PDA

View Full Version : Uh oh, Terrel Owens in Denver...all thing TO merged


Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5

watermock
01-31-2006, 08:36 AM
no...we are not putting an existing trade on the table. This is preliminary talk for when he's released.

watermock
01-31-2006, 08:37 AM
Well i hit 50K the other day, now I hit 501 on the TO thread. "hangs head in shame"

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 08:37 AM
so did TO sign or not ?
No, he was in town and Shanahan talked with him but no deal yet.

Spider
01-31-2006, 08:38 AM
I dont know if TO would be good Idea or not , I am Sure Rod Smith would love the hell out of it , poor bastard hasnt seen single coverage since the late 90's .Having TO would help on protecting Jake , you would only leave TO uncovered once , TO would help the running game , Wont see 8 in the box ....... there is alot to think about getting a TO .....

Spider
01-31-2006, 08:39 AM
No, he was in town and Shanahan talked with him but no deal yet.
thanks ......

meangene
01-31-2006, 08:39 AM
So after 500 posts of going back and forth lets assume that Shanahan and company wants and plans on getting TO..........what is the compensation?

I would go no higher than a fifth.

Maybe a 4th since we have an extra just to keep him out of the free agent bidding war. But only if we can hammer out a deal on the contract that is backloaded with plenty of incentives.

Pick Six
01-31-2006, 08:40 AM
- We won a lot and played with the lead a lot which lead to garbage time passing yards against us as teams tried to play catch up.

This BOLSTERS my argument that the offense wasn't the problem. If we had a situation where we could never move the chains, then I'd say throw the farm at T.O. That was clearly not the case this year. I think we are VERY close to achieving our goal of the Super Bowl. Signing T.O. will force players to restructure their contract or some key players will lose their jobs needlessly.

Antilles
01-31-2006, 08:43 AM
So after 500 posts of going back and forth lets assume that Shanahan and company wants and plans on getting TO..........what is the compensation?

I would go no higher than a fifth.

With a 7.5 million dollar bonus due in March, the only way a trade happens is if TO and the Broncos are able to iron out a contract restructure in advance or the Eagles are willing (and permitted under league rules) to assume part or all of that bonus. Frankly, if this is going to happen and if it is permitted, the later may be the way to go since TO's base salary is low next year. Denver could then cut him or restructure once his base salary jumps.

Needa Pass Rush
01-31-2006, 08:44 AM
Owens, Broncos talking possible deal

BY BOB BROOKOVER
Philadelphia Inquirer
<!-- begin body-content -->DETROIT - Terrell Owens' last touchdown with the Eagles came against the Denver Broncos.
His next touchdown could well be for those same Broncos.
Multiple league sources said Monday night that Owens and his agent, Drew Rosenhaus, were in Denver discussing a potential deal with Broncos head coach Mike Shanahan and owner Pat Bowlen.
The Eagles gave Rosenhaus permission to work out a trade for Owens earlier this month, and Shanahan has let it be known that he is interested in the receiver, although Bowlen apparently was not as keen on the idea.
It's unlikely that the Eagles could get much more than a low draft pick for Owens, but that would suit them fine. Owens, of course, wore out his welcome midway through last season, and his contract dispute with the team reached its apex when he insulted the organization and quarterback Donovan McNabb during an interview with ESPN.com.
He played his final game with the Eagles Oct. 30 in Denver and scored a 91-yard touchdown after faking his way past cornerback Champ Bailey. His fateful interview took place three days later.
The Broncos are coming off a 13-3 season that came to a disappointing conclusion when they lost at home to the Pittsburgh Steelers in the AFC championship game.
Denver has a star receiver in Rod Smith, who has compiled more than 1,000 yards receiving in eight of the last nine seasons. The Broncos also have an above-average No. 2 receiver in Ashley Lelie, but their passing game overall ranked just 20th in the NFL. In addition, Smith will be 36 next season.
Owens, 32, proved in his first season with the Eagles that he is capable of helping a team reach the Super Bowl. He scored 14 touchdowns in as many games in 2004 before going down with a severe ankle sprain and broken leg, then making a heroic return in the Eagles' Super Bowl loss to New England.
But shortly after the Super Bowl, he fired agent David Joseph and hired Rosenhaus, signifying his dissatisfaction with the seven-year, $48.97 million contract he had signed with the Eagles before the 2004 season.
That triggered what eventually became a bitter divorce between T.O. and the Eagles. The last good memory the team had of Owens was in Denver, and now the Broncos are hoping they can extract some more Mile High happy memories from the controversial receiver.
<!-- end body-content -->

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/13750978.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 08:45 AM
I dont know if TO would be good Idea or not , I am Sure Rod Smith would love the hell out of it , poor bastard hasnt seen single coverage since the late 90's .Having TO would help on protecting Jake , you would only leave TO uncovered once , TO would help the running game , Wont see 8 in the box ....... there is alot to think about getting a TO .....

Yep, otherwise you would be seeing this going 91 on you.


http://images.nfl.com/u/photos/pl_177627.jpg

watermock
01-31-2006, 08:51 AM
We won't do anything till he's released in march. i'm fairly ambivalent...

I'm not giving him anything like 7 million and any draft pick...1 million and up to 5 million in incentives. For one year. And that's being kind.

He's worth 6 million if he can put in a pro bowl year and not raise a stink.

It's all in incentives tho.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 08:52 AM
sorry my friend, but there's no "ugghhh" from me.

in fact, i'd throw a frigging party.

up until that last game i mightve agreed with you, but watching us in 2 receiver sets when we're down 3 scores made me desperately want another solid target at wideout.

listening to a bunch of dumb fvcks blame plummer after the fact REALLY makes me want to get another target for him.

it would only be one year, but fact is, if we sign owens you'd have to like our chances to win it all.
jake has been fantastic with smith and lelie as his ONLY viable threats as wideouts (our 3rd and 4th wr's were amongst the worst. i like charlie, but he's no #3).
what do you suppose he could do with owens out there too?

he'd be friggin LETHAL. thats what he'd be.
we would be near unstoppable on offense (and we've already been top 5 since jake arrived), and our defense should be largely intact with further development from our young corners.

it would be one year with owens, but it could well be a superbowl year, so im all for it.
we have leaders on this team. TRUE leaders, and lots of them.
rod, jake, mike, wilson, pryce, lynch, bailey, and burns collectively is as good a leadership group as one could hope to have.
theyll keep owens under wraps long enough for us to win.

bring him in.
do it.

jake

Preach on brah!!! I'm all over this too. While Mike's on a roll he should go ahead and make the deal for Ricky too!!!

Miami in February 2007. I'll be there along with my Broncos!!!

watermock
01-31-2006, 08:54 AM
512 posts in less than 24 hours. How amusing.

toad
01-31-2006, 08:54 AM
I dont know if TO would be good Idea or not , I am Sure Rod Smith would love the hell out of it , poor bastard hasnt seen single coverage since the late 90's .Having TO would help on protecting Jake , you would only leave TO uncovered once , TO would help the running game , Wont see 8 in the box ....... there is alot to think about getting a TO .....

Exactly.

Rod moves to #2 and gets single coverage -- excellent for a wily possession reciever.

Lelie moves to #3/slot which actually may help him develop. Lots of "speed" players thrive in the #3/slot position.

With 2 or 3 legitimate downfield threats the running game gets opened up because defenses have to account for the WRs.

broncoholic
01-31-2006, 08:55 AM
Too much risk. We were one game away this year! If we went 6-10, then taking a risk with a TO might be warranted, but we were sooooooo close with the guys we have, I just don't see why we would take on such a challenge.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 08:59 AM
Here's what is funny about this whole thing. TO on the field is one of the best in the game... perhaps the best. He's just ignorant with his mouth. Kind of like a teenage kid that thinks he knows everything. He reminds me ALOT of Todd Sauerbrun. He reminds a little of G-Money too... except his history includes making plays on the field. The point is, TO will likely get the low down like both G-Money and Todd S. Be yourself, talk it up on the field, play your pranks with the guys... STAY AWAY FROM THE MEDIA. We'll have a contract that protects us from TO acting up. What's not to like? Chemistry? Chemistry is what you get when you're winning. Everybody haves fun and loves one and other when the going is good. Chemistry isn't an issue until you start rebuilding, we're not in the rebuilding phase and won't be as long as Shanny is around.

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 08:59 AM
Where's that pic with TO in the Broncos uni?



http://www.sportsfan.com/dimages/faceoffs/terrell-owens.jpg



http://www.cnnsi.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/2005/07/05/tielemans/gallery3.jpg

Spider
01-31-2006, 09:00 AM
the only downside I can see is the $$$$, lockeroom cancer .....if that is even an issue ,This team came damn close to winning it all ,Fox and Williams should be better this next season ....So far I think T.O. would be a solid pick up

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:01 AM
a rookie in preseason? ... does that count?

Pretty sure he did the same thing in the Eagles game.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 09:01 AM
Too much risk. We were one game away this year! If we went 6-10, then taking a risk with a TO might be warranted, but we were sooooooo close with the guys we have, I just don't see why we would take on such a challenge.


One game away this year... add TO to this team and I'm willing to bet we don't lose either of the games against the Giants or Chefs. Add TO to this team and you have a legit quick score threat. Adding TO to your team increases your points per game by atleast 3. Recently it's been even more than that.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:03 AM
I honestly don’t know what to think.

Sure his talent his incredible and the impact he will have will be tremendous, but the risk is HUGE!! Will he cause another situation similar to Philly and San Fran or will he keep his mouth shut?

Man…Shanny must really want to improve the offense. I would rather have Moulds and a better RB IMO.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 09:05 AM
Here's what is funny about this whole thing. TO on the field is one of the best in the game... perhaps the best. He's just ignorant with his mouth. Kind of like a teenage kid that thinks he knows everything. He reminds me ALOT of Todd Sauerbrun. He reminds a little of G-Money too... except his history includes making plays on the field. The point is, TO will likely get the low down like both G-Money and Todd S. Be yourself, talk it up on the field, play your pranks with the guys... STAY AWAY FROM THE MEDIA. We'll have a contract that protects us from TO acting up. What's not to like? Chemistry? Chemistry is what you get when you're winning. Everybody haves fun and loves one and other when the going is good. Chemistry isn't an issue until you start rebuilding, we're not in the rebuilding phase and won't be as long as Shanny is around.

Todd Sauerbruan ever criticize a potential hall of fame QB (McNabb)

did Sauerbruan ever kill 2 franchies?

this deal reeks, totally, TO is a cancer that slowly kills a team from the inside

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 09:06 AM
Where's that pic with TO in the Broncos uni?



http://www.sportsfan.com/dimages/faceoffs/terrell-owens.jpg



http://www.cnnsi.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/2005/07/05/tielemans/gallery3.jpg

hopefully we never, ever see that

He would kill our franchise for at least 2 years after he left

he is a soul sucking force that kills a team slowly

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 09:06 AM
Todd Sauerbruan ever criticize a potential hall of fame QB (McNabb)

did Sauerbruan ever kill 2 franchies?

this deal reeks, totally, TO is a cancer that slowly kills a team from the inside

Are you one of the future ex-Bronco fans if we sign him?

hopefully we never, ever see that


Someone posted it a few months ago, anyone still have that pic of TO in a Bronco uni?

I can't wait to see the change of the tune around here after he puts on the orange and blue.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 09:10 AM
With a 7.5 million dollar bonus due in March, the only way a trade happens is if TO and the Broncos are able to iron out a contract restructure in advance or the Eagles are willing (and permitted under league rules) to assume part or all of that bonus. Frankly, if this is going to happen and if it is permitted, the later may be the way to go since TO's base salary is low next year. Denver could then cut him or restructure once his base salary jumps.

The paper this a.m. indicated that a new deal would be heavily incentive-laden and backloaded. However, the viability of that that hinges to some extent on the collective bargaining agreement (in which Bowlen is heading up the negotiations.) If the agreement falls through, such a deal could be very risky. Chances are that nothing official will happen until those negotiations are completed.

More indications that the parties are serious:

John Lynch, who previously criticized Owens, is now backing off, stating that he will refrain from further comment for the time being.

Count Tatum Bell among those who is in support of the deal.

Local radio reported that Rosenhaus made a comment to local reporters, after the meeting, that they might be meeting again soon.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 09:12 AM
Are you one of the future ex-Bronco fans if we sign him?



Someone posted it a few months ago, anyone still have that pic of TO in a Bronco uni?

I can't wait to see the change of the tune around here after he puts on the orange and blue.

I'll always be a Bronco fan

but I'm telling you, he may be ok for a few months, but eventually, a guy with a chemical imbalance like TO can't keep his mouth shut and then the media circus will begin and then the team will spiral downwards and by 2008 we will be a 5-11 team b/c he will rot out the core of our team, he is that bad

look at San Fran and the Eagles for examples if you must, based on the evidence on his career, this guy kills teams with his antics

I'll cheer for him when he is playing, but I'll know that if Denver signs him, it will eventually be this teams downfall to multiple losing seasons

watermock
01-31-2006, 09:14 AM
Someone posted it a few months ago,

It's just seems like a few months...it was less than 24 hours

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 09:14 AM
I'd only sign him for a year deal....

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 09:16 AM
Like athletes know what's good for them.

I can't wait to see Nails and Burnsie chiming in after TO's first meltdown. You know what? Those guys won't have anything to say to reporters when that happens. Or they'll stand there with the same stupid look on their faces TO's Eagles teammates had, while they mumble something about hoping everything works out.

