the record for fewest points allowed in a 14 game season? They only gave up 129 points behind the gimmicky "Gritz Blitz" defense. Nobody will ever remember that as a great defense, though. DE Claude Humphrey and DB Rolland Lawrence were the only Pro Bowlers and the team finished 7-7 and out of the playoffs.

[Popps]

Anyone who thinks sacks are "overrated" hasn't been watching the game for long.

Want to take a guess which position the guy who has the most SB rings played?

I'll give you a hint. He made a living terrorizing QBs.

A sack on 2nd and 4 puts an opposing offense into a 3rd and long situation.

A sack on 3rd down ends a drive.

They are game-changing plays. They're not over-rated. They're a crucial part of most championship teams. We're lucky to be where we are considering our inability to sack opposing QBs. Pressure matters, but as you saw today... Brady eventually figured out a way around the "almost sacks." Dump passes, screens, etc. But, when you're tackled to the ground before you can throw the ball, it's tough to be effective.

[TomServo]

Blah Blah, we are going on to the afc championship game. US, Broncos. our 8th.

payton gump hasnt won one afc title game yet. not one in 8 years.

not even w/all the help from the league.

if we knock him on his ass like we did brady he'll cry like always and game over..

[No1BroncoFan]

anything wrong w/ what I said. I'm just trying to keep the wonderful broncos fans from saying dumb things:).
By providing shining examples of what kind of dumb thi9ngs not to say.

Ben

[No1BroncoFan]

it wasn't because of pressure because the throw was a decent throw. if brady had thrown it into champs lap while getting hit then yes pressure. it also didnt look like brady was just dumping it off to anyone. he got hit but brady can throw while being hit, the throw was decent, champ made a great play.

THE CREDIT FOR THAT GOES TO CHAMP. I know sometimes in sports when something good happens everyone and their dog gets credit and u end up divying out more credit than originally existed.
Does it not even register in your pea brain that maybe Brady didn't see Champ because he was in a hurry to get rid of the ball to avoid the sack? Pressure causes quarterbacks to throw before they're ready, that leads to turnovers. It's really not that hard to figure out.

Yes, Champ made a great play on the ball, but if Brady has a little more time (ie not under pressure) he sees Champ in position to make a play and throws elswhere.

There, I've spelled it out for you. If you don't get it now...

Ben

[OrangeShadow]

sacks are overrated as long as the pressures force turnovers.

[Odysseus]

The only reason sacks are over rated is we are getting many.

[DB-Freak]

http://www.protrade.com/insight/InsightArticleDesjardinsToBlitzOrNotToBlitz.html

I think it's rather weird that our sack numbers are so damn low compared to the number of the time we blitz. Vice versa with the int numbers.

We are an anomaly of the league.

[yavoon]

Does it not even register in your pea brain that maybe Brady didn't see Champ because he was in a hurry to get rid of the ball to avoid the sack? Pressure causes quarterbacks to throw before they're ready, that leads to turnovers. It's really not that hard to figure out.

Yes, Champ made a great play on the ball, but if Brady has a little more time (ie not under pressure) he sees Champ in position to make a play and throws elswhere.

There, I've spelled it out for you. If you don't get it now...

Ben

we're just going back and forth but I've already said I dont think brady made all that bad of a throw and it was champs play on the ball that caused the turnover not the pressure causing a bad throw.

lotsa things lead to turnovers, coverage, pressure, tipped balls. this time it was a great individual play by champ.

[DB-Freak]

Plus how many times did we intercept Brady out of pressure.

I'll give you one.

Brady threw the ball rather well despite of being pressured and knocked down. Brady completed a good amount of passes despite of pressure and knockdowns. Actually lot of the times, those pressures and knockdowns weren't that beneficial at all to us.

pressures and knockdowns don't guarantee anything while sacks do.

[Popps]

Anyone watching this Indy game?

Sacks are overrated???????

Seriously, you have to be pretty dense to believe that. It's like saying if you can pass the ball, the running game is overrated.

Pressure is great, tackling a QB to the ground before he can throw the ball and knocking a team back 8-10 yards is BETTER, especially in a 2nd or 3rd down situation.

Great QBs can elude "almost sacks' and make plays. Great QBs cannot make plays when they're being driven into the turf.

[DB-Freak]

Again, against calm and cool QBs like Manning you need to sack em.

