Vince Young's Pro Day... [Archive] - The Orange Mane

GonzoLays

03-22-2006, 01:42 PM

I'm getting early word that he ran in the high 4.5's to low 4.6's. I was told that he has yet to throw however.

4.5's (high or low) have to be disappointing for him. I know he was hoping to be in the low 4.4's to high 4.3's range. If he ran in the 4.6's you can probably count on him being the #3 QB off the board and likely taken right around pick 15.

How is that dissapointing for 6'5" 230 pound QB? He is not a running back, he is QB and 4.57 is damn good for a QB.

bronco militia

03-22-2006, 01:43 PM

How is that dissapointing for 6'5" 230 pound QB? He is not a running back, he is QB and 4.57 is damn good for a QB.

no doubt

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 01:52 PM

People need to realize that Young isn't Vick. He doesn't have blazing speed. He has great speed compared to QBs. But he doesn't have Vick speed. He has Steve Young, or John Elway speed. He's probably as fast, or maybe a little faster than Culpepper and McNabb. I'd say he's probably faster than those guys, but he doesn't have blazing speed.

Ratboy

03-22-2006, 01:57 PM

Any where but here..

Rock Chalk

03-22-2006, 01:59 PM

Any where but here..
Why?

Broncos Rule

03-22-2006, 02:04 PM

No way Shanny drafts a QB who's dumb as a post.

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:07 PM

You people that dont want him a crazy. I guess people forget how he took over the game againts USC. The same USC team that was hailed as one of the best college teams ever.

Rock Chalk

03-22-2006, 02:08 PM

No way Shanny drafts a QB who's dumb as a post.
Yeah, no way Shanny drafts the best talent on the board (if VY is still at 15 which he wont be).

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:09 PM

No way Shanny drafts a QB who's dumb as a post.

I dont think Jake was called a rocket scientist before coming to denver. We had a real bright QB how did that work out for us?

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:10 PM

I just hope he doesn't end up in Oakland. I don't think it would be fun to face him twice a year.

Doufer

03-22-2006, 02:10 PM

Broncos paid him to use poor work performance so they could draft him @ 15 ;)

Rock Chalk

03-22-2006, 02:10 PM

I dont think Jake was called a rocket scientist before coming to denver. We had a real bright QB how did that work out for us?
Dont bother arguing. Just another Texas hater.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 02:21 PM

I said in a different thread the question was asked that if Young somehow slipped to the 22nd spot, would you take him. I said that if the Broncos didn't take him at that spot, I would go to denver and shoot everybody in the front office. I also said that they shouldn't try to trade up into the top 6 or so to take him, but if he was still there at 15 they should trade up and grab him. Now they are at 15. So if he's still there, draft that guy. At this point, I wouldn't mind if they traded up even more to get him. Franchise QBs doing grow on trees. When Plummer's run is over, the Broncos are back to where they were after Elway retired.

ignitionnight

03-22-2006, 02:23 PM

I don't want him because we are already SO close to being a championship team the last thing we need is a quarterback right now to screw with Plummer's head. We are one or two big playmakers away from the Lombardi trophy, I would rather wait for Brodie Croyle in round three than pick up Young this early. Plus everybody knows the amount of money first round quarterbacks command.

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 02:27 PM

How is that dissapointing for 6'5" 230 pound QB? He is not a running back, he is QB and 4.57 is damn good for a QB.

It's disappointing for VY b/c he himself said he was expecting to be in the low 4.4's and had run at that speed on several occassions. Now, on his big day he runs a mid 4.5. In fact, I think I remember a piece from the NCAA All-Star challenge that said he was running in the high 4.3's. I agree that 4.57 for a 230 lb QB is great. But, his game and his speed go hand in hand. This is disappointing for him, no doubt about it!

freak6

03-22-2006, 02:28 PM

No way Shanny drafts a QB who's dumb as a post.

I love VY. But I have to agree here. Our system is one of the most demanding. We want someone to come in and help us win NOW. Not in 2 seasons.

Broncos Rule

03-22-2006, 02:28 PM

Don't get me wrong - I'd be thrilled if we landed VY.

I just don't see Shanny pulling the trigger.

Jake's no Einstein, but he's not Wonderlic single digit stupid either.

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 02:29 PM

Another thing that kills me about these kids. They have the ability to run the 40 in Feb. and then again in March if they don't do as well as they know they can. Look at Brian Calhoun for an immediate example. He ran very poor times at the combine. He turns around at his pro-day and runs a couple 4.4/4.3's and he's right back in the mix. Why do these kids not run at the combine?

Broncos Rule

03-22-2006, 02:30 PM

And I couldn't care less about Texas either way.