The thing your missing Slap is that no one heard a negative peep out of TO his first season in Philly till after the Super Bowl. Why? He wanted to prove that his rep in SF was overblown, probably for his own selfish reasons, but I think he will be equaly motivated to do the same here, at least for a season. The key to me is what kind of contract he is operating under. If we give him much of a bonus, I will be leary. But if we give him a deal tied to incentives then I'm all for it. Then we can release him if he opens his big mouth, and there really wouldn't be any downside in this senario. Either he keeps his mouth shut and we benefit from his undeniable talent, or he runs his mouth and we kick him to the curb. Under these terms, it's worth a roll of the dice.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:20 AM
Adam Schefter reported that the Broncos are unlikely to give the Eagles any trade compensation for Owens, which directly contradicts a Denver Post article. I'll believe Schefter.

In the same Denver Post article it said that we would go after Ricky Williams, but would only bring in Ricky or TO and not both.

Obviously Ricky would cost a higher draft pick if we indeed trade for him, but TO's contact would be higher.

So which cancer causing agent do you want as it appears we are going to get one of them.

Going to be an interesting offseason. Unlike last year it appears that we are going to be proactive.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 09:21 AM
Adam Schefter reported that the Broncos are unlikely to give the Eagles any trade compensation for Owens, which directly contradicts a Denver Post article. I'll believe Schefter.

In the same Denver Post article it said that we would go after Ricky Williams, but would only bring in Ricky or TO and not both.

Obviously Ricky would cost a higher draft pick if we indeed trade for him, but TO's contact would be higher.

So which cancer causing agent do you want as it appears we are going to get one of them.

can I go with option C

neither?

you would've thought Shanny learned after Dale Carter and IHOP

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 09:23 AM
can I go with option C

neither?

you would've thought Shanny learned after Dale Carter and IHOP


he didn't...he drafted Slo MoC

ND Bronco Fan
01-31-2006, 09:24 AM
Not to call anyone out but...................

Can we please stop using the term cancer in regards to players and their attitudes, has anyone lost a family member to that disease? Hearing the word brings back many bad memories and is not a term to be used as loosely as it is thrown around.

toad
01-31-2006, 09:25 AM
Too much risk. We were one game away this year! If we went 6-10, then taking a risk with a TO might be warranted, but we were sooooooo close with the guys we have, I just don't see why we would take on such a challenge.

But that's the point -- 1 game away but we need something, like a huge playmaker, to get us over the hump.

Let's face it: Jake is likely never going to win head-to-head shootouts against the likes of Manning, Brady, Roethlisberger, etc with a 36 year old possession reciever and an underacheiving and one-dimensional #2. And winning those shootouts is what its going to take to stay among the elite in the AFC.

Perhaps TO is what we need to go from being "one game away" to being "there."

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:29 AM
BTW…Shanny’s contract is up in two years and he has said before that he will only coach up to his contract. This may be his last ditch effort to get another SB victory here.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 09:37 AM
can I go with option C

neither?

you would've thought Shanny learned after Dale Carter and IHOP


Let me clarify real quick. I want TO in Orange N' Blue. I know that there are risks. Those risks are high. I also realize that the reward is very high. TO in Denver automatically puts us as favorites to go to the SB in 07.

Shanny drew busts with IHOP and Dale Carter, but he's also done pretty well with guys like Chester, G-Money, and Sourbunz.

TO could very well prove to be a big time problem in Denver. But, given the circumstances, I think it's safe to say that he'll be a class act for atleast a year or two and so long as we're winning he'll be happy, the team will be happy, and we fans will be HAPPY! We've won 34 games in the last 3 years. A little better than 11 wins per season. I think it's safe to say that we will win more than we lose. That gives me faith.

The only concern I have is TO's touches. Rod had something like 150 passes thrown his way this year. I want to say TO had more than 100 in the 6 or 7 games he played this year. I'm concerned that TO will be double covered and Jake will look away from him (which he should!) and TO will cry about getting the ball. If Shanny can find a way to combat this key problem area then I think we'll be okay.

DrFate
01-31-2006, 09:40 AM
People need to realize that if TO ****s up with his next team, he's out of the league. No one's going to give him a chance if he can't get along with Reid and Shanahan, two of the best coaches in the league and loved by most of their players.

I simply don't buy the argument that Owens is going to become a boy scout simply because he has moved on to another team (whether it is Dallas, Miami, Tampa, or Denver). He got his wish when the 49ers traded him - and he complained. He got his wish when he Baltimore sent him to Philly - HIS HAND-PICKED TEAM - and he complained. He got his wish when he got a mega-contract - and he cried about that too.

He will move on - and somebody will regret taking him. He is the Kobe Bryant of the NFL. Flashy moves make great SportsCenter highlights, but he causes the team to implode because he wants the attention.

If we get him (and I am thinking now that we will) I'll root for the guy - but it is 5-1 that it won't last.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:40 AM
He was winning in Philly yet still causing problems Bman. I don't beleive that argument.

I think that should be one of the things Shanny and them should discuss...what will he do if Rod, Lelie, Putzier, or whoever gets more looks/touches then him if he is constantly double covered. We don't exactly have the best QB in the world at threading the needle.

-Slap-
01-31-2006, 09:44 AM
The thing your missing Slap is that no one heard a negative peep out of TO his first season in Philly till after the Super Bowl. Why? He wanted to prove that his rep in SF was overblown, probably for his own selfish reasons, but I think he will be equaly motivated to do the same here, at least for a season. The key to me is what kind of contract he is operating under. If we give him much of a bonus, I will be leary. But if we give him a deal tied to incentives then I'm all for it. Then we can release him if he opens his big mouth, and there really wouldn't be any downside in this senario. Either he keeps his mouth shut and we benefit from his undeniable talent, or he runs his mouth and we kick him to the curb. Under these terms, it's worth a roll of the dice.

An incentive laden deal might be a rational idea, if we were talking about a rational individual. Are you going to tie it to receptions/yardage/touchdowns? If so, you can expect to hear bitching about Plummer, Dennison and the scheme. Are you going to tie it to games played? What if he gets hurt? What if he decides to start faking injuries like he did in Philly?

Rascal
01-31-2006, 09:46 AM
I would tie it to the amount of times he complains, talks to the media, or fails to give 100%. If he doesn't talk to the media, complain, or put out the effort he will get x amount, each time he does it is reduced by y%.

And I would make it a 1-2 year deal.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 09:52 AM
An incentive laden deal might be a rational idea, if we were talking about a rational individual. Are you going to tie it to receptions/yardage/touchdowns? If so, you can expect to hear b****ing about Plummer, Dennison and the scheme. Are you going to tie it to games played? What if he gets hurt? What if he decides to start faking injuries like he did in Philly?

Then, if it's an incentive laden contract, you kick him to the curb and move on. That's the thing: under this senario he will have ample motivation to keep his mouth shut, because if he doesn't, he won't get paid. If he acts up, we have no fiscal hindrences from ridding ourselves of him. Where is the downside under this senario?

toad
01-31-2006, 09:52 AM
In Jake's defense he was pretty productive with David "TO Lite" Boston.

Boston is a very cantankerous character himself but his best years were with Jake.

1). Jake has to like big, physical recievers because they can win the battles and catch off-target balls. TO makes catches Lelie, Adams, Devoe simply can't make.

2). Jake has the perfect "couldn't care less" attitude to deal with a guy like TO. Jake's also pretty low profile and somewhat eccentric himself....not an "NFL poster boy" like McNabb.

To me the rewards outweight the risks.

BMF Bronco
01-31-2006, 09:57 AM
Love It!!!!!!!!!

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 09:58 AM
Let me clarify real quick. I want TO in Orange N' Blue. I know that their are risks. Those risks are high. I also realize that the reward is very high. TO in Denver automatically puts us as favorites to go to the SB in 07.

Shanny drew busts with IHOP and Dale Carter, but he's also done pretty well with guys like Chester, G-Money, and Sourbunz.

TO could very well prove to be a big time problem in Denver. But, given the circumstances, I think it's safe to say that he'll be a class act for atleast a year or two and so long as we're winning he'll be happy, the team will be happy, and we fans will be HAPPY! We've won 34 games in the last 3 years. A little better than 11 wins per season. I think it's safe to say that we will win more than we lose. That gives me faith.

The only concern I have is TO's touches. Rod had something like 150 passes thrown his way this year. I want to say TO had more than 100 in the 6 or 7 games he played this year. I'm concerned that TO will be double covered and Jake will look away from him (which he should!) and TO will cry about getting the ball. If Shanny can find a way to combat this key problem area then I think we'll be okay.

there is the problem bman

he bitches about his touches constantly, you can't keep this man happy, period, end of story

he plays hard, but if he doesn't get looked at 10 times a game, he starts pouting and that isn't a team first attitude we need on this team

Al Wilson
01-31-2006, 10:04 AM
What makes you think Shanahan isn't going to get T.O. ? The dude drafted Maurice Clarette:spit:

Get T.O. here

fontaine
01-31-2006, 10:09 AM
The level of denial on this thread is a palpable thing, isn't it? The Eagles went to three straight Conference Championship Games without TO. I think you need strong leaders to accomplish something like that. If guys like Reid, McNabb, Dawkins and Trotter couldn't keep him in line, its sheer lunacy to think our lockerroom is any different.

Does anybody remember the way TO treated Eagles OC Brad Childress last year? Here's a coach with so much presence that he was named the new head coach of the Vikings last month. TO refused to speak to him and demonstrated a threatening demeanor when Childress tried to communicate with him. Sounds like a rational guy to me.


For perhaps the first and last time I hope Drew will be Drew.

Which is to say he'll lie, cheat, steal, beg and do just about anything to drive up the price up for TO so much so that he'll be out of range for the Broncos. All we need is one more team to be stupid enough to flirt with this a$$clown for Drew to show his greed.

That's probably our best shot at avoiding certain disaster.

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 10:19 AM
this was from november:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/drew/111005drew.gif

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 10:23 AM
Shanny says he has personal interviews with malcontents and makes his own evaluation instead of listening to the media. Personally I would love TO to come to Denver on an incentive deal. He's the best WR in the game and would upgrade O instantly.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 10:25 AM
And here some of us thought this was going to be a boring off-season.

Rock Chalk
01-31-2006, 10:25 AM
Count me in the group against T.O. but not for any of the reason's why everyone here doesn't want him.

We do not run an offense that is capable of utilizing TOs strengths to the maximum efficiency. This in turn, is going to cause trouble on TOs end.

Jake is Jake and I think we all know that he is never going to be the most accurate passer and the moment TO gets a pass thats off the mark, he is going to be bitching at Plummer.

The money that we spend on TO (which will be incentive laden but he will get his money in it) would be better spent on a true Pass rushing DE. Look, our offense puts up over 20 points a game, its NOT THE PROBLEM. Our defense is fantastic save for ONE aspect and thats the pass rushing ends. We have none. Pryce is a shell of what he used to be and disappears entirely in big games. Brown is great at run stopping but his ability to get to the QB is not there.

TO will not help our defense. I understand all the arguments for him coming here and I agree he could put up an extra 70 points on the board yearly, but what does that matter if we can't stop the opposite team from marching down the field. Sure, we did well this year, we only lost 4 games, but in the last game it was blatantly obvious where our biggest weakness is and thats the defensive line.

El Guapo
01-31-2006, 10:26 AM
I dont know why you guys have your panties in a bunch over this. Yeah, TO has been bad news.. Yeah, TO is a GREAT WR... Yeah, our guys are a strong cohesive group in the locker room... Yeah, we need help at WR.. Yeah, Shanny can be trusted in his decisions. = good decision to get him.

Chances are we'll spend a high draft choice on the guy in a trade to the eagles, so that'll leave us some cap room for other guys. AND if we can bring in a couple of defensive rook's like we did this year, then we will be more than fit for a run to the SB.

I think it'll work out just fine. stop pouting over something that will HELP our team.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 10:26 AM
Shanny says he has personal interviews with malcontents and makes his own evaluation instead of listening to the media. Personally I would love TO to come to Denver on an incentive deal. He's the best WR in the game and would upgrade O instantly.

again

how you get around the fact that he criticized one of the best QBs playing right now on almost a daily basis

now what in the world do you think he'll say about Jake?

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 10:27 AM
I dont know why you guys have your panties in a bunch over this. Yeah, TO has been bad news.. Yeah, TO is a GREAT WR... Yeah, our guys are a strong cohesive group in the locker room... Yeah, we need help at WR.. Yeah, Shanny can be trusted in his decisions.

I think it'll work out just fine. stop pouting over something that will HELP our team.

I tend to say, a player rotting a team from the inside out is generally a bad thing

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 10:27 AM
Rod Smith is lethal in the slot, Lelie is great vs Single cover! The putz can run around unabaited, Terrell takes the safety out of the box vs the run, he changes everything for our offense, now, lynch, wilson, jake, rod, and CHAMP have to have a come to jesus meeting with him, and if and only if he signs on is he welcome, I personally think T.O. learned a great deal by not having football in his life the last 4 months, whoever gets him gets a motivated and sharp T.O. This is classic Shanny move and you know Bowlen has given his blessing either way! How exciting for the Broncos!

Very true this would help the team...

things to ponder.

1. who do we lose as a player if we trade for Owens.