[Gcver2ver3]

I guess we do disagree, to an extent. I concede the 2000 Ravens were a great defense, but I don't put them in the same class as the 1985 Bears and one reason is because the Bears utterly terrorized quarterbacks all game long. Hell, Otis Wilson knocked like five QBs out of games all by himself that season. How many QBs did the Ravens knock out in 2000? Goose dropping his tonnage on Gannon in the playoffs and that's about it.

I also disagree about points allowed being the gold standard for measuring defenses. Do you realize the 1977 Atlanta Falcons set the record for fewest points allowed in a 14 game season? They only gave up 129 points behind the gimmicky "Gritz Blitz" defense. Nobody will ever remember that as a great defense, though. DE Claude Humphrey and DB Rolland Lawrence were the only Pro Bowlers and the team finished 7-7 and out of the playoffs.


no one remembers them because they didn't win....

but if they allowed that few of points then they were great...

i'm not sure why you would give the 85 bears the nod over the ravens because of "style points"....just because they did it in a sexier fashion matters not to me....

funny thing is i think the 85 bears had the best defense also.....

but i'll take good D anyway i can get it...

[Gcver2ver3]

Anyone watching this Indy game?

Sacks are overrated???????

Seriously, you have to be pretty dense to believe that. It's like saying if you can pass the ball, the running game is overrated.

Pressure is great, tackling a QB to the ground before he can throw the ball and knocking a team back 8-10 yards is BETTER, especially in a 2nd or 3rd down situation.

Great QBs can elude "almost sacks' and make plays. Great QBs cannot make plays when they're being driven into the turf.


hey look....stop with the insults alright.....take that somewhere else...

you are looking at it from an extremely narrow viewpoint...bottom line is you're misinformed...makes me wonder if you've followed the game very long...

don't take the phrase "sack are overrated" as to mean sacks aren't important...

what it means is that it isn't as important as some may have thought...MANY experts say the same thing...so calling everyone dense for not seeing it your way makes you sound really ignorant...carry yourself better

our 14-3 record and points allowed clearly shows you can play great D without getting a lot of sacks...2000 Ravens had a amazing defense with only 35 sacks (courtesy of Slap)...

When we get sacks it is a bonus but PRESSURE is the key to our defense...as long as we get pressure...we are in good shape...

if brady would've been sacked versus just being pressured in the redzone...champ doesn't get the pick..and they get 3 points...instead of us changing the scope of the entire game..

so as you can see (if you allow yourself to see) there is more ways than just sacks to play great D...our D isn't predicated on sacks...just pressure...but that doesn't mean we don't want more sacks...because we do...but pressure is the key

[-Slap-]

no one remembers them because they didn't win....

but if they allowed that few of points then they were great...

i'm not sure why you would give the 85 bears the nod over the ravens because of "style points"....just because they did it in a sexier fashion matters not to me....

funny thing is i think the 85 bears had the best defense also.....

but i'll take good D anyway i can get it...
If you think my point was about style points, you missed it completely. The Bears only lost one game all year and that was to Dan Marino in Miami at the height of his powers. Why did Dan shred them? Because his amazingly quick release prevented him from getting sacked. The Bears pressured him that night, but he got the ball away to the Marks Brothers and put the game away before halftime.

I will agree with your contention that pressure is underrated, but sacks are not overrated. Do you honestly think our defense wouldn't be improved if we added a consistent double digit sack man at DE?

[bpc]

Sacks can be overated to a point but who doesn't want them? It depends on who you play. A guy like Brady can be rattled pretty well when you bring a ton of pressure at him and he'll be shaken.

A guy like Manning at least against us, has destroyed our blitz and our lack of four down linemen who have been able to pressure him. In that case a true pressure DL can save your behind.

Whom misses who more right now? Reggie Hayward and his millions in Jacksonville or Denver and bargain priced free agents playing four a conference and league championship?

[Gcver2ver3]

If you think my point was about style points, you missed it completely. The Bears only lost one game all year and that was to Dan Marino in Miami at the height of his powers. Why did Dan shred them? Because his amazingly quick release prevented him from getting sacked. The Bears pressured him that night, but he got the ball away to the Marks Brothers and put the game away before halftime.