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 02:32 PM

I love VY. But I have to agree here. Our system is one of the most demanding. We want someone to come in and help us win NOW. Not in 2 seasons.

Where is everyone getting that VY is dumb as a post?

Also, there is a big difference in a written test and figuring out what coverage a defense is in. There are plenty of people in this world that can probably score a 40 on the wonderlic and throw a ball 55 or 60 yards down field... does that mean they are better equipped than VY to be a Bronco QB?

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 02:33 PM

I love VY. But I have to agree here. Our system is one of the most demanding. We want someone to come in and help us win NOW. Not in 2 seasons.

Chances are who ever they draft with either of those picks aren't going to help them win now. Even if they draft a DE in the first round, they'll still have a hole at DE.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 02:35 PM

Young scored higher than Dan Marino.

After Steve McNair scored a 16, the GM of the Titans went and gave him a football quiz. After the quiz he said he had to draft him.

This whole wonderlic thing has gotten blown way out of porportion.

coachmastermind

03-22-2006, 02:41 PM

Does anyone know if Shanny himself is in Austin today? ...or if it's just Broncos scouts? That could tell us a little bit of the actual interest we'd have in him.

Although I heard no one from Oakland is there... so who knows...

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:42 PM

On NFL.com I read VY started out throwing going for 7 of 7. He also has plans to go into a room with a chalk board to talk about his decision making and take questions from team reps.

Tha rock

03-22-2006, 02:42 PM

Arkie

03-22-2006, 02:43 PM

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:45 PM

what r u guys talking aboout if we dont take him you wont get a chance jets trading up to get lieniert, titans take cutler or vince if vince falls raiders take him and if its cutler he falls to arizona they already said if a qb falls to them they will take him. The raiders will sign brooks and if they do we pass on vince or cutler who ever isnt taken by jets and titans will be selected by oak or arizona.

thanks for killing the dream. Although what a team says and does are two differnt things when it comes to the draft.

Mile High Shack

03-22-2006, 02:46 PM

.....no comment...........

Don't want to infruriate the Vince Young lovers anymore

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 02:48 PM

.....no comment...........

Don't want to infruriate the Vince Young lovers anymore

what makes you a VY hater ?

Mile High Shack

03-22-2006, 02:51 PM

what makes you a VY hater ?

not a hater in the least

just a realist

his skills won't translate to the pro game

his speed is nice, but he won't be able to run like he did in college

the offense he ran at UT was a very simple offense, one read and run basically, he won't have that option in a WCO, you have to be able to read multiple receivers, not just one and run

His throwing motion sucks

Not sure if he has the mental facilties to be able to assimilate and NFL play book

Rock Chalk

03-22-2006, 02:54 PM

not a hater in the least

just a realist

his skills won't translate to the pro game

his speed is nice, but he won't be able to run like he did in college

the offense he ran at UT was a very simple offense, one read and run basically, he won't have that option in a WCO, you have to be able to read multiple receivers, not just one and run

His throwing motion sucks

Not sure if he has the mental facilties to be able to assimilate and NFL play book
What a bunch of lies.

Your an Okie and VY is a Texan and everyone knows that Okies are jealous of Texans. Always have been and always will be.

Nuggets4

03-22-2006, 02:58 PM

I love how if you question VY you're a hater. What a joke.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 03:03 PM

what r u guys talking aboout if we dont take him you wont get a chance jets trading up to get lieniert, titans take cutler or vince if vince falls raiders take him and if its cutler he falls to arizona they already said if a qb falls to them they will take him. The raiders will sign brooks and if they do we pass on vince or cutler who ever isnt taken by jets and titans will be selected by oak or arizona.

Nobody is saying that he'll be there at 15. We all know that the chances of him falling that far are pretty remote. If the Broncos wanted to make a run at him, they could. Remember, they do have two first round draft picks.

Maximus

03-22-2006, 03:04 PM

thanks for killing the dream. Although what a team says and does are two differnt things when it comes to the draft.

You can have the bum. The wonderlic isn't the only problem. I don't understand why people don't see the problem. Most of it is hype. Vince young is a project! It will take 3 years for the kid to learn a pro style offense. Don't believe all the Shotgun hype that you saw during his college days. Taking a 5 step drop and reading a defense is something that young has not done.

Mile High Shack

03-22-2006, 03:06 PM

What a bunch of lies.

Your an Okie and VY is a Texan and everyone knows that Okies are jealous of Texans. Always have been and always will be.