2. Who do we lose because of money spent on owens . Nailen ,Lepisis,Pryce, Warren,Smith, Liele or Putz .

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 10:32 AM
again

how you get around the fact that he criticized one of the best QBs playing right now on almost a daily basis

now what in the world do you think he'll say about Jake?

you know I have hear that until I am blue in the face . realy all he said was mchease burger needed to lighten up ...well maybe he did need to lean up:thumbs:

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 10:35 AM
again

how you get around the fact that he criticized one of the best QBs playing right now on almost a daily basis

now what in the world do you think he'll say about Jake?
Again? THis is the first post I've made on the subject but anyway, people must realize he is going to get a contract that the team that gets him can get out of. It's not like the Broncos are going to give him a 20 million dollar signing bonus. TO is going to have a huge year and will try to prove himself because his time to make big money is running out.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 10:38 AM
The money that we spend on TO (which will be incentive laden but he will get his money in it) would be better spent on a true Pass rushing DE. .
I agree here but who are you planning on signing, these players seldom hit FA market and cost too much in a trade.

bendog
01-31-2006, 10:39 AM
Very true this would help the team...

things to ponder.

1. who do we lose as a player if we trade for Owens.

2. Who do we lose because of money spent on owens . Nailen ,Lepisis,Pryce, Warren,Smith, Liele or Putz .

I wonder too. I don't know what the iggles think they can get for him. They have to cut him anyway. Assuming Den got him, and then used it's two no 1 pics to get a DE pass rush, could we still keep Smith, Lelie, Warren and Lepsis? I think nalen and pryce are history in any case. Add TO, and Smith and Lelie, then they're gonna have to go 3 wide, and putz is expendable.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 10:45 AM
Count me in the group against T.O. but not for any of the reason's why everyone here doesn't want him.

We do not run an offense that is capable of utilizing TOs strengths to the maximum efficiency. This in turn, is going to cause trouble on TOs end.

Jake is Jake and I think we all know that he is never going to be the most accurate passer and the moment TO gets a pass thats off the mark, he is going to be b****ing at Plummer.

The money that we spend on TO (which will be incentive laden but he will get his money in it) would be better spent on a true Pass rushing DE. Look, our offense puts up over 20 points a game, its NOT THE PROBLEM. Our defense is fantastic save for ONE aspect and thats the pass rushing ends. We have none. Pryce is a shell of what he used to be and disappears entirely in big games. Brown is great at run stopping but his ability to get to the QB is not there.

TO will not help our defense. I understand all the arguments for him coming here and I agree he could put up an extra 70 points on the board yearly, but what does that matter if we can't stop the opposite team from marching down the field. Sure, we did well this year, we only lost 4 games, but in the last game it was blatantly obvious where our biggest weakness is and thats the defensive line.


Here you are bashing the O b/c we wouldn't/couldn't use TO's strengths, but you want a top notch pass rushing DE when that goes against the scheme we run on defense. If we were to turn the DE's loose and tell them to go after the QB first rather than occupy blockers so that our LB's are free to attack the RB then I'd be all for it. I know Trevor Pryce is no Michael Strahan, but he's certainly better at getting to the QB than his 4 sacks indicate! Coyer said it himself when we played the Chefs the first time. I turned them loose. Trevor Pryce was in Trent's face and really couldn't be blocked. The problem isn't with the DE's, its the scheme!

orangenblue
01-31-2006, 10:47 AM
Acquiring Owens would be a mistake. You can't wave a magic wand and turn him in to somthing he's not. The guy is selfish period... We don't need him to win.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 10:48 AM
Here you are bashing the O b/c we wouldn't/couldn't use TO's strengths, but you want a top notch pass rushing DE when that goes against the scheme we run on defense. If we were to turn the DE's loose and tell them to go after the QB first rather than occupy blockers so that our LB's are free to attack the RB then I'd be all for it. I know Trevor Pryce is no Michael Strahan, but he's certainly better at getting to the QB than his 4 sacks indicate! Coyer said it himself when we played the Chefs the first time. I turned them loose. Trevor Pryce was in Trent's face and really couldn't be blocked. The problem isn't with the DE's, its the scheme!
I couldn't disagree more

Pryce hasn't had a good year in 4 years
Brown is over-rated
Ekuban is a run stopper

we have no pass rushing Dends

ludo21
01-31-2006, 10:50 AM
Here you are bashing the O b/c we wouldn't/couldn't use TO's strengths, but you want a top notch pass rushing DE when that goes against the scheme we run on defense. If we were to turn the DE's loose and tell them to go after the QB first rather than occupy blockers so that our LB's are free to attack the RB then I'd be all for it. I know Trevor Pryce is no Michael Strahan, but he's certainly better at getting to the QB than his 4 sacks indicate! Coyer said it himself when we played the Chefs the first time. I turned them loose. Trevor Pryce was in Trent's face and really couldn't be blocked. The problem isn't with the DE's, its the scheme!


The Chiefs game is the only time Pryce showed up all season. So when we are only rushing 4 ona passing down the scheme is to let the QB have all day jus to protect against him running? Ha!

I agree that when we blitz the DL job is to take up the OL so the LB can get in, but when they are asked to get to the QB by themselves, they SUCK!

We need some new talent in here, guys who have a motor and drive to get to the QB.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 10:52 AM
TO brings instant big play ability. With TO our game plan changes drastically. With a target like TO you will see a competely different offense. And, if we were to get down by 10 it wouldn't be a lost cause. There's things to not like, but TO is an upgrade and would instantly make us the favorites to win the SB.

People want to point out that the Niners and Eagles both suck now b/c of TO. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Niners would suck either way right about now. How can you blame TO for injuries to Donovan and Westbrook? How can you blame TO for the Eagles sending their best DL packing? Can't say that it was cap room b/c they sat on close to 20 mil and still sent Corey Simon packing!

TO causes problems, but to think that he's the reason the Niners and Eagles both had losing records this year..... Pure Hatred.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 10:55 AM
The Chiefs game is the only time Pryce showed up all season. So when we are only rushing 4 ona passing down the scheme is to let the QB have all day jus to protect against him running? Ha!

I agree that when we blitz the DL job is to take up the OL so the LB can get in, but when they are asked to get to the QB by themselves, they SUCK!

We need some new talent in here, guys who have a motor and drive to get to the QB.


When we are only rushing 4 the first job for our DE's is to play the run. Very rarely are they asked to penetrate. Ekuban had 8 or 9 sacks for a horrible defense in Cleveland. I guess he all of the sudden decided to be a run stuffing DE instead of a pass rusher?

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 11:04 AM
I tend to say, a player rotting a team from the inside out is generally a bad thing

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment...

Was Owens really the cause of the 49ers deterioration? Or was that simply a matter of salary cap hell? And while it's true that he made life miserable for Mooch, a very similar thing happened to Mooch in Detroit. Maybe Mooch's touchie-feelie coaching style had a little something to do with it.

Did the Eagles really fall apart because of Owens this year? Arguably, the more probable reason for their demise was all the injuries: McNabb, Thomas, Short, Sheppard, Westbrook, Pinkston, Grasmanis, Herremans, Fraley, Consadine, Buckhalter & Johnson all went to I/R at some point, and guys like Kearse, Lewis, Akers, Trotter and Walker seemed like they were on the questionable or doubtful lists more weeks than not. Toss in the fact that they had tougher competition in their division from the Giants and the Redskins, as well as a tough schedule vs. the AFC West.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 11:04 AM
When we are only rushing 4 the first job for our DE's is to play the run. Very rarely are they asked to penetrate. Ekuban had 8 or 9 sacks for a horrible defense in Cleveland. I guess he all of the sudden decided to be a run stuffing DE instead of a pass rusher?

so in the pittsburgh game when it was 3rd and 10, you are saying the Dends weren't told to rush the passer, but to protect for the run?

b.s.

watermock
01-31-2006, 11:07 AM
I should of been a QB...I just casually tossed a carton of cools a full 10 feet into a shelf...there was a beer can on the shelf and it was a miracle toss...

onto the deviled ham...mmmmmmmm.......ham.....

watermock
01-31-2006, 11:09 AM
so in the pittsburgh game when it was 3rd and 10, you are saying the Dends weren't told to rush the passer, but to protect for the run?

b.s.

I feel like Lot, Jesus and Mussulini combined...

We let them have 10 of 16 3rd down conversions...

"tears off clothes and runs naked in the great white north like a crazed man....which is accurate...."

fontaine
01-31-2006, 11:11 AM
I'd rather have TO lite in Eric Moulds or Antonio Bryant.

Half the flavor, but with same great freshness.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:17 AM
With a 7.5 million dollar bonus due in March, the only way a trade happens is if TO and the Broncos are able to iron out a contract restructure in advance or the Eagles are willing (and permitted under league rules) to assume part or all of that bonus. Frankly, if this is going to happen and if it is permitted, the later may be the way to go since TO's base salary is low next year. Denver could then cut him or restructure once his base salary jumps.

Cannot discuss contract figures with a player currently under contract with another team

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:19 AM
look at San Fran and the Eagles for examples if you must, based on the evidence on his career, this guy kills teams with his antics


The 49ers' total ineptitude when it came to managing the cap killed them

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 11:19 AM
Cannot discuss contract figures with a player currently under contract with another team

who can't? Shanny with the media or Shanny and TO's agent even after the eagles granted them permission to seek a trade?

fontaine
01-31-2006, 11:19 AM
Cannot discuss contract figures with a player currently under contract with another team


The merest hint of foreplay and it's a 23 page thread.

But we don't need TO, Lelie is a great WR.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 11:20 AM
Cannot discuss contract figures with a player currently under contract with another team

Can't that be waived if the team that owns the right to the player gives its consent?

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 11:22 AM
Can't that be waived if the team that owns the right to the player gives its consent?

I'm pretty sure it can since the eagles gave him permission to seek a trade

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:23 AM
who can't? Shanny with the media or Shanny and TO's agent even after the eagles granted them permission to seek a trade?

Shanny cannot negotiate with TO about a new deal until he is a Bronco, even if the Eagles have given him permission to seek a trade. Until a trade is complete, TO is still under contract with the Eagles. It's tampering. We went through this 3 years ago with Griese and Denver's inability to trade him because teams wouldn't take on that contract, and 2 years ago when Portis had to wait until he was officially a Skin before he could hammer out a new deal with Snyder.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:24 AM
Can't that be waived if the team that owns the right to the player gives its consent?

Unless the League has changed the rules within the past year, no.

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 11:25 AM
Shanny cannot negotiate with TO about a new deal until he is a Bronco, even if the Eagles have given him permission to seek a trade. Until a trade is complete, TO is still under contract with the Eagles. It's tampering. We went through this 3 years ago with Griese and Denver's inability to trade him because teams wouldn't take on that contract, and 2 years ago when Portis had to wait until he was officially a Skin before he could hammer out a new deal with Snyder.

ahhh..thanks bro

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:26 AM
ahhh..thanks bro

Yeah, dumb rule since they're already allowing the guy to shop himself around. Might help facilitate more trades if they can talk numbers at the same time.

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 11:28 AM
Yeah, dumb rule since they're already allowing the guy to shop himself around. Might help facilitate more trades if they can talk numbers at the same time.

I wonder if that's something the players union would be interested in for the new CBA?

dakranker
01-31-2006, 11:38 AM
Shanny cannot negotiate with TO about a new deal until he is a Bronco, even if the Eagles have given him permission to seek a trade. Until a trade is complete, TO is still under contract with the Eagles. It's tampering. We went through this 3 years ago with Griese and Denver's inability to trade him because teams wouldn't take on that contract, and 2 years ago when Portis had to wait until he was officially a Skin before he could hammer out a new deal with Snyder.

Porris had a contract before we made the trade.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:41 AM
Porris had a contract before we made the trade.

A contract? Yes, he was still under contract with the Broncos when the trade was made. With the Skins? No he didn't. In fact some people here freaked out (SoCal I'm pointing to you;D ), when rumors started to surface that the Skins were going to flip Portis to the Pats immediately after they acquired him. If he had a deal in place, that wouldn't have happened.

dakranker
01-31-2006, 11:42 AM
A contract? Yes, he was still under contract with the Broncos when the trade was made. With the Skins? No he didn't. In fact some people here freaked out (SoCal I'm pointing to you;D ), when rumors started to surface that the Skins were going to flip Portis to the Pats immediately after they acquired him. If he had a deal in place, that wouldn't have happened.

yes he did.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/football/nfl/02/24/redskins.broncos/

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/WAS/7139035

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:47 AM
Then I stand corrected

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 11:48 AM
Certainly, the agent is free to discuss T.O. with teams and find out what they would be willing to pay him. That might be the biggest benefit of the Eagles' granting permission.

http://tinyurl.com/cc7gc

RMT
01-31-2006, 11:52 AM
The merest hint of foreplay and it's a 23 page thread.

But we don't need TO, Lelie is a great WR.

Lelie is NOT TO "great," though ... of course, he's not TO "basket base" either.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2006, 11:53 AM
http://tinyurl.com/cc7gc

Next time provide context with your quote

Asked about interest in Owens yesterday, Tampa Bay coach Jon Gruden replied: "He's under contract. It's tampering to even to discuss his situation. So, I wouldn't even go there and try to respond."

Actually, now that Rosenhaus has permission to seek a trade, it's unikely a team would be charged with tampering. Certainly, the agent is free to discuss T.O. with teams and find out what they would be willing to pay him. That might be the biggest benefit of the Eagles' granting permission.


The entire final paragraph is the writer's opinion.

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 12:04 PM
so in the pittsburgh game when it was 3rd and 10, you are saying the Dends weren't told to rush the passer, but to protect for the run?

b.s.