I will agree with your contention that pressure is underrated, but sacks are not overrated. Do you honestly think our defense wouldn't be improved if we added a consistent double digit sack man at DE?



once again i'm being misinterpreted...

sacks ARE important....but we are winning games without getting them...

why?

because of our constant pressure...

there is no official diagram on how to play good defense...there are a number of ways to do it...we jailhouse blitz a lot...so the QB sees us coming so he gets rid of the ball quickly...so we don't get sacks but we do disrupt the play and get incomplete passes or picks...

i've said this like a hundred times on this thread...

but would i like more sacks...of course....but stats don't always tell the story

people think we suck against the pass because we give up a lot of passing yards and don't get sacks

that's deceiving...we play a style that allows for yards but no points...

i'll take that all day long..

you see where i'm coming from?

[Rascal]

bump

[ludo21]

bump


they still overrated now???

Ha!

WE didnt even PRESSURE the QB yesterday, we need a pass rusher.

[Gcver2ver3]

they still overrated now???

Ha!

WE didnt even PRESSURE the QB yesterday, we need a pass rusher.




well sacks start with pressure so i'm not sure your point is any stronger than before....


with that said....sacks would've been nice to have sunday.....

[ludo21]

well sacks start with pressure so i'm not sure your point is any stronger than before....


with that said....sacks would've been nice to have sunday.....

I do agree that pressures worked for us this season because they forced TO's. But more often than not a sack is better than just getting pressures time and time again.

[Gcver2ver3]

I do agree that pressures worked for us this season because they forced TO's. But more often than not a sack is better than just getting pressures time and time again.



fair enough.....i concede

[ludo21]

fair enough.....i concede


I WINNN!!!! :strong: ;D

Anyone know what it would take to get Mario?? Draft pick wise, slot wise?

Im thinking top 10, like 7th pick. But anyone else?

What kind of trade would have to be done? Both 1sts?? and next years??

[Gcver2ver3]

I WINNN!!!! :strong: ;D

Anyone know what it would take to get Mario?? Draft pick wise, slot wise?

Im thinking top 10, like 7th pick. But anyone else?

What kind of trade would have to be done? Both 1sts?? and next years??


i like mario but do you think he's the next freeney?

he'd better be for us to give up that much for him...

i'd like to see us turn 3-4 defense....i may start a thread about it...

[TheDave]

I WINNN!!!! :strong: ;D

Anyone know what it would take to get Mario?? Draft pick wise, slot wise?

Im thinking top 10, like 7th pick. But anyone else?

What kind of trade would have to be done? Both 1sts?? and next years??

Based on the old Value Chart both first's should get us between 7-9

[ludo21]

i like mario but do you think he's the next freeney?

he'd better be for us to give up that much for him...

i'd like to see us turn 3-4 defense....i may start a thread about it...


Im all for the 3-4. I know we arent set up for that, but our DL sucks anyway, might as well draft some fat bodies and let our LBs fly around.

He might be, but i agree if he isnt, thats wayy to much

[-Slap-]

Based on the old Value Chart both first's should get us between 7-9
I would be more than willing to part with both number ones for the top pass rushing defensive end off the board. Williams sounds like a cross between Neil Smith and Julius Peppers.

[ludo21]

Based on the old Value Chart both first's should get us between 7-9

if thats what it would take id be all for it. The guy is going to be good.

[-Slap-]

if thats what it would take id be all for it. The guy is going to be good.

http://www.nationalchamps.net/2005/sub/pics/small/northcarolinastate_mario_williams_sm.jpg

[TheDave]

I would be more than willing to part with both number ones for the top pass rushing defensive end off the board. Williams sounds like a cross between Neil Smith and Julius Peppers.

I have not seen him play. I have read every draft profile out there and everyone has him as the #1 DE prospect. If he is as good as everyone says then absolutely you go for that. Give him Trevors money and hope he earns it.

One thing to keep in mind... i remember reading somewhere that D-Line prospects have one of the largest bust rates in the draft. I'm a long way from getting up to speed on the draft, but i do know there is a ton of O-Line talent this year. Williams better be a stud, 'cause it looks like we could fill 2 spots on the o-line for about a decade.

[-Slap-]

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/2005/08/11/acc/williams.jpg

He definitely passes the eyeball test. Kind of got ballerina ankles, though.

[-Slap-]

I have not seen him play. I have read every draft profile out there and everyone has him as the #1 DE prospect. If he is as good as everyone says then absolutely you go for that. Give him Trevors money and hope he earns it.