I live in oklahoma, so that doesn't make me a UT hater since I wasn't born here

I just have seen him play and he survives by his feet, not his arm

Sideburn

03-22-2006, 03:26 PM

Young has always reminded me of a gazelle. Long fluid strides, and as said before never looks to be running full speed. He has a hidden gear somewhere, but it takes time to get there. The 80 yard run against OSU was a great example of it. He coasted around the corner, got Woods into the air with a pump fake and then acceled right by him. About 30 yards down field he jumped into hidden gear and was gone.
Young has open field moves that just wow you. He doesn't cut on a dime, he incorporates deception into his moves as if he's plotting out what to do 3 moves ahead. His speed is very deceptive. He has the marks of a sprinter without the initial burst. Long shins, and big thighs, and has a knack for giving you a leg to attack before taking it away.

TexanBob

03-22-2006, 03:34 PM

Explain how a QB who runs a 4.5 40-time is a bad thing? Anyone who wants to question Vince Young's potential running the football at the next level doesn't know dick. Question his ability to read coverages? Okay. Question his ability to pass effectively? Okay.

But don't insult him by implying he's too SLOW to be an NFL quarterback. If anything, he's overqualified in that regard.

TexanBob

03-22-2006, 03:45 PM

Shanny put all of his eggs in the Griese basket. He wanted somebody like himself QBing his team. He went with a cerebral guy with little physical talent. Shanny's philosophy would have done a 180 if he drafts Vince Young. He's already dumbed down the offense enough for Jake.

And Denver's offense isn't that complicated for the *quarterback*. Most plays start with a play-action going to a rollout/bootleg. He then has a read-run option if he didn't hand off. To make it work you need a) a running attack that is a legitimate threat in order to buy time, b) a quarterback who can be a threat to run and c) a quarterback with enough arm to hit Lelie deep.

Sure, you can build off that with pitchouts and screens and the like but, in a nutshell, that's the Bronco offense under Plummer. It's actually the running game that is sophisticated and takes time to develop. Plummer's job takes more athleticisim than smarts.

Rulon Velvet Jones

03-22-2006, 03:58 PM

Just had Salisbury on here in Dallas. Some points:

Young TORE IT UP on his pro day. 6 balls hit the ground. 2 were on deep balls, 2 on throws across the field and 2 were dropped by his receivers.

Said he's never seen anyone throw like that. That Vince makes it look easy. Any angle from any part of the field, Vince gets it there.

Changed his mind and ran for the scouts. Did something in the range of 4.4-4.5.

Says that anyone at the top of the draft that decides to pass on Vince for other needs would be making a mistake.

Has all the physical tools and is trying to prove to the scouts that he's got the football mind to go along.

Mile High Shack

03-22-2006, 04:02 PM

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:03 PM

NO PROJECTS

Young is a project - at LEAST 2 years away. If this team is close (1 game from the SB), we need players who can help NOW. Not in 08.

Hercules Rockefeller

03-22-2006, 04:07 PM

Young is a project - at LEAST 2 years away. If this team is close (1 game from the SB), we need players who can help NOW. Not in 08.

Quick name every Shanny draft pick that was expected to be a major contributor that season from the second they were drafted.

Arkie

03-22-2006, 04:08 PM

And Denver's offense isn't that complicated for the *quarterback*. Most plays start with a play-action going to a rollout/bootleg. He then has a read-run option if he didn't hand off. To make it work you need a) a running attack that is a legitimate threat in order to buy time, b) a quarterback who can be a threat to run and c) a quarterback with enough arm to hit Lelie deep.

Sure, you can build off that with pitchouts and screens and the like but, in a nutshell, that's the Bronco offense under Plummer. It's actually the running game that is sophisticated and takes time to develop. Plummer's job takes more athleticisim than smarts.

Shanahan makes the offense fit the players, but I think his dream was to have the smartest QB running the most complicated offense. Griese had the smarts and the bare minimum physical talents, but he didn't have the coolness, leadership, or attitude. Shanahan will do a 180 if he drafts Young which isn't necessarily a bad thing, just an observation.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:10 PM

Quick name every Shanny draft pick that was expected to be a major contributor that season from the second they were drafted.

DJ did pretty well his first year. So did DW and Foxworth. Portis had a nice rookie season.

You can draft a defender or a RB and have them contribute soon. If you take Young there is no chance of that happening.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 04:14 PM

NO PROJECTS

Young is a project - at LEAST 2 years away. If this team is close (1 game from the SB), we need players who can help NOW. Not in 08.

I've said it a number of times now. Chances are who ever the Broncos pick, that player won't help too much this year. Even if they draft a DE, they'll still have a hole at that position. Who ever they draft might not even see the field much.

Hercules Rockefeller

03-22-2006, 04:14 PM

DJ did pretty well his first year. So did DW and Foxworth. Portis had a nice rookie season.