No, not at all! I'm saying that in that particular scenario they were asked to occupy the OL so that our blitzes would be effective. If you can stomach watching the game again go back and look. Bullrushes right into the OL everytime, everybody trying to collapse in so that the Blitz from the outside would be free.

bendog
01-31-2006, 12:06 PM
http://tinyurl.com/cc7gc
nice link. And in addition to waht it says, any team signing TO will not want to get his old contract with him. A team would really need to have incentive/performance clauses so that any suspension would cost him big bucks.

jonny1
01-31-2006, 12:10 PM
I think it is WAY too early to be getting excited or concerned about this.

One constant you hear from Shanahan is, "We are going to look at every opportunity to make the team better." Well, he wouldn't be following that philosophy if he didn't look into TO's situation. Now he can say that they talked to him.

I just don't see it happening, with everything Shanahan has said about what a pleasure this year was coaching because of the character of the team.

bronco militia
01-31-2006, 12:14 PM
found this at the end of an article from NFL.com

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/DEN/9197892

But for some compensation in a trade, a team could get the rights to Owens, then negotiate a new deal with him while he's still under his old contract.

watermock
01-31-2006, 12:14 PM
What can you say? I think they shook and will wait for his release...we can't give him a 7 million bonus...

I can guarantee you there will be no trade.

Watching Dr.Drew sniffing his ass while he loses clients left and right is amusing.

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 12:15 PM
Next time provide context with your quote

The entire final paragraph is the writer's opinion.

And the another post here shows you that contracts are negotiated before trades are made so why is it only his "opinion"?

Boobs McGee
01-31-2006, 12:29 PM
theoretically speaking, IF we decide to grace Denver with his presence (cough cough), I can only hope they televise the first discrepancy between Jake and he.

I can picture the sidelines after TO's first missed pass from Plummer:

Trotting off the field..."Jake, you need to man up and get the ball near me. As long as it's CLOSE, I'll make the play baby. No more o that high over the middle bull****"

Jake, "............"

TO, "Yo JAKE, I'm talkin to YOU baby. You're the QB, your job is to get me the ball, so why don't you just start hitting the weight room onc-"

This is the part that will be forever etched in sabol-esque fashion for years and years to come. I can hear the "what would you do with a drunken sailor" music queing now.....

Jake, being the non-conformist media hating hippie parent having qdoba loving economy driving car guy that he is will turn around and punch Terrel Owens square in the mouth.

Yes, right in the big piehole that's gonna get him kicked off of our team like the last 4.

You think Jake gives a f***? Probably not.

I'll have my VCR rollin so I can capture forever a personal recording of the infamous day that the biggest mouth in Football was finally shut. (for a minute or two anyway)

Conklin
01-31-2006, 12:33 PM
I'll have my VCR rollin so I can capture forever a personal recording of the infamous day that the biggest mouth in Football was finally shut. (for a minute or two anyway)

what the hell is a VCR?

Boobs McGee
01-31-2006, 12:43 PM
did i say vcr? I meant tivo :D

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 12:44 PM
I think it is WAY too early to be getting excited or concerned about this.

One constant you hear from Shanahan is, "We are going to look at every opportunity to make the team better." Well, he wouldn't be following that philosophy if he didn't look into TO's situation. Now he can say that they talked to him.
Fair point, but...

I just don't see it happening, with everything Shanahan has said about what a pleasure this year was coaching because of the character of the team.
... you forgot the part where Shanhan takes 8 or 9 out of 10 of these chances. He always seems to feel that this team is 1 player away. He also knows that this team is always dealing with limited resources. If TO takes a paycut (as projected by just about everyone this side of Drew), then Denver is simply crazy not to think about this from every angle. If things line up and TO is willing to play for incentives, I think it happens.

Don't forget to add in the fact that Denver lost in the AFC Title game -- a little more incentive for Shanahan to believe that this team is close.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 12:51 PM
Gary Miller from Channel 4 sports just had a report that TO and Drew R. were in Denver today and had meetings w/ Mike Shanahan. He had video of them walking together at the airport. Drew made some comment like maybe we'll be seeing you guys later. Uggggggggggg!!! Sorry guys... I know this is overdone, but I had to weigh in.

I just can't imagine why people aren't exicted about the possibility. It's not like his attitude is an "unknown" quantity. People know, he knows, his agent knows. TO will be under a microscope for the rest of his life and Denver would have multiple chances (minicamp, training camp, and at least one contract year) to get out. As long as they don't go and do something stupid like Philly (not bother to have any other receivers of quality around) then the risk is mitigated.... In other words, we still have to think about life after Rod (and TO if he comes aboard).

... and think about the upside. With TO, Smith, and Lelie as your 1 - 3 WR and Jeb as your TE. Wow! T.O. is one of maybe 12 legit game-chaning players in this league. Not only would he take attention away from Lelie and Smith, but it would also keep teams from putting 8 or 9 in the box against our run game. T.O. makes plays even when the defense knows he's gonna get the ball. He makes plays after the catch.

This is a 30+ pt/game offense with T.O. You add one respectable pass rusher (the D would be pass rushing a lot with that O scoring pts), T.O. and keep the rest in tact, and you have a Super Bowl team. The players have more or less endorsed it. Of course T.O. has to say and do the right things for the next 12 months... but I think he will. What he'll do in 13 or 14 mos is a different story ;D

Don't think of it as a long term thing... think of it as an opportunity to kick some ass next year. Isn't that what this organization is about... the year at hand? So what if T.O. goes up in flames in 2007.

halfcreek
01-31-2006, 12:54 PM
I'm for bringing in TO and RW (inspite of what the Post says).
Ricky will supply TO with strong weed to keep him mellow.

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:04 PM
599

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:06 PM
I would rather have Moulds

ludo21
01-31-2006, 01:06 PM
600 posts on this thread, quite amazing!

defenseman
01-31-2006, 01:09 PM
LOL at half creek..........Ricky will supply TO with strong weed to keep him mellow

Kind of like: Mutt and Jeff, Frick and Frack, Bill C. and Monica Lew (though, she kept him mellow by smoking his pipe for him)....dman

Rohirrim
01-31-2006, 01:11 PM
Obviously, the idea of Owens in Denver sparks a lot of controversy. I'd have to say yes to TO, if the contract provides an easy out in case TO still hasn't grown up. If he has grown up, it's kind of a shame for Andy Reid. He has the guts to deliver the lesson, and then doesn't get to reap the reward.

Elway 4 Life
01-31-2006, 01:14 PM
I would rather have Moulds
Unfortunatley we are not talking to him.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 01:17 PM
While I was on the fence for most of the speculation about TO, reading the arguments presented on this thread, I have come to a conclusion. I don't like the idea of TO in Denver. This team came together almost like a family this past season, there's no way they keep that kind of chemistry with TO around. Takes more than talent to be a positive contributor to a team.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:18 PM
Unfortunatley we are not talking to him. He's unaffordable. His contract calls for something like $11 million next year and he doesn't have any baggage that will force him to take a pay cut. The T.O. gamble is about risk/reward just like it was with the Browncos. Denver could have had a number of high quality, promising DL last offseason, but chose the risk/reward route.

T.O. is a better play-maker anyway.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:19 PM
He's unaffordable. His contract calls for something like $11 million next year and he doesn't have any baggage that will force him to take a pay cut. The T.O. gamble is about risk/reward just like it was with the Browncos. Denver could have had a number of high quality, promising DL last offseason, but chose the risk/reward route.

T.O. is a better play-maker anyway.

he is going to get cut in march, the bills have pretty much already stated that

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:19 PM
well then we need to!!!

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:21 PM
While I was on the fence for most of the speculation about TO, reading the arguments presented on this thread, I have come to a conclusion. I don't like the idea of TO in Denver. This team came together almost like a family this past season, there's no way they keep that kind of chemistry with TO around. Takes more than talent to be a positive contributor to a team.
But all it takes is one talented team to knock down a team, as Pittsburgh showed us. This team needs more playmakers to be a real SuperBowl contender. Besides, the argument that this is a family and a team could be used in support of bringing T.O. in for two reasons:
1) He'll have to conform because the pressure will be great
2) If he doesn't then the team can cast him aside and move on.

What happened in Philly is not only T.O.'s antics, but he also exposed some division in the lockerroom about Donovan. If that team was unanimously behind McNabb, then their problems would not have been so great. But there are a lot of Philly players who agreed with T.O. and think Donovan choked in the Super Bowl.

Dos Rios
01-31-2006, 01:22 PM
Jumping several steps ahead (I'm in the pro-TO camp): how fun would it be to see TO and Champ go at it together every day in practice? Is it possible that the #1 wr and the #1 corner in the game could make each other better? I imagine TO's presence in practice would also be pretty useful for the development of the other defensive backs on the roster.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:23 PM
he is going to get cut in march, the bills have pretty much already stated that
Even so, the demand for him will be greater and teams will be willing to pay more. Denver is considering making a deal with Philly for a reason... so they don't have to bid for T.O. The bidding for Moulds will take Denver out of that race, maybe not for T.O. as everyone will want to give him an incentive deal.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:24 PM
Jumping several steps ahead (I'm in the pro-TO camp): how fun would it be to see TO and Champ go at it together every day in practice? Is it possible that the #1 wr and the #1 corner in the game could make each other better? I imagine TO's presence in practice would also be pretty useful for the development of the other defensive backs on the roster.
He could elevate the play of Lelie and Jeb as while just by taking coverage away from them. If he lined up in the slot next to Rod, you'd probably have some safeties and nickle DBs covering Lelie and Jeb.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:24 PM
Even so, the demand for him will be greater and teams will be willing to pay more. Denver is considering making a deal with Philly for a reason... so they don't have to bid for T.O. The bidding for Moulds will take Denver out of that race, maybe not for T.O. as everyone will want to give him an incentive deal.

Moulds is up there in age, just like TO, so I doubt he'd be the #1 off season priority for every NFL team

Reggie Wayne is probably the top WR on the market this year

TO is a horrible option...just horrible, he does nothing but bitch year in and year out and is a horrible team mate

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:27 PM
I just wish one of the millon WR we drafted in the past 5 or so years would stand up !!!

after thinking about all what slappy has posted I have to say a big no to owens

ludo21
01-31-2006, 01:27 PM
While I was on the fence for most of the speculation about TO, reading the arguments presented on this thread, I have come to a conclusion. I don't like the idea of TO in Denver. This team came together almost like a family this past season, there's no way they keep that kind of chemistry with TO around. Takes more than talent to be a positive contributor to a team.


I really think TO could fit in here.

And as Rohirrm said, Shanny has learned from past contractual mistakes. He will not sign TO if it hurts us in the long run cap wise.
And TO has to know that no one will give him big money.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:28 PM
I really think TO could fit in here.

And as Rohirrm said, Shanny has learned from past contractual mistakes. He will not sign TO if it hurts us in the long run cap wise.
And TO has to know that no one will give him big money.

he might know that

but Rosenscum doesn't

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:28 PM
Moulds is up there in age, just like TO, so I doubt he'd be the #1 off season priority for every NFL team

Reggie Wayne is probably the top WR on the market this year

I'm not debating that Moulds is the top WR available, but he's got enough left that someone will give him a contract like Mushin Muhammad (also up in age and still productive) got last season from Chicago, which will be too expensive for Denver. This team is up against the cap and must find room for Dayne, Lepsis, Nalen, and Warren.

TO is a horrible option...just horrible, he does nothing but b**** year in and year out and is a horrible team mate
Winning cures a lot. He was a fine teammate in Philly until the offseason.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:29 PM
I'm not debating that Moulds is the top WR available, but he's got enough left that someone will give him a contract like Mushin Muhammad (also up in age and still productive) got last season from Chicago, which will be too expensive for Denver. This team is up against the cap and must find room for Dayne, Lepsis, Nalen, and Warren.


Winning cures a lot. He was a fine teammate in Philly until the offseason.

yeah, lol, after they were the 2nd best team in football

wtf do you think he would do the minute he doesn't get looked at 8 times a game?

2KBack
01-31-2006, 01:30 PM
But all it takes is one talented team to knock down a team, as Pittsburgh showed us. This team needs more playmakers to be a real SuperBowl contender. Besides, the argument that this is a family and a team could be used in support of bringing T.O. in for two reasons:
1) He'll have to conform because the pressure will be great
2) If he doesn't then the team can cast him aside and move on.

What happened in Philly is not only T.O.'s antics, but he also exposed some division in the lockerroom about Donovan. If that team was unanimously behind McNabb, then their problems would not have been so great. But there are a lot of Philly players who agreed with T.O. and think Donovan choked in the Super Bowl.

Philly was practically the same team with TO and without him (from a playing persepective), TO didn't get them to the superbowl, he didn't even play the last 5 games. All TO ever brought to Philly was pain. That's what denver can look foreward to, possible slight improvement, with an inevitable implosion along the way.

BTW, who are the playmakers that Seattle and Pittsburgh have that are better than Denver? I'd say that Denver has just as many playmakers, why can they do it, but Denver needs more?

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 01:32 PM
yeah, lol, after they were the 2nd best team in football

wtf do you think he would do the minute he doesn't get looked at 8 times a game?

If he signs an incentive laden deal, then if he complains or hurts the team, cut him. Simple.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:33 PM
yeah, lol, after they were the 2nd best team in football

wtf do you think he would do the minute he doesn't get looked at 8 times a game?
It's a risk, no doubt. No one is debating that. You do your homework and take a shot. How is it any more of a chance than Jerry Rice, IHOP, or MoC? This team cannot possibly be better next season without taking some risks in the offseason... they have too much cap work to do and have not demonstrated an ability to bring in rookies that can contribute right way at positions like WR, DL or OL.