One thing to keep in mind... i remember reading somewhere that D-Line prospects have one of the largest bust rates in the draft. I'm a long way from getting up to speed on the draft, but i do know there is a ton of O-Line talent this year. Williams better be a stud, 'cause it looks like we could fill 2 spots on the o-line for about a decade.
Knocks on him are a questionable motor and his consistency playing the run. They claim his physical tools are the best since Peppers.

[ludo21]

Like Freeney he will use thos little ankles to bust around the OL to get to the QB FAST!!!!!!!!


at least thats what i hope ;D

[Clockwork Orange]

To get Mario Williams the Broncos will likely have to trade up to the 6th spot at the lowest and that's only if the 49ers are holding that pick. If the Fade have the 6th pick (I'm still not certain whether they've had the coin toss for who gets 6 and who gets 7 yet) the Broncos would have to trade into the top 5 to get him as Chokeland will grab him if he's there when they're on the clock. Hell, he might not get past Green Bay at #5.

A trade up for Mario Williams will unfortunately cost more than just the Broncos pair of 1st rounders.

[-Slap-]

Like Freeney he will use thos little ankles to bust around the OL to get to the QB FAST!!!!!!!!


at least thats what i hope ;D
If he's a Bronco. If Oakland gets him, he'll be plagued by high ankle sprains and eventually slug a coach.

[TheDave]

Knocks on him are a questionable motor and his consistency playing the run. They claim his physical tools are the best since Peppers.

Damn that's tempting...

Analysis
STRENGTHS: Size, Strength, short area quickness, pass rush.
WEAKNESSES: Pursuit
NFL COMPARISON: Julius Peppers, Panthers
Williams isn't the super elite athlete that Peppers is, but he's not slouch. Both are big, tall defensive ends who can get into passing lanes and use their long arms to their advantage. Williams fits as a strongside end in a 4-3 or as an end in a 3-4. He has rare size for the position and that allows him to play inside or outside. He has good athleticism considering how big he is. He isn't blazing off the ball, but is more than quick enough. He has quick feet around the line of scrimmage and has a good spin move to get around offensive tackles. Williams has very long arms and uses them to keep linemen from locking into his midsection. He also has good strength and is pretty effective with a bull rush. One thing he doesn't have is an elite speed rush. He does have the quicks and enough speed to get around some tackles, but a lot of the time, his blocker can get to his outside which is where his inside moves come in handy. As a run stopper, Williams has the strength to hold his ground, although he doesn't always fire out low and quick and get immediate penetration. However, he is more than capable of holding his ground and does do a good job of coming down the line to make plays. In pursuit is where he doesn't stand out. He lumbers a bit and doesn't show great straight line speed. He does do a decent job of sniffing out screens and draws though and does an adequate job of staying home and not being fooled by misdirection. He does show good hustle though and will chase downfield.

[-Slap-]

Damn that's tempting...

Analysis
STRENGTHS: Size, Strength, short area quickness, pass rush.
WEAKNESSES: Pursuit
NFL COMPARISON: Julius Peppers, Panthers
Williams isn't the super elite athlete that Peppers is, but he's not slouch. Both are big, tall defensive ends who can get into passing lanes and use their long arms to their advantage. Williams fits as a strongside end in a 4-3 or as an end in a 3-4. He has rare size for the position and that allows him to play inside or outside. He has good athleticism considering how big he is. He isn't blazing off the ball, but is more than quick enough. He has quick feet around the line of scrimmage and has a good spin move to get around offensive tackles. Williams has very long arms and uses them to keep linemen from locking into his midsection. He also has good strength and is pretty effective with a bull rush. One thing he doesn't have is an elite speed rush. He does have the quicks and enough speed to get around some tackles, but a lot of the time, his blocker can get to his outside which is where his inside moves come in handy. As a run stopper, Williams has the strength to hold his ground, although he doesn't always fire out low and quick and get immediate penetration. However, he is more than capable of holding his ground and does do a good job of coming down the line to make plays. In pursuit is where he doesn't stand out. He lumbers a bit and doesn't show great straight line speed. He does do a decent job of sniffing out screens and draws though and does an adequate job of staying home and not being fooled by misdirection. He does show good hustle though and will chase downfield.

I would put him at LDE, so his wingspan would knock down more passes. Put a pure speed rusher on the weakside.

[DBroncos4life]

I think it would just be easier to get Kiwi. Before this off year Kiwi was a top ten lock.