We're not talking about winning the position in training camp or later in the season. Most rookies are considered projects because they aren't expected to contribute in a big way right away. You said no projects, so we're looking for players who right after they are drafted should be expected to be a big part of the team for the upcoming season. DWill was considered a project, he wasn't expected to be anything more than a returner and dime back at best. Portis wasn't expected to contribute, he was behind TD, MA, and OG.

Shanahan has drafted 2 players who were annointed starters from Day 1: Mobley and Eric Brown. Nick Harris could be thrown in, and probably DJ because everyone knew it was just a formality that he wasn't the starter going into camp. That's maybe 4 guys in 11 drafts that were supposed to be rookie contributors.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 04:15 PM

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 04:16 PM

no offense to steak boy

but those receivers are use to getting balls thrown by Vince Young and they have probably done those same routes a million times since the combine

Now that's BS. The guy finally does something positive, and people are trying to find ways to make it seem like he didn't do anything of note.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 04:18 PM

DJ did pretty well his first year. So did DW and Foxworth. Portis had a nice rookie season.

You can draft a defender or a RB and have them contribute soon. If you take Young there is no chance of that happening.

DJ is an exception. Not many rookies play on that level.

D. Will and Fox did well for rookies, but they were forced to play. Walls sucked, then got hurt. The other CBs on the roster sucked. So those two had to play. They played well, but I wouldn't consider them difference makers.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:18 PM

We're not talking about winning the position in training camp or later in the season.

Sure we are. If you draft Mario Williams or AJ Hawk you expect him to be an impact as a rookie. Same with Davis or White. I know DW was drafted as a return guy, but he was expected to contribute from day 1 as a return guy.

Nothing is a guarantee, regardless of position. But QBs are the slowest to develop - there is no question. And taking a RAW QB when the team is supposed to be 'on the verge' makes no sense.

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 04:21 PM

Now that's BS. The guy finally does something positive, and people are trying to find ways to make it seem like he didn't do anything of note.

It doesn't matter people will still try and come out and tear him down.

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 04:21 PM

I think Anny's question was which one was EXPECTED to make a major contribution? DJ maybe? DW was expected to play only ST's. Foxxy was expected to CHALLENGE for the Nickel. Portis was the 3rd RB when drafted. Sometimes it works out quite well, sometimes not so well.

As for VY and throwing the football... effortless is indeed the best description. I laugh when people question is arm strength. Dude has toned it down to help improve his accuracy. When he gets to throw the ball all day everyday in the pros he'll be able to find that accuracy w/the full strength toss. He's going to be very special in the NFL.

BoiseBluTurf

03-22-2006, 04:22 PM

This thread illustrates just how much the game of football has changed over the years...
In the past you would have never passed up on a QB that could help you out two or three years down the road... matter of fact... most coaches prefered rookies grow on the side line...

Now... if your gm uses a pick to build for the future it's considered a wasted pick... I disagree... If young is there... take him... jake has a few years left in his game and Young can learn holding the clip board...

Players this claiber only come around once in a blue moon... and most times the team you are pulling for is in no position to grab him... that in mind... if VY is there and rated high enough on the Bronco board, takes him!

That is all

Michael

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 04:27 PM

Sure we are. If you draft Mario Williams or AJ Hawk you expect him to be an impact as a rookie. Same with Davis or White. I know DW was drafted as a return guy, but he was expected to contribute from day 1 as a return guy.

Nothing is a guarantee, regardless of position. But QBs are the slowest to develop - there is no question. And taking a RAW QB when the team is supposed to be 'on the verge' makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense. A team on the verge with TWO 1st round draft picks. You can afford to gamble on greatness. You have the opportunity to draft a guy with more talent than McNabb, Vick, or Culpepper and still can get a solid DL prospect in the same draft. We're in a position right now that can set us up for the next 7 or 8 years and still address the immediate needs to put us in the SuperBowl now! The Steelers will be constant threats in the AFC for the next several years b/c of Roth. We don't have that w/Plummer. I'm not sure he can get the job done next year, let alone two or three years from now. Address the need, let him sit for a year and use him in spot duty (decoy and goalline type situations) develope him and when Jake's done we don't miss a beat. How does this not make sense?

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:28 PM

Now... if your gm uses a pick to build for the future it's considered a wasted pick... I disagree... If young is there... take him... jake has a few years left in his game and Young can learn holding the clip board...

I don't think that is entirely true. And I think it depends on the player and the situation. If you are 8-8, you take a guy who might help in 2 years. If you are 12-4, you might want to 'take your shot', get an impact player for NOW, and try to get a trophy.