I would feel completely different if Denver gave into his contract demands and gave him 7 years, 50 million. I am looking at this as an opportunity to get one of the top 15 playmakers in the league at blue light special prices.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:34 PM
If he signs an incentive laden deal, then if he complains or hurts the team, cut him. Simple.
Exactly! And he knows that. His agent knows that. He is running out of chances. Philly actually thought they were saving T.O. No such luck if he comes here.... it will take a lot for T.O. to fracture this team like he did Philly.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:36 PM
Philly was practically the same team with TO and without him (from a playing persepective), TO didn't get them to the superbowl, he didn't even play the last 5 games. All TO ever brought to Philly was pain. That's what denver can look foreward to, possible slight improvement, with an inevitable implosion along the way.

BTW, who are the playmakers that Seattle and Pittsburgh have that are better than Denver? I'd say that Denver has just as many playmakers, why can they do it, but Denver needs more?

Seattle has DJack and Alexander and a better oline

Pittsburgh has a better QB and not much better offensively

they have the play makers on the defensive side of the ball

which is where we should concentrate on this offseason....our porous defense, we should spend every bit of our FA money in defensive players, get some playmakers besides Champ Bailey on D, like someone who can rush the passer

TO is not needed and like you said, didn't get Philly over the hump, he didn't even play in the playoffs

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:40 PM
Philly was practically the same team with TO and without him (from a playing persepective), TO didn't get them to the superbowl, he didn't even play the last 5 games. All TO ever brought to Philly was pain. That's what denver can look foreward to, possible slight improvement, with an inevitable implosion along the way.

BTW, who are the playmakers that Seattle and Pittsburgh have that are better than Denver? I'd say that Denver has just as many playmakers, why can they do it, but Denver needs more?

I will do you one better we kicked Ray rodes out of denver because he sucked right ? well now what is our excuse now? I am kind of perplexed on this thing .

Rascal
01-31-2006, 01:40 PM
Even so, the demand for him will be greater and teams will be willing to pay more. Denver is considering making a deal with Philly for a reason... so they don't have to bid for T.O. The bidding for Moulds will take Denver out of that race, maybe not for T.O. as everyone will want to give him an incentive deal.

The guy is 33 years old...he won't get that much.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 01:42 PM
Seattle has DJack and Alexander and a better oline

Pittsburgh has a better QB and not much better offensively

they have the play makers on the defensive side of the ball

which is where we should concentrate on this offseason....our porous defense, we should spend every bit of our FA money in defensive players, get some playmakers besides Champ Bailey on D, like someone who can rush the passer
TO is not needed and like you said, didn't get Philly over the hump, he didn't even play in the playoffs

I agree here but who is the pass rusher that needs to be added? The athletic speed passrushing DE don't hit the market very often unless they are injury prone or getting old. Teams don't let these guys go they are too valuable. Denver has to draft and hope one of them is an impact in year 1. But the offense could get an immediate boost with TO. Rod and lelie would be matched up with 2 and 3 corners and the run game would open up even more.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:43 PM
Philly was practically the same team with TO and without him (from a playing persepective), TO didn't get them to the superbowl, he didn't even play the last 5 games. All TO ever brought to Philly was pain. That's what denver can look foreward to, possible slight improvement, with an inevitable implosion along the way.
Come on, you're better than that. TO carried that team's passing game even though ever DC in America knew he would get the ball. Did you happen to see him play in that Super Bowl? Did you happen to see what happened to Philly without him this year (yeah McNabb quit as after barfing up the Dallas game)? Did you forget the fact that Philly never made the Super Bowl without TO (yeah he got hurt be they were miles ahead of the competition when he went down).

The NFL is about match-ups and T.O. gives you one of the best matchups against anyone he lines up against. Plus he'll take coverage away from Rod and keep teams from loading up on the run against us. Go back and look at how anemic our offense was in the playoffs. We need some playmaking ability on offense. Just his presence alone would take heat off of every other player on offense.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:43 PM
I agree here but who is the pass rusher that needs to be added? The athletic speed passrushing DE don't hit the market very often unless they are injury prone or getting old. Teams don't let these guys go they are too valuable. Denver has to draft and hope one of them is an impact in year 1. But the offense could get an immediate boost with TO. Rod and lelie would be matched up with 2 and 3 corners and the run game would open up even more.

explain to me how TO got Philly to the superbowl?

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:46 PM
The guy is 33 years old...he won't get that much.
Mushin Muhammad. $12 million guaranteed, $30 million total at 32 years of age.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2000387

Less than 12 hours after the Panthers terminated Muhammad's contract, rather than pay him a $10 million roster bonus, the veteran wide receiver and the Chicago Bears reached an agreement in principle on a multi-year deal. The contract was officially signed late Saturday afternoon.

The six-year contract can be worth as much as $30 million. It includes $12 million in total guarantees, and the first three seasons are worth $16 million.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 01:46 PM
explain to me how TO got Philly to the superbowl?
14 td's 1200 yards in 12 games, look up garcia's #'s along with McNabbs with and without TO. You failed to answer my question who is the DE you want the money spent on? I agree that is #1 priority but who is out there worth the money. Why not take a chance on TO, they aren't signing him long term.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 01:46 PM
which is where we should concentrate on this offseason....our porous defense

OK, now I agree we need to find a pass rusher and maybe a cover safety, but to call a D that allowed 256 points and finished 2nd in run D a 'porous defense' is nothing short of astonishing. Every defense can't be the '85 Bears. Our offense is comprised mainly of nice role players. The only consistent playmaker in the group is Rod, and even he isn't capable of the big plays he used to make. We need to get some weapons on offense. The D is almost there, it just needs some tinkering.

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:47 PM
thing is shanny alway jumps into deep water when it is not always neccary

watermock
01-31-2006, 01:48 PM
He's unaffordable. His contract calls for something like $11 million next year and he doesn't have any baggage that will force him to take a pay cut. The T.O. gamble is about risk/reward just like it was with the Browncos. Denver could have had a number of high quality, promising DL last offseason, but chose the risk/reward route.

T.O. is a better play-maker anyway.

We are not going to sign this moron to his existing contract....if some team wants to pick up his contract, more power to them...we can't afford it. When TO gets off the plane WO that Shark holding his diaper up we can talk.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 01:48 PM
Come on, you're better than that. TO carried that team's passing game even though ever DC in America knew he would get the ball. Did you happen to see him play in that Super Bowl? Did you happen to see what happened to Philly without him this year (yeah McNabb quit as after barfing up the Dallas game)? Did you forget the fact that Philly never made the Super Bowl without TO (yeah he got hurt be they were miles ahead of the competition when he went down).

The NFL is about match-ups and T.O. gives you one of the best matchups against anyone he lines up against. Plus he'll take coverage away from Rod and keep teams from loading up on the run against us. Go back and look at how anemic our offense was in the playoffs. We need some playmaking ability on offense. Just his presence alone would take heat off of every other player on offense.

My problem with TO isn't about what kind of Talent he brings. You're right, having his talent can potentially open things up for others. He himself is a malcontent though, you really think we'll be able to run the Shanny offense without him bitching? The entire denver system is based around the run, which I love. TO (if he plays the whole season, and is the #2 wr) is looking at 60-70 balls max, probably closer to 60 since Dinger is a fan of TE. The first game Denver loses he will bitch about the offense and the ball not going his direction. Honestly he really screwed himself in Philly, he was in the perfect situation, a no rush offense.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:49 PM
explain to me how TO got Philly to the superbowl?
Pretty simple... the 3 years before T.O. were 3 NFC Title game losses. The year he arrived... Super Bowl. Easy.

Of course you'll argue that he was hurt, but you'd be ignoring the fact that they were 13 - 1 when he got hurt and 2 - 2 afterward.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule/PHI/2004

Odysseus
01-31-2006, 01:49 PM
I will do you one better we kicked Ray rodes out of denver because he sucked right ? well now what is our excuse now? I am kind of perplexed on this thing .

Ouch. Ray is at the Super bowl saying I told you so.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:49 PM
14 td's 1200 yards in 12 games, look up garcia's #'s along with McNabbs with and without TO. You failed to answer my question who is the DE you want the money spent on? I agree that is #1 priority but who is out there worth the money. Why not take a chance on TO, they aren't signing him long term.

how did TO help Philly in the playoffs, the only game he played in in the playoffs was the superbowl, which they lost, so that argument doesn't hold water

right now, there isn't anyone, but I'll answer that in march when people are cut

Rascal
01-31-2006, 01:50 PM
Mushin Muhammad. $12 million guaranteed, $30 million total at 32 years of age.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2000387

Less than 12 hours after the Panthers terminated Muhammad's contract, rather than pay him a $10 million roster bonus, the veteran wide receiver and the Chicago Bears reached an agreement in principle on a multi-year deal. The contract was officially signed late Saturday afternoon.

The six-year contract can be worth as much as $30 million. It includes $12 million in total guarantees, and the first three seasons are worth $16 million.

And Mushin also led the league the year before.

816 yards and 4 TD's versus...1405 yards and 16 TD's. Hmmmm...I wonder which one will get paid more?

Plus that contract had incentives in it, so the true value is unknown. ESPN and other sport websites always report the highest number instead of the more likely number.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:50 PM
Pretty simple... the 3 years before T.O. were 3 NFC Title game losses. The year he arrived... Super Bowl. Easy.

Of course you'll argue that he was hurt, but you'd be ignoring the fact that they were 13 - 1 when he got hurt and 2 - 2 afterward.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule/PHI/2004

they went 2-2 b/c they had everything wrapped up, TO wouldn't of played much regardless if he was there

the only thing TO did was play in the game they lost in the playoffs last year

2KBack
01-31-2006, 01:51 PM
Ouch. Ray is at the Super bowl saying I told you so.

Actually ray rhodes had health problems at the beginning of the season, his assistant has been calling the shots on defense in Seattle.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:51 PM
OK, now I agree we need to find a pass rusher and maybe a cover safety, but to call a D that allowed 256 points and finished 2nd in run D a 'porous defense' is nothing short of astonishing. Every defense can't be the '85 Bears. Our offense is comprised mainly of nice role players. The only consistent playmaker in the group is Rod, and even he isn't capable of the big plays he used to make. We need to get some weapons on offense. The D is almost there, it just needs some tinkering.

we have as many play makers as Pittsburgh does

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:52 PM
We are not going to sign this moron to his existing contract....if some team wants to pick up his contract, more power to them...we can't afford it. When TO gets off the plane WO that Shark holding his diaper up we can talk.
I think you are mixed up on the quotes about Moulds instead of T.O. Of course we won't pick up T.O. on his existing deal. We may get him to agree to restructure and then trade for him though. Shanny says he has no problem with Rosenhaus.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 01:53 PM
they went 2-2 b/c they had everything wrapped up, TO wouldn't of played much regardless if he was there

the only thing TO did was play in the game they lost in the playoffs last year

Don't like the guy if you want, but that statement is ridiculous. The only reason they had a chance to beat the Patroits was because of Owens' amazing performance. If McNabb hadn't choked in the last 5 minutes, he might have been able to carry them over the top. They won their two NFC playoff games against a pitifully weak field. They needed him to win the SB, and he almost pulled it off. Your bias is blinding you if you say he did not play a major part in their almost winning a championship.

Broncos Rule
01-31-2006, 01:54 PM
Denver is "well ballanced" but more lucky than elite. There are holes on both sides of the ball.

TO is high risk/reward, would be a major new offensive weapon - a "game breaker" - and this is what you need to do in the salary cap era - get more bng for your buck.

Address pass rush through the draft.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 01:54 PM
And Mushin also led the league the year before.

816 yards and 4 TD's versus...1405 yards and 16 TD's. Hmmmm...I wonder which one will get paid more?

Plus that contract had incentives in it, so the true value is unknown. ESPN and other sport websites always report the highest number instead of the more likely number.
All I am saying is that anything close to $12 million guaranteed is more than Denver can afford. Just because Moulds is old doesn't mean that someone won't break the bank on him since he'll likely be the best receiver available (Indy will keep Wayne).

Rascal
01-31-2006, 01:54 PM
DE's available. http://www.theredzone.org/2006/freeagents/showposition.asp?Position=DE

Darren Howard and Kyle Vanden Bosch are available.

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 01:54 PM
Ouch. Ray is at the Super bowl saying I told you so.

I told you so what ? that is what is so preplexing ????

2KBack
01-31-2006, 01:55 PM
I say if they do pick up this jackass, they make him hang out with the O-line at all times. They'll straighten him out and shut him up.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 01:56 PM
Don't like the guy if you want, but that statement is ridiculous. The only reason they had a chance to beat the Patroits was because of Owens' amazing performance. If McNabb hadn't choked in the last 5 minutes, he might have been able to carry them over the top. They won their two NFC playoff games against a pitifully weak field. They needed him to win the SB, and he almost pulled it off. Your bias is blinding you if you say he did not play a major part in their almost winning a championship.
Well put, I don't like the guy and won't if he's a bronco but won't complain if he is producing and celebrating in invesco 10+ times. He's the most complete reciever in the league and could do wonders for the O and the D for that matter. And Denver would still have to go for passrushers because they would be playing with a lead more which would lead to more teams passing.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 01:57 PM
explain to me how TO got Philly to the superbowl?

With Owens in the lineup, the Eagles went 13-1, and had clinched almost everything by the time he was injured vs. Dallas. The Eagles lost their next two games, but they were playing a lot of reserves.

Owens was a factor, but the success had a lot to do with Philly's D, which was great that year. Six times they held their opponents to single digits in scoring. In six additional games, they held opponents to 17 or less.