[ludo21]

If he's a Bronco. If Oakland gets him, he'll be plagued by high ankle sprains and eventually slug a coach.


As a Bronco he wont be stopped!! ;)


Thanks for the new Avy :wiggle:

[-Slap-]

How about Kiwi slides to us at 22 and we trade up for Justice a couple picks later?

[ludo21]

How about Kiwi slides to us at 22 and we trade up for Justice a couple picks later?

according to Kiper Kiwi does slip to 22. And Bing to us at 29.

I could live with that

[TheDave]

I think it would just be easier to get Kiwi. Before this off year Kiwi was a top ten lock.

What happened to Kiwi? Before the season he was all the rage now everything i read mentions his lack of a motor and/or questions his love of the game... was it anything specific, or just amazing potential not producing enough results?

[ludo21]

What happened to Kiwi? Before the season he was all the rage now everything i read mentions his lack of a motor and/or questions his love of the game... was it anything specific, or just amazing potential not producing enough results?


probably got complacent after hearing how he was a sure fire top 10 guy, then he just couldnt kick it back into high gear.

[Gcver2ver3]

One thing to keep in mind... i remember reading somewhere that D-Line prospects have one of the largest bust rates in the draft. I'm a long way from getting up to speed on the draft, but i do know there is a ton of O-Line talent this year. Williams better be a stud, 'cause it looks like we could fill 2 spots on the o-line for about a decade.


this is why i say we go 3-4 like we almost did last year...

play to your strengths...ours is LB....it is just too risky spilling our load on a DE that could wind up being a bust....take a page from the Pats,Steelers, and Chargers...

copy cat league is what i say

[Popps]

Free agent options look like N.D. Kalu and John Abraham.

That's about it.

[DBroncos4life]

What happened to Kiwi? Before the season he was all the rage now everything i read mentions his lack of a motor and/or questions his love of the game... was it anything specific, or just amazing potential not producing enough results?
He was hurt alot this year, then that guy stomped on his knee. Right now they have him at a 4.6 40. Maybe that is off, I can't say for sure but if its right its what we need.

Pros: Amazing speed and good size for the position, is a pass rushing phenom and a quarterback's nightmare. Tons of potential.
Cons: Needs to add some weight and work on refining some parts of his game.
Draft Exchange Analysis:
All-America candidate...named to the Athlon Sports Preseason All-America first team...named to Lindy's Preseason All-America second team...named to the Nagurski Trophy Watch List, given annually to the top defensive player in college football...named to the 2003 All-Big East first team, the first BC sophomore to receive that honor since William Green in 2000...led the Big East in sacks in 2003 with 11.5...proudly displays a Ugandan flag in his dorm room as a reminder of his African heritage and in memory of his late grandfather, Benedicto Kiwanuka, who was elected Uganda's first prime minister in 1961 and assassinated in 1972 by Idi Amin...

2004 Season

Picked up three solos, three assists, team-best four TFLs for 24 yards, and two sacks for a combined 20 yards at Ball State...two solos, one assist, one TFL for seven yards and one sack for seven yards vs. Penn State...the Penn State game marked the 11th consecutive contest in which Kiwanuka had sacked the quarterback...three solos, two assists, one TFL for three yards, and one interception vs. Connecticut in the Eagles' BIG EAST opener...four solos, two assists at Wake Forest...four solos, one assist, four TFLs for 19 yards, and one sack vs. Massachusetts...

2003 Season

All-America candidate...named to the All-Big East first team, the first BC sophomore to receive that honor since William Green in 2000...led the Big East in sacks with 11.5...had a team-high 24 quarterback hurries on the year...was a 13-game starter at defensive end...four solos, one TFL vs. Wake Forest in season opener...three solos, one TFL, two QB hurries, two QB sacks, one fumble recovery, two knock downs vs. Penn State...five solos, two assists, one TFL, two QB hurries at Connecticut...had two solos, one assist, one TFL, and five QB hurries vs. Miami...led the Eagles against Ball State with seven tackles, also had one assist, one TFL, one half of a sack, three QB hurries...four solos, four assists, one QB hurry, one QB sack at Temple...six solos, two assists, one TFL, one QB sack, caused one fumble at Syracuse... three solos, one assist, one TFL, three QB hurries, two and a half sacks vs. Notre Dame...six solos, one assist, four QB hurries, one QB sack vs. Pittsburgh...five solos, four assists, one TFL, one QB sack vs. West Virginia...five solos, two assists, one TFL, one QB hurry, one half of a QB sack vs. Rutgers...had one sack and one TFL at Virginia Tech including four QB hurries...registered six tackles, including four solos...had a career-high nine tackles (four solos) and a sack in the Diamond Walnut San Francisco Bowl game...nicknamed "Kiwi"...he and offensive tackles James Marten and Jeremy Trueblood are the tallest Eagles at 6-8.