If Shanny thinks Young is Elway revisited then sure, take him. It isn't a problem to have him develop. But if you are a game away (and you feel your team is primed for a run) there will be more pressure to take a guy who can step in as a rookie and make the team better immediately.

A couple years ago the Bills were 8-8 and close to being a playoff team. They threw a lot of picks at Dallas to draft Losman. That then caused them to toss Bledsoe. The team declined. The team would have been better in the short term by drafting a need position and keeping Bledsoe. (probably long term too, but that is harder to tell)

I'm just saying that as the armchair GM you have to say 'this team was a game away' or you don't. If you do, taking Plummer's replacement means that you are hoping to compete in 2 years when Nalen and Smith and Elam are gone. If you think the team needs a playmaker to make it to the Super Bowl, you are more likely to take a pass rusher or a safety or a RB - somebody who has a good chance to help in 06.

epicSocialism4tw

03-22-2006, 04:31 PM

What a bunch of lies.

Your an Okie and VY is a Texan and everyone knows that Okies are jealous of Texans. Always have been and always will be.

I'm an Okie...grew up right by THE university. I absolutely love Young. We might not ever see another college football player like him. I think that he has the skills to break the mold at QB.

extralife

03-22-2006, 04:32 PM

All of you guys saying we can "afford" to "gamble" on VY because we have two first rounders are crazy. The man will NOT last past the Raiders at seven. NO CHANCE. And that's if he even falls that far. You want him, you're going to have to give up those firsts.

You guys are saying most rookies aren't expected to be starters. That's great--who cares about expectations? Fact is, we've had a whole lot of rookies either start or end up starting down the road in their rookie season. You draft Vince? He won't see the field. At all. Ever. And if he does? That means Jake is down and we're screwed anyway. VY CANNOT help us this year, whereas ANY OTHER PLAYER we might take with these picks certainly can.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:34 PM

How does this not make sense?
It doesn't make sense because 2 impact players are better than one. NOW

It is silly to take the opinion 'we have 2 first round picks, we can gamble with one'. The same thing was said of Clarrett - look how that worked out.

Personally I think Young is an IMMENSE project. He doesn't have the mechanics to play now and he played in a gimmick offense in college. If Shanny loves him and drafts him - great. I hope he is a HOFer. I'll buy a jersey (I'm partial to the orange, personally)

But I think if this team adds a pass rusher and a playmaker on offense they can be competitive again for a trophy in 06. Maybe that is optimistic, maybe not. This isn't based on my opinion of Young - if we took Leinart or Cutler I'd feel somewhat similar (although Young is a bigger project).

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 04:37 PM

epicSocialism4tw

03-22-2006, 04:37 PM

Now that's BS. The guy finally does something positive, and people are trying to find ways to make it seem like he didn't do anything of note.

That's all you're gonna hear until he plays in the pro's. The guy is the best player in the draft, IMO.

Young is a legit freak of nature. A football phenomenon. He might be the guy to finally shut some people up about this black quarterback stuff. You've heard all of the labels already: can only run, isnt smart, throws funny, game wont translate, etc.

He plays unlike any player that has ever played QB. Cunningham is the only comparison I can think of, but Cunningham couldnt run as well as Young can. Young has outstanding field vision. He makes great clutch throws too.

epicSocialism4tw

03-22-2006, 04:38 PM

How on earth is Young "raw"?? He throws funny?

This is becoming funny.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:42 PM

How on earth is Young "raw"?? He throws funny?

This is becoming funny.

His mechanics are awful and he played in a gimmick offense at Texas. I am pretty sure that is the definition of a raw college QB.

epicSocialism4tw

03-22-2006, 04:44 PM

His mechanics are awful and he played in a gimmick offense at Texas. I am pretty sure that is the definition of a raw college QB.

Are you aware that he had the best completion % in the entire NCAA?

Im not sure what you mean by "gimmicky", but Young made plenty of reads from the shotgun.

You know who else made great plays from the gun? John Elway.

Was he gimmicky?

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:49 PM

Are you aware that he had the best completion % in the entire NCAA?

Im not sure what you mean by "gimmicky", but Young made plenty of reads from the shotgun.

You know who else made great plays from the gun? John Elway.

Was he gimmicky?

As a matter of fact I am aware of that. Are YOU aware that he played against college DBs and college defensive coordinators? As much as I hate Gunther I'm sure he has a few more tricks up his sleeve than the D coordinator of Rice or Louisiana-Lafayette. Name the NFL team that runs out of the shotgun as much as Texas does? It isn't an NFL pro-style offense.