Their defense continued to play well in the playoffs, holding the Vikes to 14 and the Falcons to 10.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 01:58 PM
DE's available. http://www.theredzone.org/2006/freeagents/showposition.asp?Position=DE

Darren Howard and Kyle Vanden Bosch are available.

How does anyone know if vanden bosch just had a lucky year (16 career sacks in 4 years, three 16 game years) because he will get big money now. Howard don't know too much about him.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 01:58 PM
DE's available. http://www.theredzone.org/2006/freeagents/showposition.asp?Position=DE

Darren Howard and Kyle Vanden Bosch are available.

I'd give the money we would give to Ricky Williams or TO to both of these guys

especially Vanden Bosch, all the guy does is make plays

good catch rascal

give me some vaden bosch more so than TO

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:00 PM
we have as many play makers as Pittsburgh does

That's your opinion, and I happen to disagree. Rothlisberger is a more of a playmaker than Jake because he's more accurate passing and, while Jake certainly makes his fair share of incredible escapes, I haven't seen anyone other than Elway who can escape impossible situations the way Big Ben does. Their receiving unit as a whole is more consistent. Miller is already more of a playmaking TE than Jeb. We need someone other than Rod who can consistently make plays.

Do you really think we have a 'porous defense' based on a one game sample? Do the other 17 games when we were playing one of the leagues toughest schedules and playing usually terrific defense not count for something? C'mon.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 02:00 PM
I'd give the money we would give to Ricky Williams or TO to both of these guys
And all you would need is about another $15 million and you'd have a shot. TO will be lucky to make $3 million next year. Either one of those guys is gonna get $10 million (at least) guaranteed.

Clark
01-31-2006, 02:01 PM
If Terrel didn't like McNabb choking in big games, what's going to happen to Jake? He could be killed and T.O. facing murder-one. No, it's not worth it for all parties concerned.

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 02:02 PM
we have as many play makers as Pittsburgh does

Right. Our QB is just as good, our TE is just as good and our WR is just as good. :thumbs:

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 02:02 PM
listen the reason we are not talking SB is because our o-line coach got his hinny handed to him the last game we played. that was the start of all the other things colapsing now if you want to boil water all day we can talk about what happened after we let there D have there way with this team!

will TO fix our O-line problems no it does not need fixed it needs a mean coach...you know a minny nepolan...I wish shanny would let go of all the GM duties and work on the players.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 02:02 PM
That's your opinion, and I happen to disagree. Rothlisberger is a more of a playmaker than Jake because he's more accurate passing and, while Jake certainly makes his fair share of incredible escapes, I haven't seen anyone other than Elway who can escape impossible situations the way Big Ben does. Their receiving unit as a whole is more consistent. Miller is already more of a playmaking TE than Jeb. We need someone other than Rod who can consistently make plays.

Wow, we are on the same page. I completely agree. Denver is getting by with the running game and GREAT coaching.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 02:02 PM
How does anyone know if vanden bosch just had a lucky year (16 career sacks in 4 years, three 16 game years) because he will get big money now. Howard don't know too much about him.

I guess the same could have been said of Berry and Hayward...who had horrible seasons after their big year...doh.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:03 PM
especially Vanden Bosch, all the guy does is make plays

Until this season he could never stay healthy. I don't like the idea of throwing big money at a guy who puts together one healthy season out of four.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 02:03 PM
And all you would need is about another $15 million and you'd have a shot. TO will be lucky to make $3 million next year. Either one of those guys is gonna get $10 million (at least) guaranteed.

spread out not at once.

i4jelway7
01-31-2006, 02:04 PM
can I go with option C

neither?

you would've thought Shanny learned after Dale Carter and IHOP


option C: Sign Eric Moulds and use the draft to get a pass rushing DE, S, O-line depth, and a RB

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:07 PM
I guess the same could have been said of Berry and Hayward...who had horrible seasons after their big year...doh.

Berry and Hayward never had the injury problems this guy has had.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 02:11 PM
Until this season he could never stay healthy. I don't like the idea of throwing big money at a guy who puts together one healthy season out of four.

so your ok with risky team chemistry for a cancer causing agent like TO, but not for a potential stud DE in Vandenbosch b/c he has had a couple of injuries

I suppose risk/reward only applies to players you want

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 02:11 PM
I think there are 4 good speed rushers in the draft

Rascal
01-31-2006, 02:15 PM
Berry and Hayward never had the injury problems this guy has had.

The guy missed a season in 2003 and had 12.5 sacks in 2005...what more evidence do you want? I guess with your logic anybody that missed a season due to injury and came back and had an excellent year is not worth looking at. Good luck with that montra.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 02:16 PM
so your ok with risky team chemistry for a cancer causing agent like TO, but not for a potential stud DE in Vandenbosch b/c he has had a couple of injuries

I suppose risk/reward only applies to players you want

Bingo. ^5

Popps
01-31-2006, 02:17 PM
When we are only rushing 4 the first job for our DE's is to play the run. Very rarely are they asked to penetrate. Ekuban had 8 or 9 sacks for a horrible defense in Cleveland. I guess he all of the sudden decided to be a run stuffing DE instead of a pass rusher?

Someone has already corrected you on this, but it's worth posting again.

You honestly believe that on pass-rushing downs, our guys are told to just stand there?

When we send guys on a blitz, yea... he may be asked to occupy a space.

When we're playing a cover 2 or a nickel, etc... he's being asked to get after the QB, something our front 4 just can't seem to do.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:17 PM
so your ok with risky team chemistry for a cancer causing agent like TO, but not for a potential stud DE in Vandenbosch b/c he has had a couple of injuries

I suppose risk/reward only applies to players you want

Different situations. TO is not likely going to require a large financial investment. If he does, I'll join the rest of you and say 'pass'. Vanden Bosch has had more than 'a couple of injuries'. He's been been plagued by the injury bug his whole career. One 12.5 sack season is not enough for me to feel comfortable giving him big money. If he'll sign an incentive laden deal, then I'm all for it. But teams are so desperate to find pass rushers that he will likely fetch at least a $10 million bonus, in spite of these very serious concerns.

-Slap-
01-31-2006, 02:17 PM
If Terrel didn't like McNabb choking in big games, what's going to happen to Jake? He could be killed and T.O. facing murder-one. No, it's not worth it for all parties concerned.

Hey, Jake is guaranteed to get the Broncos at least 3 points in the first half of any playoff game.

gadlaw
01-31-2006, 02:20 PM
Dear lord,

Hear my prayer. Don't let this cancer come to Denver. He's been a cancer everywhere he's gone and he'll be a cancer here. That's all I want. Oh, and the lottery number please. If you have a minute. :-)

Popps
01-31-2006, 02:26 PM
while Jake certainly makes his fair share of incredible escapes, I haven't seen anyone other than Elway who can escape impossible situations the way Big Ben does.

Are you even half-serious?

Did you watch the game?

Plummer had more incredible escapes IN THAT GAME than Big Ben had. Don't let the fact that Pitt's defense got to him confuse you. While they got to him a few times, he also eluded pressure and made a ton of plays... one where he looked like he was going to be sacked a couple of times, used pure speed to escape, then avoided another sack with a forward shovel-pass to Johnson for a gain on the play.

The difference? Pitt's defense actually has a pass-rush. They actually put real pressure on Plummer. Watch the tape. Rothlisberger sat in a comfy pocket most of the day scanning the field.

Plummer is every bit as elusive as Rothlisberger, if not more.

Then again, you refer to him as "Big Ben," so maybe you're a fan of his.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:26 PM
The guy missed a season in 2003 and had 12.5 sacks in 2005...what more evidence do you want? I guess with your logic anybody that missed a season due to injury and came back and had an excellent year is not worth looking at. Good luck with that montra.

I'm not against bringing the guy in for a reasonable deal, but it's question of resources. I'm not in favor of handing a signing bonus in access of $10 million to a guy who until this season had 5 sacks in four seasons. For a guy with his background, I wouldn't give a dime more than a $5 million signing bonus, and I wouldn't feel comfortable with that. And, yes, I'd say the same regarding T.O. His position, though, makes it less likely that he will command those kind of dollars.

DBroncos4life
01-31-2006, 02:27 PM
Berry and Hayward never had the injury problems this guy has had.
Vanden Bosch was a damn good player in college. Its not like he just got good for this year. Like all players, when healthy he is good.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 02:28 PM
Are you even half-serious?

Did you watch the game?

Plummer had more incredible escapes IN THAT GAME than Big Ben had. Don't let the fact that Pitt's defense got to him confuse you. While they got to him a few times, he also eluded pressure and made a ton of plays... one where he looked like he was going to be sacked a couple of times, used pure speed to escape, then avoided another sack with a forward shovel-pass to Johnson for a gain on the play.

The difference? Pitt's defense actually has a pass-rush. They actually put real pressure on Plummer. Watch the tape. Rothlisberger sat in a comfy pocket most of the day scanning the field.

Plummer is every bit as elusive as Rothlisberger, if not more.

Then again, you refer to him as "Big Ben," so maybe you're a fan of his.

Jake made a few escapes in that game that were just unbelievable. It would have been really exciting if we weren't losing so badly. No one escapes like Jake, the concern is what he does after the escape.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:31 PM
Are you even half-serious?

Did you watch the game?

Plummer had more incredible escapes IN THAT GAME than Big Ben had. Don't let the fact that Pitt's defense got to him confuse you. While they got to him a few times, he also eluded pressure and made a ton of plays... one where he looked like he was going to be sacked a couple of times, used pure speed to escape, then avoided another sack with a forward shovel-pass to Johnson for a gain on the play.

The difference? Pitt's defense actually has a pass-rush. They actually put real pressure on Plummer. Watch the tape. Rothlisberger sat in a comfy pocket most of the day scanning the field.

Plummer is every bit as elusive as Rothlisberger, if not more.

Then again, you refer to him as "Big Ben," so maybe you're a fan of his.

Popps, I like Jake, and in the past I've argued with you in his defense. He is a great escape artist to be sure, but it is blind homerism to suggest that he surpasses Big Ben in this respect. Have you seen Rothlisberger's passer rating when he gets hit? It's astonishing. Guys like Brady and Manning are in the 60s, he's over 100. The guy is so strong he just physically rips himself away from 300 pound lineman and rips their heart out with a deep pass. I mean that in no way to disparage Jake. I like him. We can win a Super Bowl with him. But let's try to be a tad realistic when comparing him with other players. And while I admire Rothlisberger's ability, no, I'm not an especially big fan of his.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 02:40 PM
Popps, I like Jake, and in the past I've argued with you in his defense. He is a great escape artist to be sure, but it is blind homerism to suggest that he surpasses Big Ben in this respect. Have you seen Rothlisberger's passer rating when he gets hit? It's astonishing. Guys like Brady and Manning are in the 60s, he's over 100. The guy is so strong he just physically rips himself away from 300 pound lineman and rips their heart out with a deep pass. I mean that in no way to disparage Jake. I like him. We can win a Super Bowl with him. But let's try to be a tad realistic when comparing him with other players. And while I admire Rothlisberger's ability, no, I'm not an especially big fan of his.

Ben isn't elusive, he's just bg and strong, he's like 6'5" 250

orange crusher
01-31-2006, 02:42 PM
Right. Our QB is just as good, our TE is just as good and our WR is just as good. :thumbs:

I think you're saying Ward is better than Rod. I disagree with that.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:44 PM
Ben isn't elusive, he's just bg and strong, he's like 6'5" 250

My point is that he gets out of impossible situations and makes plays. Jake does as well, but I think Ben's accuracy puts him ahead of Plummer overall in the playmaking department. Again, that's not a rip on Jake.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 02:48 PM
My point is that he gets out of impossible situations and makes plays. Jake does as well, but I think Ben's accuracy puts him ahead of Plummer overall in the playmaking department. Again, that's not a rip on Jake.

He's made strides this year, but he didn't exactly get challenged in the Denver game. He looked pretty crappy against a solid rush last year, and did almost throw a paniced int to Champ. I'll grant that he was a rookie last year, but still, saying that he makes the impossible possible seems a bit premature.

MichaelAngelo
01-31-2006, 02:48 PM
I was thinking that maybe the case. Here is a brief article from a site I frequent often who thinks the same thing, he is a portion of what I got off the site..here is the link if you want to read more:

http://www.blacksportsonline.com

Bronco Billy 1-31-06

Late last night there were rumblings on the
underground that T.O. and super agent Drew
were in Denver talking to the Broncos. Thanks
to my man Willie Beamon and a couple of my
other sources I was able to get the low down
on what went down at that meeting. There has
been a lot of Drew bashing going on, but I
guarantee you that Drew is going to get Owens
a lot of money up front. Any contract that
he signs will have safe guards for the team,
but he will get his money. The meeting with
the Broncos was not to discuss trade but to
work out contract parameters. Drew will use
those parameters as he shops Owens around the
league. Contrary to reports there are at least
6-10 teams who are interested in talking with
Owens. As more information has surfaced about
what happened in Philly more teams Owens is not
as bad as he was made out to be by the media. I
also found out that Mike Shananhan spoke to Andy
Reid and while Reid says that it was very difficult
at times dealing with Owens, the root of the
problem was money and if the money part is taken
care of, he wouldn’t anticipate any problems.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 02:50 PM
I really don't want TO, but I would be outright pissed if we pay him big bucks. Let him use us as leverage, I'm cool with that, let someone else overpay for a season of turmoil.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:52 PM
He's made strides this year, but he didn't exactly get challenged in the Denver game. He looked pretty crappy against a solid rush last year, and did almost throw a paniced int to Champ. I'll grant that he was a rookie last year, but still, saying that he makes the impossible possible seems a bit premature.