2002 Season

Five sacks on the year, second on the team...finished the season with 44 tackles (27 solos)...a bright young talent on the Eagle defensive line...started the first two games of the season for the injured Derric Rossy...responded with three solos, one assist, a sack, a TFL, a pass breakup and a QB hurry vs. Connecticut in his first collegiate game...two solos plus a forced fumble in the Stanford game...also had two pass deflections, two quarterback hurries, a forced fumble and a fumble recovery for a touchdown...four solos, two assists vs. Miami in the Orange Bowl...one solo, one assist, one QB sack vs. Virginia Tech...is one of two Cathedral High School graduates on the BC squad; schoolboy teammate Jeremy Trueblood is an offensive lineman...three solos, one assist and a quarterback hurry vs. Navy...two tackles, one pass knockdown vs. Pittsburgh...three tackles vs. Notre Dame...five tackles (three solos) vs. West Virginia...three tackles (two solos), 1 TFL (a quarterback sack) vs. Syracuse...four tackles, a quarterback sack and an interception vs. Temple...recovered a fumble and ran it in for a 49-yard touchdown vs. Rutgers in the regular-season finale.

2001 Season

Redshirted.

High School

Earned SuperPrep all-Midwest honors as a senior at Cathedral; gained all-Midwest accolades from Tom Lemming...garnered all-state and all-city honors in 2000...recorded 39 tackles, 11 tackles for loss and one pass breakup as a senior defensive end...registered 98 receiving yards as a tight end...helped lead Cathedral to back-to-back state 4A championships in 1998 and 1999; team had a 36-5 record in his three years...played for head coach Rick Streiff.

Personal

Mathias Kagimu Kiwanuka, born March 8, 1983...enrolled in the College of Arts & Sciences with a major in communications...proudly displays a Ugandan flag in his dorm room as a reminder of his African heritage and in memory of his late grandfather, Benedicto Kiwanuka, who was elected Uganda's first prime minister in 1961 and assassinated in 1972 by Idi Amin...Mathias is the youngest of Deodata and Emmanuel Kiwanuka's three children; has one brother and one sister.

[-Slap-]

this is why i say we go 3-4 like we almost did last year...

play to your strengths...ours is LB....it is just too risky spilling our load on a DE that could wind up being a bust....take a page from the Pats,Steelers, and Chargers...

copy cat league is what i say
You need at least a couple legitimately big LBs to play the kind of 3-4 those teams are playing. All of Pittsburgh's LBs are like 6'3", 240-250 pounds. We would get destroyed rolling the three guys we have right now out there in a 3-4. Do you realize how much more often 3-4 LBs have to shed blockers? Our trio of 6 foot nothings would get manhandled.

[Gcver2ver3]

You need at least a couple legitimately big LBs to play the kind of 3-4 those teams are playing. All of Pittsburgh's LBs are like 6'3", 240-250 pounds. We would get destroyed rolling the three guys we have right now out there in a 3-4. Do you realize how much more often 3-4 LBs have to shed blockers? Our trio of 6 foot nothings would get manhandled.


yeah we are undersized at LB....although i do think wilson and DJ could hold their own..but we'd still need 2 more and that ain't including depth....

i still say it's cheaper than scoring playmaking 4-3 d-linemen....

[DBroncos4life]

Hell maybe we could land Kiwi and Hali in the first. That wouldn't be that bad. Then maybe a guy like Mark Setterstrom and Jason Avant in the next two rounds.

[Gcver2ver3]

Hell maybe we could land Kiwi and Hali in the first. That wouldn't be that bad. Then maybe a guy like Mark Setterstrom and Jason Avant in the next two rounds.


i'm not familiar with the last two you named...who are they?

[DBroncos4life]

i'm not familiar with the last two you named...who are they?
http://www.nflfans.com/x/2006/showplayer.php?key=Mark%20Setterstrom
Minn runs our system.
http://www.nflfans.com/x/2006/showplayer.php?key=Jason%20Avant
Sounds like a Rod Smith to me.