It doesn't mean Young can't succeed. It just means he will have more adjustments than Leinart would (who played in a pro-style offense at USC) He'll have to learn how to make 3, 5, and 7 step drops and get rid of the ball quickly. To make the right read from under center. The thing that separates good NFL QBs from Kyle Orton.

eddie mac

03-22-2006, 04:49 PM

Brooks has just signed for the Raiders. Will they still be looking for a QB at No7 when their defense has more holes than a string vest???

DrFate

03-22-2006, 04:53 PM

Brooks has just signed for the Raiders. Will they still be looking for a QB at No7 when their defense has more holes than a string vest???

They are bad enough that they might want to take a guy to develop and continue to suck in the short term. But they suck in the long term (they ARE the Raiders), so who knows.

:)

It is a good question, EMac. Since the Saints will probably pass on Leinart and Co. due to Brees will the Raiders pass because of Brooks?

broncohaven

03-22-2006, 04:57 PM

Sure we are. If you draft Mario Williams or AJ Hawk you expect him to be an impact as a rookie. Same with Davis or White. I know DW was drafted as a return guy, but he was expected to contribute from day 1 as a return guy.

Nothing is a guarantee, regardless of position. But QBs are the slowest to develop - there is no question. And taking a RAW QB when the team is supposed to be 'on the verge' makes no sense.
If you think Young would have no impact next year, you're just wrong. I'm pretty sure that Heim and Shanny could find a way to get him on the field in certain situations. Lendale would not come into camp as a starter, nor would he leave camp as the starter. There are maybe two positions on this team where a rookie could make a huge impact; DE and TE, and we'll have to move way up to get immediate impact guys at either of those two spots.

As far as not taking a raw QB when we're close to a title. You can accomplish that two ways. 1-Never draft a QB again 2-Pray for a rebuilding period. I'm not into either.

You made the best argument for taking Young yourself by saying that QBs are the slowest to develop. By that rationale we should take a QB sooner than later, and unless you're suggesting we take an inferior talent, targeting Young should be a no brainer.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 05:07 PM

If you think Young would have no impact next year, you're just wrong. I'm pretty sure that Heim and Shanny could find a way to get him on the field in certain situations. Lendale would not come into camp as a starter, nor would he leave camp as the starter. There are maybe two positions on this team where a rookie could make a huge impact; DE and TE, and we'll have to move way up to get immediate impact guys at either of those two spots.

As far as not taking a raw QB when we're close to a title. You can accomplish that two ways. 1-Never draft a QB again 2-Pray for a rebuilding period. I'm not into either.

You made the best argument for taking Young yourself by saying that QBs are the slowest to develop. By that rationale we should take a QB sooner than later, and unless you're suggesting we take an inferior talent, targeting Young should be a no brainer.

That is pretty silly. The only way Young plays at QB this year (for anyone) is if the #1 gets hurt. He simply hasn't played in a pro system enough to step in and be competent. The Young supporters seem to disregard the jump between college and the NFL. Palmer didn't play as a rookie. Rivers didn't play as a rookie. Rogers didn't play as a rookie. Campbell didn't play as a rookie.

If we added White he'd become the primary ball carrier before the card got to Taglibue. We have Ron Dayne and Tatum Bell. I don't see a lot of Pro Bowls coming from that duo. RBs can contribute as rookies (look at Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown)

If we add Davis he makes a contribution immediately as a red zone guy. If we add a quality DE he steps in and adds 8 sacks. If we add Cutler it is a minimum of 1 year with the clipboard. Young probably more.

As far as the now or later argument - if you take Young you go into 06 with the same team as last year minus Anderson, Putzier, and Pryce (add Webster and Lang, of course). That is an inferior team than the 05 version.

Lestat

03-22-2006, 05:12 PM

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 05:45 PM

That is pretty silly. The only way Young plays at QB this year (for anyone) is if the #1 gets hurt. He simply hasn't played in a pro system enough to step in and be competent. The Young supporters seem to disregard the jump between college and the NFL. Palmer didn't play as a rookie. Rivers didn't play as a rookie. Rogers didn't play as a rookie. Campbell didn't play as a rookie.

If we added White he'd become the primary ball carrier before the card got to Taglibue. We have Ron Dayne and Tatum Bell. I don't see a lot of Pro Bowls coming from that duo. RBs can contribute as rookies (look at Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown)

If we add Davis he makes a contribution immediately as a red zone guy. If we add a quality DE he steps in and adds 8 sacks. If we add Cutler it is a minimum of 1 year with the clipboard. Young probably more.

As far as the now or later argument - if you take Young you go into 06 with the same team as last year minus Anderson, Putzier, and Pryce (add Webster and Lang, of course). That is an inferior team than the 05 version.