Actually, he had the highest QB rating in the league by far when hit by a defender before the throw, so I don't see how you can support yourself when you say that he 'looked pretty crappy against a solid rush'. As a rookie, sure, but he ain't a rookie anymore.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 02:55 PM
I was thinking that maybe the case. Here is a brief article from a site I frequent often who thinks the same thing, he is a portion of what I got off the site..here is the link if you want to read more:

http://www.blacksportsonline.com

Bronco Billy 1-31-06

Late last night there were rumblings on the
underground that T.O. and super agent Drew
were in Denver talking to the Broncos. Thanks
to my man Willie Beamon and a couple of my
other sources I was able to get the low down
on what went down at that meeting. There has
been a lot of Drew bashing going on, but I
guarantee you that Drew is going to get Owens
a lot of money up front. Any contract that
he signs will have safe guards for the team,
but he will get his money. The meeting with
the Broncos was not to discuss trade but to
work out contract parameters. Drew will use
those parameters as he shops Owens around the
league. Contrary to reports there are at least
6-10 teams who are interested in talking with
Owens. As more information has surfaced about
what happened in Philly more teams Owens is not
as bad as he was made out to be by the media. I
also found out that Mike Shananhan spoke to Andy
Reid and while Reid says that it was very difficult
at times dealing with Owens, the root of the
problem was money and if the money part is taken
care of, he wouldn’t anticipate any problems.

I don't want us to give much up front money. I'm for bringing him in if it's an incentive laden deal, but no guarenteed money, Shanny!

penguintheory
01-31-2006, 02:56 PM
Jake's WRs already outclass him. However, TO could be the X factor that leads us to the Super Bowl. As it sits now, whether the problem is with the QB or WRs (I think QB), we'll never, ever win a shootout.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 02:57 PM
spread out not at once.
I'm talking guaranteed money. Guaranteed money is what you need to worry about and just about any player other than T.O. is going to get more than T.O. and he's the biggest game-breaker in the group.

bloodsunday
01-31-2006, 03:00 PM
Jake made a few escapes in that game that were just unbelievable. It would have been really exciting if we weren't losing so badly. No one escapes like Jake, the concern is what he does after the escape.
The other concern is the result of the play. When Ben scrambles he has a very high pass rating and it very often results in big plays. He's been to two AFC Title Games in two years. I'd say he is pretty good. It's not a jab at Jake to say that Ben is at least his equivalent if not better.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 03:00 PM
Actually, he had the highest QB rating in the league by far when hit by a defender before the throw, so I don't see how you can support yourself when you say that he 'looked pretty crappy against a solid rush'. As a rookie, sure, but he ain't a rookie anymore.

I was speaking mostly about last year, and yes I understand he was a rookie. That's the whole idea, he is a second year guy, so I'm not ready to induct him yet. His size is a great asset, he can get bumped and still get off a good ball. He threw 200 fewer passes than Jake, but was still sacked more than jake, and threw more int. Ben kicked our ass, but yet again, I think it's too early to call him more elusive or even a better playmaker than jake.

penguintheory
01-31-2006, 03:00 PM
Also, a playmaker like TO could ease the pressure on Jake in terms of pass rush, and also ease up the pressure on the line so perhaps Dayne or Bell can produce more. I like the idea of shaking up our offense a little.

Also, if those Ricky Williams rumors hold any water, we're starting to look a little like Oakland in terms of signing controversial characters... all we need to do now is draft Marcus Vick.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 03:06 PM
I guess my main concern is that the Broncos could bring in Ricky Williams, Brett Favre, Terrell Owens and the Pointer Sisters, and a year from now, we'lll still be sitting here bitchin' about the pass rush.

RMT
01-31-2006, 03:06 PM
Also, a playmaker like TO could ease the pressure on Jake in terms of pass rush, and also ease up the pressure on the line so perhaps Dayne or Bell can produce more. I like the idea of shaking up our offense a little.

Also, if those Ricky Williams rumors hold any water, we're starting to look a little like Oakland in terms of signing controversial characters... all we need to do now is draft Marcus Vick.

Shanahan's never been one to shy away from controversial players. Beside MoC, he's also brought in Dale Carter and Daryl Gardener. It's all about "risk-reward" ... TO brings GREAT risk but also GREAT reward. For a team on the verge of returning to the Super Bowl next year, adding TO is intriguing.

RMT
01-31-2006, 03:07 PM
I guess my main concern is that the Broncos could bring in Ricky Williams, Brett Favre, Terrell Owens and the Pointer Sisters, and a year from now, we'lll still be sitting here b****in' about the pass rush.

You're talking just about FA ... don't forget the draft, especially those TWO 1st round picks we have. We could parlay that into a higher pick and draft a DL STUD!

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 03:08 PM
DE's available. http://www.theredzone.org/2006/freeagents/showposition.asp?Position=DE

Darren Howard and Kyle Vanden Bosch are available.



Look, when Ray Rhodes was our DC our defense sucked. He dropped 9 into coverage, rushing only two at times. Guess what!? Larry Coyer did the same thing last year.

While Ray ray was coach we didn't do well in the sack department. We didn't do very well with Coyer this year or last year either.

Here's the tell tale though. Seattle, with the likes of Fisher, Darby, Bernard, and Winstrom. The only one of those four that likely starts in Denver is Winstrom... so tell me, how is it that that front four is able to get 19 sacks and their DL a total of 30 sacks?

I'm not saying its Larry Coyer's scheme b/c I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!

2KBack
01-31-2006, 03:09 PM
Shanahan's never been one to shy away from controversial players. Beside MoC, he's also brought in Dale Carter and Daryl Gardener. It's all about "risk-reward" ... TO brings GREAT risk but also GREAT reward. For a team on the verge of returning to the Super Bowl next year, adding TO is intriguing.

Shanny is pretty good about cutting ties when the risks don't reap the rewards as well.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 03:11 PM
Shanahan's never been one to shy away from controversial players. Beside MoC, he's also brought in Dale Carter and Daryl Gardener. It's all about "risk-reward" ... TO brings GREAT risk but also GREAT reward. For a team on the verge of returning to the Super Bowl next year, adding TO is intriguing.

Those guys also got cut because their production sucked. If they were playing up to their contract shanny would of been more apt to tolerate a little turmoil.

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 03:12 PM
Look, when Ray Rhodes was our DC our defense sucked. He dropped 9 into coverage, rushing only two at times. Guess what!? Larry Coyer did the same thing last year.

While Ray ray was coach we didn't do well in the sack department. We didn't do very well with Coyer this year or last year either.

Here's the tell tale though. Seattle, with the likes of Fisher, Darby, Bernard, and Winstrom. The only one of those four that likely starts in Denver is Winstrom... so tell me, how is it that that front four is able to get 19 sacks and their DL a total of 30 sacks?

I'm not saying its Larry Coyer's scheme b/c I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!
Any one of those 4 would start especially the DT's. I actually wanted Fisher last year, seattle lead league in sacks and most of them were DL athough playing in the NFC west would probably help that stat. They still are underated due to playing in NW where media hype doesn't ever reach.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 03:13 PM
Look, when Ray Rhodes was our DC our defense sucked. He dropped 9 into coverage, rushing only two at times. Guess what!? Larry Coyer did the same thing last year.

While Ray ray was coach we didn't do well in the sack department. We didn't do very well with Coyer this year or last year either.

Here's the tell tale though. Seattle, with the likes of Fisher, Darby, Bernard, and Winstrom. The only one of those four that likely starts in Denver is Winstrom... so tell me, how is it that that front four is able to get 19 sacks and their DL a total of 30 sacks?

I'm not saying its Larry Coyer's scheme b/c I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!

I say watch the corners, if they are giving a 10 yard cushion, then there probably won't be a sack. As long as an offense has that short option there just wouldn't be time for the d-line to get there.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 03:18 PM
Look, when Ray Rhodes was our DC our defense sucked. He dropped 9 into coverage, rushing only two at times. Guess what!? Larry Coyer did the same thing last year.

While Ray ray was coach we didn't do well in the sack department. We didn't do very well with Coyer this year or last year either.

Here's the tell tale though. Seattle, with the likes of Fisher, Darby, Bernard, and Winstrom. The only one of those four that likely starts in Denver is Winstrom... so tell me, how is it that that front four is able to get 19 sacks and their DL a total of 30 sacks?

I'm not saying its Larry Coyer's scheme b/c I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!

When it is 3rd and 10 and we don't blitz and the QB sits back, eats a steak drinks a 12 pack of beer and bangs his wife before deciding who to throw to it's apparent our pass rushing skills suck and it is not the scheme.

Every single one of our DE's are run stopping DE's.

ludo21
01-31-2006, 03:23 PM
I don't want us to give much up front money. I'm for bringing him in if it's an incentive laden deal, but no guarenteed money, Shanny!


my thoughts exactly. Im all for TO, but dont give him money just so he stabs us in the back.

If he can reach some incentives, then im ok with paying him.

DB-Freak
01-31-2006, 03:35 PM
I think Shanny has a lot to do with it... but no matter how you look at it, something isn't right with it when it comes to the DL and rushing the passer!
Yea!!!

Refusing to bring in any blue chip DL into his club.He's been throwing **** on the wall hoping one of them would stick, but they haven't.

It's either they suck or somewhere else!!

Broncoman13
01-31-2006, 03:40 PM
When it is 3rd and 10 and we don't blitz and the QB sits back, eats a steak drinks a 12 pack of beer and bangs his wife before deciding who to throw to it's apparent our pass rushing skills suck and it is not the scheme.

Every single one of our DE's are run stopping DE's.

Okay, I'll play along... our DE's suck at rushing the passer. But, in the last three years we've had guys that have totalled about 30 sacks (previous to this season). All three of those guys were allowed to seek employment elsewhere. So you tell me, does it seem like a priority to bring in a pass rushing DE? The scheme doesn't call for it and we won't pay for it. Plain and simple.

Mile High Shack
01-31-2006, 03:43 PM
Okay, I'll play along... our DE's suck at rushing the passer. But, in the last three years we've had guys that have totalled about 30 sacks (previous to this season). All three of those guys were allowed to seek employment elsewhere. So you tell me, does it seem like a priority to bring in a pass rushing DE? The scheme doesn't call for it and we won't pay for it. Plain and simple.

no, it's called trying to save a buck

we tried to resign Berry and Heyward, but we didn't want to pay them as much money as others were willing to

and losing pass rushers has bit us in the ass since 1998

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 03:51 PM
Temptation.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images2/MNFSheridan1.jpg

Atlas
01-31-2006, 03:54 PM
If this team needs a 33 year old attention whore to win it all then we're as far away from the SuperBowl as we can get.

.

One that happens to be the best WR in the NFL

12th man
01-31-2006, 03:55 PM
no, it's called trying to save a buck

we tried to resign Berry and Heyward, but we didn't want to pay them as much money as others were willing to

and losing pass rushers has bit us in the ass since 1998
agreed. The line this year got good pressure early on, then as the season went on we seemed to be blitzing our Lb's more. Our Dline has potential and that's it. They just need to be more consistant and get the sack along with the pressure. They need to give more of an effort. But I still think we need/will draft a dominant lineman who CAN sack the qb.

Atlas
01-31-2006, 03:57 PM
the root of the[/B]
problem was money and if the money part is taken
care of, he wouldn’t anticipate any problems.

Is that why he ripped Jeff Garcia and hinted that Garcia a gay???

12th man
01-31-2006, 04:03 PM
Do we sound desperate with us talking to TO and wanting him come to Denver? I was talking to my brother and he asked "if TO was'nt talking to Denver, and Denver had no interest in him, would you say the teams after TO are desperate?" I said probably. With that said, are we coming off desperate? I told my brother no, because we did make it to the AFC championship game without him, and I think we could make it without him,but with him we could kill teams. what do you guys think. do we sound desperate?

ludo21
01-31-2006, 04:06 PM
Do we sound desperate with us talking to TO and wanting him come to Denver? I was talking to my brother and he asked "if TO was'nt talking to Denver, and Denver had no interest in him, would you say the teams after TO are desperate?" I said probably. With that said, are we coming off desperate? I told my brother no, because we did make it to the AFC championship game without him, and I think we could make it without him,but with him we could kill teams. what do you guys think. do we sound desperate?


WE desperately need an offensive playmaker. So yeah, maybe a little.

The DL is where we need help, other than that, i think we will compete again next year.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 04:23 PM
Interesting article on Owens:

http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/Owens/Owens_bio.html

It's outdated now, since it was written before last year's antics, but still has lots of info on his general background.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 04:25 PM
Is that why he ripped Jeff Garcia and hinted that Garcia a gay???

I think it's actually that TO is the KKK grandmaster.

12th man
01-31-2006, 04:26 PM
WE desperately need an offensive playmaker. So yeah, maybe a little.

The DL is where we need help, other than that, i think we will compete again next year.
Ok, I could live with what you said. Just when the word desperate came up, Im thinking the media are going to say things like: Yeah the Broncos are trying to get TO, so they are a desperate offense and no threat to anyone. wich I totally disagree with, because you don't make a championship game without being dangerouse.

Rascal
01-31-2006, 04:33 PM
How many TD's did our WR's have this year? I don't think it was very high, but point is do you honestly think TO is going to be happy having to share that pidly # with Rod and Lelie? I really doubt it.

BroncoSoja
01-31-2006, 04:34 PM
I would love to have TO here if we had a different QB.. But since we got Mr. Mistake and confused back there I think we need to avoid TO like the plague.. I can just see the first time Jake tosses to a Rod smith convered by 3 guys while TO was streaking down teh field beating his 1 man.. I can just see the first time Jake under throws a open TO which allows the saftey and CB to catch up and make a play on the ball or intercept it...