[Gcver2ver3]

http://www.nflfans.com/x/2006/showplayer.php?key=Mark%20Setterstrom
Minn runs our system.
http://www.nflfans.com/x/2006/showplayer.php?key=Jason%20Avant
Sounds like a Rod Smith to me.


oh yeah i remember avant now....he's okay i guess...we seem to blow it drafting WR's..i say we pass on him and go FA for WR's

that setterstrom guy looks perfect for our system....i hope we get him...

thanks for the info!

[Popps]

For the love of everything holy... can we PLEASE lay off the CBs and WRs in the first few rounds, now?

We're backed up on CBs and Shanahan has had mediocre luck with drafting WRs, at best.

Go out and get a guy in FA who has shown some skills in an NFL offense.

[Gcver2ver3]

For the love of everything holy... can we PLEASE lay off the CBs and WRs in the first few rounds, now?

We're backed up on CBs and Shanahan has had mediocre luck with drafting WRs, at best.

Go out and get a guy in FA who has shown some skills in an NFL offense.


wow i can't believe i'm saying this but i agree with popps on this one....:saywhat:

[DBroncos4life]

For the love of everything holy... can we PLEASE lay off the CBs and WRs in the first few rounds, now?

We're backed up on CBs and Shanahan has had mediocre luck with drafting WRs, at best.

Go out and get a guy in FA who has shown some skills in an NFL offense.
At some point in time he is going to have to draft and develop a guy. We can't just keep picking up broken down vets that don't last through camp or keep using guys like Adams or Devoe as our 3 and 4 guys. Wayne is the only young guy out there really that is a FA. The rest are getting up there in age.

[maven]

Damn, it's a Mario Williams love-fest.

[broncobum6162]

Not just this game...but our entire season has proven this...

We are at or near the bottom in the NFL in sacks....but our D clearly plays with a dominating style....

Sacks usually occur when teams get a rush with four man front...the QB is caught by surprise because one of his lineman got beat...

Other sacks can occur from a delayed blitz by a LB or a DB blitzing fromn the blind side...again catching the QB by surprise

we play differently..

When we blitz...WE BLITZ!...the QB sees us crowding the line of scrimmage and prepares for the rush...only thing is it disrupts the play and leads to incomplete passes, short completions, or picks....we get no sacks because the QB sees us coming....but teams don't score!

This game was clear example....we've play Brady and the Pats twice this year...we didn't sack him once either time...but he got hit every snap...that's more important...disrupting the entire offense is better than an occasional sack...

We are just plain physical...Brady will have nightmares about us for years to come...he hates playing us over any team...GUARANTEED

So again...screw sacks....hurries and picks and fumbles are what keeps the offenses from scoring points....and wins games...(14-3 case in point)

Yup they are overrated, thats why we won against the Steelers and are playing in the Super Bowl. What a BS thread!

[toad]

I think this may have been pointed out but its no suprise that the 2 teams in the SuperBowl ranked #1 and #3 in sacks for the regular season (we were ranked #28) and #1 and #4 in sacks for the postseason (we were ranked #10 of 12).

Seattle: #1 in Regular Season, #4 in Postseason
Pittsburgh: #3 in Regular Season, #1 in Postseason
Denver: #28 in Regular Season, #10 (of 12) in Postseason

Remember that although we pestered Brady and knocked him around he still threw for 341 and a TD on us. His last INT, the one Lynch snared, was really a last hope heave so it shouldn't even count. Brady had a decent game on us considering how "hurried" he was.

Then Roethlisberger came to town and picked us apart. 21-29 for 275 yards, 2 TDs and no INTs. Part of that can obviously be chalked up to Foxworth's inexperience and Ferguson's weak coverage but still....21-29 for 275 and 2 TDs?

LB and secondary blitzes are good in their own right but a true threat on the DL is something different altogther.

Mario Williams is a man among boys. I'm a big NC State fan and have watched him tear it up for the past few years. Freakish atheletic ability -- 6'9 and 290 lbs with the athleticism of Julius Peppers and Jason Taylor. He's not all hype -- he backs it up.

NC States other DE, Manny Lawson, will also be available in the draft and will probably be a 2nd or 3rd rounder. A solid player in his own right, but not a physical freak like Williams.