Nobody is saying that Young is going to be a starter. There is certainly reason to believe that he would see the field in certain packages though. Hell, Shanny brought BVP on the field this year. If you think that Vince Young doesn't bring 10x that of BVP you're crazy.

First of all, we need a competent back up to Plummer right now. Young could fill that role immediately. If it came to it (injury) and Young had to start some games we'd probably be in for a rough season, but there aren't too many teams in the NFL that wouldn't be in for a rough, long haul if their #1 went down. I can look at Young as the long term for the Broncos, I don't see that in BVP.

Broncoman13

03-22-2006, 05:49 PM

because when you run it at the combine everyone knows that's pretty much your true speed, you run it on your home surface & in some cases since your used to the track it'll make you faster cause your already adjusted to it

you run a 4.7 in indy & then a 4.5 on pro day won't help much cause it'll stick in the scouts who wanna see you fall head's that you ran a 4.7 & that'll push your stock down

another reason is alot of kids bulk up & put on alot of muscle for the combine to impress & it kills their speed so they use the combine to bulk up & then lose the mass for their pro day to run faster

So you think that Jeremy Bloom's true speed was on display at the combine? If he turns out a 4.3 later this month it won't matter? Where's that Bullshiat flag smiley? Same can be said for Brian Calhoun. He ran horrible times at the combine. There was talk that he ran himself well into the 2nd day of the draft. He turns a good time at his pro-day and once again he's a projected 2nd rounder.

If anything the combine is good for interviewing, acute physicals, and getting true sizes (height, weight, hands, etc.) and not much else.

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 05:59 PM

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 06:06 PM

because when you run it at the combine everyone knows that's pretty much your true speed, you run it on your home surface & in some cases since your used to the track it'll make you faster cause your already adjusted to it

you run a 4.7 in indy & then a 4.5 on pro day won't help much cause it'll stick in the scouts who wanna see you fall head's that you ran a 4.7 & that'll push your stock down

another reason is alot of kids bulk up & put on alot of muscle for the combine to impress & it kills their speed so they use the combine to bulk up & then lose the mass for their pro day to run faster

I don't buy that at all. I ran track. City champ in the 300m hurdles. Ran at UCLA. It didn't matter where I ran. The times weren't better at home. It all depended on where I was at in my training. The further the season went along, the better the times were. It didn't matter if I was at home or on the road. I'd beat my fastest times of the year on the road, on tracks I'd never ran on. After the conference season ended all of the track meets were on the road, and that's when I ran my fastest time.

Vince Young had a good pro day. Why are the people who are against him coming up with these lame ass excuses?

extralife

03-22-2006, 06:17 PM

Nobody is saying that Young is going to be a starter. There is certainly reason to believe that he would see the field in certain packages though. Hell, Shanny brought BVP on the field this year. If you think that Vince Young doesn't bring 10x that of BVP you're crazy.

First of all, we need a competent back up to Plummer right now. Young could fill that role immediately. If it came to it (injury) and Young had to start some games we'd probably be in for a rough season, but there aren't too many teams in the NFL that wouldn't be in for a rough, long haul if their #1 went down. I can look at Young as the long term for the Broncos, I don't see that in BVP.

BVP was on the field for one play that mattered last year. One.

Anyway, a rookie is not a competent backup, almost by default. If you draft a guy that early, he has the skills to start. Why aren't you starting him? Because he doesn't know what he's doing. That makes him a crappy backup. The ideal backup is a vet that has been around for a long time, and thus is perfectly capable of steping in, absorbing the system and getting ready to play on short notice. He can make the reads and run the system with minimal adjustments. You think VY can give us any of those things this year?

Jason in LA

03-22-2006, 06:32 PM

McNair didn't start his first year. Palmer didn't. Culpepper didn't. Brady didn't. I don't think Brees did.

I don't have a problem with sitting a first round draft pick all year. Like I said before, George Foster sat his first year. Would anybody call that a bad pick?

extralife

03-22-2006, 06:35 PM

It all depends on the circumstance. Am I uniformly against sitting a top pick for a year? Of course not. Am I against trading up in a deep draft where we have two firsts, in a year where we did nothing in FA and are close to a Super Bowl so we can pick a guy we'd sit for two years? You bet your ass I am.

Clockwork Orange

03-22-2006, 06:37 PM

Vince Young had a good pro day. Why are the people who are against him coming up with these lame ass excuses?

I'll continue to invite anyone who bashes Vince Young to watch a replay of the Rose Bowl. The biggest game of his life against what some were calling possibly the best college football team of all time. He wasn't just great, he was a man amongst boys against the two time defending champions. No wonderlic score or 40 time is going to make me forget that.

Great13

03-22-2006, 06:40 PM

BVP was on the field for one play that mattered last year. One.