Plummer does not play good under pressure, hell looking at his career he doesnt play good period. TO will be silent for a while but how many under throws, missed oppurtunities, over throws, badly timed balls later untill TO blows up.

Hell maybe this work for me though, with all the extra attention the Broncos will get Jake really will be under the micro scope and start to mess up and the pressure will be on Shanny to get a decent QB back there..Hrmmmmm

12th man
01-31-2006, 04:41 PM
I would love to have TO here if we had a different QB.. But since we got Mr. Mistake and confused back there I think we need to avoid TO like the plague.. I can just see the first time Jake tosses to a Rod smith convered by 3 guys while TO was streaking down teh field beating his 1 man.. I can just see the first time Jake under throws a open TO which allows the saftey and CB to catch up and make a play on the ball or intercept it...

Plummer does not play good under pressure, hell looking at his career he doesnt play good period. TO will be silent for a while but how many under throws, missed oppurtunities, over throws, badly timed balls later untill TO blows up.

Hell maybe this work for me though, with all the extra attention the Broncos will get Jake really will be under the micro scope and start to mess up and the pressure will be on Shanny to get a decent QB back there..Hrmmmmm
Jake is a decent Qb, and had one hell of a year. He will be even better if and when TO comes to Denver. Plus, heimerdinger is a big plus to help our passing game. And Im sure if TO starts to b1tch, shanahan will have somthing in his contract that will penalize him.

Northman
01-31-2006, 05:01 PM
Do we sound desperate with us talking to TO and wanting him come to Denver? I was talking to my brother and he asked "if TO was'nt talking to Denver, and Denver had no interest in him, would you say the teams after TO are desperate?" I said probably. With that said, are we coming off desperate? I told my brother no, because we did make it to the AFC championship game without him, and I think we could make it without him,but with him we could kill teams. what do you guys think. do we sound desperate?


thats what i was hinting to last night. this team made the AFC championship game being a " Team " and fell one game short of the SB. now you hear from all the fans that TO is the answer and will bring us the trophy again. but whats more disturbing is that some of the Bronco players believe it as well even though they are the ones who helped get the team to a 14-4 record. now the saddest part about all this is if we sign TO i would say im probably secretly hoping the Broncos totally bomb next year just to say I TOLD YOU SO even though i shouldnt wish for that. But the fact remains for me that i would much rather have a " all-star " player with class and respect help this team get over the hump rather than a selfish flavorclown. all i know is if we do sign TO i hope it doesnt sink this franchise into the ground in the process.

Rulon Velvet Jones
01-31-2006, 05:03 PM
Rod Smith lead the Broncos with 6 receiving TDs.

No one else had more than 1.

Give me TO.

Northman
01-31-2006, 05:03 PM
Jake is a decent Qb, and had one hell of a year. He will be even better if and when TO comes to Denver. Plus, heimerdinger is a big plus to help our passing game. And Im sure if TO starts to b1tch, shanahan will have somthing in his contract that will penalize him.


Jake will only be as good as his O-line. If we sign TO we better damn well get some beef up front cause TO will never see the ball otherwise.

defenseman
01-31-2006, 05:08 PM
TO may eat up some money. Shanny , had better make his contract incentive laden in addition to being, conduct clauses and he'll have to wait for the big roster bonus not one but two years at least...dman

*without the OL help (maybe), it all will be for naught

12th man
01-31-2006, 05:13 PM
Jake will only be as good as his O-line. If we sign TO we better damn well get some beef up front cause TO will never see the ball otherwise.
Does it matter what TO wants anymore? I think he has ruined his chance to still get the big bucks because he is such a risk. If he does come to Denver he going to learn to block down field more instead of catching more. Denver will find a way to get him the ball throuh the bootleg. plus, like ive said before, heimdinger is going to help jake and our passing game.

TotallyScrewed
01-31-2006, 05:25 PM
Hiemerdinger...TO's personal coach???

Gcver2ver3
01-31-2006, 05:27 PM
Jake will only be as good as his O-line. If we sign TO we better damn well get some beef up front cause TO will never see the ball otherwise.



i agree

BigPlayShay
01-31-2006, 05:37 PM
So what type of incentives do you put in his contract? Catches? If he doesn't get enough balls thrown his way he will complain and become a problem. Yards? If he isn't getting the balls, he isn't getting the yards. Touchdowns? Do I need to continue?

Plus, if you have conduct clauses and start fining or suspending him, you start to divide the locker room like what happened in Philly. TO guys versus Non-TO guys. He is a ****ing head case. We are talking about a guy that caused a ton of problems over whether or not he could wear tights in practice. He will not all of a sudden be about the team, which you would have to be with the Broncos or you get bounced. It just isn't worth it to me to take the chance.

I guess anyone can change. If he does come here I will support it, but he REALLY has to prove to me that he wants to win and not just get paid.

Old Dude
01-31-2006, 05:39 PM
The fantasy guys seem to like it:

http://msn.foxsports.com/fantasy/story/5295010

The Big E
01-31-2006, 05:54 PM
When it is 3rd and 10 and we don't blitz and the QB sits back, eats a steak drinks a 12 pack of beer and bangs his wife before deciding who to throw to it's apparent our pass rushing skills suck and it is not the scheme.

Every single one of our DE's are run stopping DE's.
I'd really hate to admit which one of those would take the least amount of time.

FADERPROOF
01-31-2006, 06:07 PM
One that happens to be the best WR in the NFL

This guy...

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/11/03/PH2005110302043.jpg

or this guy?

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/fantasy/10/31/hot.streaks/t1_stevesmith_all.jpg

azbroncfan
01-31-2006, 06:09 PM
One that happens to be the best WR in the NFL
I agree with Atlas on this one, TO is most complete reciever that runs short routes, med and long routes, breaks tackles and is hardest matchup as far as skill. THat's just my opinion.

BroncoInferno
01-31-2006, 06:54 PM
How many TD's did our WR's have this year? I don't think it was very high, but point is do you honestly think TO is going to be happy having to share that pidly # with Rod and Lelie? I really doubt it.

Perhaps part of the reason the numbers were piddly was the overall quality of the receiving corps.

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 07:05 PM
thing is how do you think cbs spotted owens in the airport leaving ... how do you like his timing the day before the SB meidia day ...the guy was using us so he could get his name back in the spot light looks like it worked me me me me me me good ol owens I mean me guy he cant stand to not be in the spot light I am sure this killed some of the miedia day time talk not that I care who is in the SB my broncos are not there so I could give a rats ass who wins .

BurgundyNGold
01-31-2006, 07:15 PM
I seriously cannot believe that some of you folks would actually welcome TO to your team. Yes, he's a great talent but did you not watch what happened in Philly? You guys have pretty good chemistry right now. Why roll a grenade into that?

footstepsfrom#27
01-31-2006, 07:18 PM
I seriously cannot believe that some of you folks would actually welcome TO to your team. Yes, he's a great talent but did you not watch what happened in Philly? You guys have pretty good chemistry right now. Why roll a grenade into that?
Somebody has some common sense.

Sassy
01-31-2006, 07:21 PM
I seriously cannot believe that some of you folks would actually welcome TO to your team. Yes, he's a great talent but did you not watch what happened in Philly? You guys have pretty good chemistry right now. Why roll a grenade into that?
They think he'll change Ha!

Northman
01-31-2006, 07:22 PM
I seriously cannot believe that some of you folks would actually welcome TO to your team. Yes, he's a great talent but did you not watch what happened in Philly? You guys have pretty good chemistry right now. Why roll a grenade into that?


Because we are a glutten for punishment.

Gcver2ver3
01-31-2006, 07:28 PM
I seriously cannot believe that some of you folks would actually welcome TO to your team. Yes, he's a great talent but did you not watch what happened in Philly? You guys have pretty good chemistry right now. Why roll a grenade into that?



they said the same thing about the bulls taking rodman and we see how that turned out..

best team ever.....3 straight titles...

i'm ready to take my chances...

Northman
01-31-2006, 07:28 PM
they said the same thing about the bulls taking rodman and we see how that turned out..

best team ever.....3 straight titles...

i'm ready to take my chances...


Rodman wasnt a problem, just weird.

Gcver2ver3
01-31-2006, 07:30 PM
Rodman wasnt a problem, just weird.



you're joking right?

BurgundyNGold
01-31-2006, 07:34 PM
they said the same thing about the bulls taking rodman and we see how that turned out..

best team ever.....3 straight titles...

i'm ready to take my chances...
Yeah, but that's more the exception than the rule, don't you think? Plus, Rodman was more of an off the court distraction. He dressed like a member of the Revolution, lol, but he was a professional on the court. Well, mostly. He never yelled at his coaches during a game or threw any of his teammates under the bus that I can recall. Most importantly, that team had Michael Jordan, so if Rodman acted a fool on the court, MJ would rip out Rodman's spine like that scene in Predator.

Bronco_Beerslug
01-31-2006, 07:37 PM
Yeah, but that's more the exception than the rule, don't you think? Plus, Rodman was more of an off the court distraction. He dressed like a member of the Revolution, lol, but he was a professional on the court. Well, mostly. He never yelled at his coaches during a game or threw any of his teammates under the bus that I can recall. Most importantly, that team had Michael Jordan, so if Rodman acted a fool on the court, MJ would rip out Rodman's spine like that scene in Predator.

Rodman was an idiot both on and off the floor.

BurgundyNGold
01-31-2006, 07:40 PM
Rodman was an idiot both on and off the floor.
An idiot yes, but he didn't divide the locker room. If I could keep myself from LMAO long enough to recount the story about him fighting with the, hehehehe, team ambassador... Ha!

Anyway, Philly didn't have the personalities who could keep him in check. Who would Denver annoint with that responsibility. Maybe the bigger question is, why should anyone HAVE to do that?

Elway 4 Life
01-31-2006, 07:42 PM
How about meshawn then. He acted a fool on and off of the field and now is a very good player for the cowboys. I think people can change. I alos think there is far more to the TO story then we all know. I think TO deserves some blame but I think the eagles also did things that we are not privy to. I think we give him a fresh start and see what happens. If he fvcks up then we throw his ass to the wolves. Until then I say we give the best reciever in football a chance to play for the best organization in football. GO BRONCOS.

2KBack
01-31-2006, 07:43 PM
An idiot yes, but he didn't divide the locker room. If I could keep myself from LMAO long enough to recount the story about him fighting with the, hehehehe, team ambassador... Ha!

Anyway, Philly didn't have the personalities who could keep him in check. Who would Denver annoint with that responsibility. Maybe the bigger question is, why should anyone HAVE to do that?


If, and that is a big if, any team has the personalities to keep TO in check, I think Denver does. With guys like Rod, Lynch, the Marine, and Al, denver is stacked with hardnose no nonsense guys. I just don't think anybody can keep that guy in check, he's got a chemical defeciency of some kind.

Northman
01-31-2006, 07:44 PM
you're joking right?


I dont ever remember Dennis causing the kind of chaos that TO has. was Rodman a sideshow circus? oh yea but he was hardly the kind of issue that TO has become. as far as having 3 rings, that much is true but Dennis was a small part of that because of a guy named MJ. by the way, how many rings does TO have with SF or Philly?

Northman
01-31-2006, 07:45 PM
How about meshawn then. He acted a fool on and off of the field and now is a very good player for the cowboys. I think people can change. I alos think there is far more to the TO story then we all know. I think TO deserves some blame but I think the eagles also did things that we are not privy to. I think we give him a fresh start and see what happens. If he fvcks up then we throw his ass to the wolves. Until then I say we give the best reciever in football a chance to play for the best organization in football. GO BRONCOS.


Meshawn rode the coatails of a very good Tampa defense to get his ring. For him that mission is accomplished now he is just working to get paid. He wasnt even the best receiver on that Tampa team that year.

-Slap-
01-31-2006, 08:10 PM
This guy...

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/11/03/PH2005110302043.jpg

or this guy?

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/fantasy/10/31/hot.streaks/t1_stevesmith_all.jpg

This guy.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/bremertonian/football/TorryHolt1.jpg

~Crash~
01-31-2006, 08:16 PM
holt is the way you play football all class

FADERPROOF
01-31-2006, 08:17 PM
This guy.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/bremertonian/football/TorryHolt1.jpg


That's #3 to me.

Bronco Bob
01-31-2006, 08:22 PM
Too much risk. We were one game away this year! If we went 6-10, then taking a risk with a TO might be warranted, but we were sooooooo close with the guys we have, I just don't see why we would take on such a challenge.


Philly was also one game away for several years until they got TO.
That was the year they made it to the Super Bowl. And only lost
by a field goal. And that may well have been because McNabb was
too sick to play, despite the denials afterwards. Healthy McNabb
and less BS about the Patriots dynasty.

DBroncos4life
01-31-2006, 08:24 PM
Talking about lack of passing touchdowns is like pointing out that Zach Wiegert only gave up one sack in his 4 years at NU.

BurgundyNGold
01-31-2006, 08:26 PM
Philly was also one game away for several years until they got TO.
That was the year they made it to the Super Bowl. And only lost
by a field goal. And that may well have been because McNabb was
too sick to play, despite the denials afterwards. Healthy McNabb
and less BS about the Patriots dynasty.
I would point out that they finished out the season and then got to the Superbowl in the playoffs without TO. They also lost a lot this year with TO.

-Slap-
01-31-2006, 08:27 PM
That's #3 to me.
When Holt's career is over, he'll be regarded as the second best WR ever. His numbers will back it up.