[Gcver2ver3]

Yup they are overrated, thats why we won against the Steelers and are playing in the Super Bowl. What a BS thread!



dude shut up and go away....

many good points were made both ways...

if you don't like a thread then stay off of it...

[24champ]

One of these guys I would trade up for.....

Super Mario-

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/College_Football/724_Mario-Williams.JPG


Michael Huff

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/College_Football/14388_huff_8661.JPG

[broncobum6162]

dude shut up and go away....

many good points were made both ways...

if you don't like a thread then stay off of it...


Too much time wasted on what was obviously one of our major problems against Pittsburg.

[ludo21]

Too much time wasted on what was obviously one of our major problems against Pittsburg.


our major problem was not getting any pressure, not just not getting sacks.

And when we did blitz it was obvious that they were prepared for them each time and hit wilson on the put route every time.

[Gcver2ver3]

our major problem was not getting any pressure, not just not getting sacks.

And when we did blitz it was obvious that they were prepared for them each time and hit wilson on the put route every time.


gotta give it to them....steelers had a good game plan for us....they were prepared

[ludo21]

gotta give it to them....steelers had a good game plan for us....they were prepared


yep.....It might be a good thing for the future because now its a GLARINGLY obvious we need a new DL. Blitzing 7 guys each time worked 14 times, but when you play a team thats actually prepared and patient its a HUGE downfall.

[Gcver2ver3]

yep.....It might be a good thing for the future because now its a GLARINGLY obvious we need a new DL. Blitzing 7 guys each time worked 14 times, but when you play a team thats actually prepared and patient its a HUGE downfall.



good point ludo.....very true

[Popps]

At some point in time he is going to have to draft and develop a guy. We can't just keep picking up broken down vets that don't last through camp or keep using guys like Adams or Devoe as our 3 and 4 guys. Wayne is the only young guy out there really that is a FA. The rest are getting up there in age.

Moulds may shake loose. There is rumor that Keyshawn will be let go, particularly if they sign Owens. Owens is obviously out there if you want to gamble.

A few other guys include:

Aaron Moorehead RFA Colts
Andre' Davis UFA Patriots
Antonio Bryant UFA Browns
Antwaan Randle El UFA Steelers
Arnaz Battle RFA 49ers
Az-Zahir Hakim UFA Saints
Brad Pyatt RFA Colts
Brandon Lloyd RFA 49ers
Bryan Gilmore UFA Dolphins
Cedric James UFA Patriots
Charlie Adams RFA Broncos
Chris Horn RFA Chiefs
Corey Bradford UFA Texans
Cortez Hankton RFA Jaguars
Darnerian McCants UFA Eagles
David Boston UFA Dolphins
David Givens UFA Patriots
David Tyree RFA Giants
Derick Armstrong RFA Texans
Dez White UFA Falcons
Edell Shepherd RFA Buccaneers
Ike Hilliard UFA Buccaneers
J.J. Moses RFA Cardinals
Jabar Gaffney UFA Texans
Jason McAddley UFA 49ers
Jerheme Urban RFA Seahawks
Jerome Pathon UFA Falcons
Joe Jurevicius UFA Seahawks
Kassim Osgood RFA Chargers (aw man....)
Keenan McCardell UFA Chargers (already signed extension w/ SD. Correction. Thanks 'Roo.)
Kelley Washington RFA Bengals
Kendall Newson UFA Dolphins
Kevin Curtis RFA Rams
Kevin Johnson UFA Lions
Kevin Walter RFA Bengals
Koren Robinson UFA Vikings
Marc Boerigter UFA Chiefs
Michael Lewis UFA Saints
Nate Burleson RFA Vikings
Patrick Johnson UFA Ravens
Peerless Price UFA Cowboys
Peter Warrick UFA Seahawks
Quincy Morgan UFA Steelers
Randal Williams UFA Raiders
Reche Caldwell UFA Chargers
Reggie Swinton UFA Cardinals
Reggie Wayne UFA Colts
Rod Gardner UFA Panthers
Sam Aiken UFA Bills
Sean Morey UFA Steelers
Shaun McDonald RFA Rams
Tim Carter UFA Giants
Tim Dwight UFA Patriots
Troy Brown UFA Patriots
Troy Edwards UFA Lions
Troy Walters UFA Colts
Willie Ponder RFA Giants




Don't tell me there isn't anyone we can bring in. Don't waste another draft pick on one.