Anyway, a rookie is not a competent backup, almost by default. If you draft a guy that early, he has the skills to start. Why aren't you starting him? Because he doesn't know what he's doing. That makes him a crappy backup. The ideal backup is a vet that has been around for a long time, and thus is perfectly capable of steping in, absorbing the system and getting ready to play on short notice. He can make the reads and run the system with minimal adjustments. You think VY can give us any of those things this year?

Who cares about THIS year when it comes to drafting Vince Young?.. You mean to tell me you'd rather take a chance on drafting a DE that can help out a little bit in a pass rushing rotation and probably become an above average player for his career if his name isn't Mario Williams..than to draft a difference maker at the QB position.

We haven't had a blue chip game changer at the QB position since Elway. Young is a project..yes.. but we have Plummer for the next three years..and this draft is deep enough to get good D-Line or TE or Safety help in the second & third rounds. McCargo, Mark Anderson, Ray Edwards, Orien Harris, Bullocks, Blue, Klopenstein, Day.. there is plenty of talent that will be a slight notch below the players drafted at their positions in the first round..

Name some QB's that we have a chance of drafting in the next couple of years that have the potential of Vince Young. Opportunities like this don't come along often.. and in the words of my now infamous alliance.. sometimes you gotta play BALLS to the WALLS!

No guts... No glory.. I say we bring in VY.

extralife

03-22-2006, 06:42 PM

Who cares about THIS year when it comes to drafting Vince Young?.. You mean to tell me you'd rather take a chance on drafting a DE that can help out a little bit in a pass rushing rotation and probably become an above average player for his career if his name isn't Mario Williams..than to draft a difference maker at the QB position.?

If it gets us a ring this year or next (when VY would be riding the pine), then of course I would. And so would you.

extralife

03-22-2006, 06:46 PM

I'll continue to invite anyone who bashes Vince Young to watch a replay of the Rose Bowl. The biggest game of his life against what some were calling possibly the best college football team of all time. He wasn't just great, he was a man amongst boys against the two time defending champions. No wonderlic score or 40 time is going to make me forget that.

You're forgetting that that USC defense was universally cited as pretty crappy by nearly everyone that followed the team. They simply had no idea what to do against a guy like Young. In the NFL, they've got plenty of ideas.

I'm not saying VY will be a terrible player (I'm wishy-washy on him, but because of the system we run and the coach we have, I'd rather gamble on him than a guy like Leinart, whom I consider to be the better prospect), but don't take that game to be the end-all be-all statement on his worth. In fact, more than any of his stats or plays, the thing I take about VY from that game is his ability to step up under pressure. That's more important than his 200 yards rushing.

Jens1893

03-22-2006, 06:49 PM

Anubis I think it was said "and that´s your chocoloate colored John Elway right there" when Vince took down SC all by himself on that last drive. I still agree. Young has "it" and that´s some **** you can´t coach or evaluate in a wonderlic test.

Clockwork Orange

03-22-2006, 06:51 PM

I'm not saying VY will be a terrible player (I'm wishy-washy on him, but because of the system we run and the coach we have, I'd rather gamble on him than a guy like Leinart, whom I consider to be the better prospect), but don't take that game to be the end-all be-all statement on his worth. In fact, more than any of his stats or plays, the thing I take about VY from that game is his ability to step up under pressure. That's more important than his 200 yards rushing.

That game isn't the be all end all by any stretch. I also saw the way he progressed before our very eyes the year before against Michigan and the way he dominated everyone put in front of him the following season.

I'm not saying that he's a guaranteed superstar, but for people to imply that landing him would be a waste seems downright foolish to me.

Great13

03-22-2006, 06:58 PM

If it gets us a ring this year or next (when VY would be riding the pine), then of course I would. And so would you.

IF IF IF... what if it doesn't get us a ring then what? Would you be satisfied passing on a possible blue chipper at a pivotal position? Like I said earlier..its all a gamble.. but we are in a position that we normally are not in.. good draft position with plenty of ammo. All I'm asking is that we take a risk and go for a gamebreaking QB...

And for the record i believe if D. Williams doesn't get hurt.. we beat pittsburgh and win the superbowl. He played much tighter coverage than foxworth all year.. Foxy is good no doubt.. but DWill had the ability to stick to recievers like white on rice.. when he was healthy.. his preseason coverage of M. Harrison showed me all I needed to know about his skills.

extralife

03-22-2006, 07:00 PM

Everything is an if, man. You've gotta take your shots at the Super Bowl at some point. Someone is going to win it every year.

fdf

03-22-2006, 07:02 PM

I dont think Jake was called a rocket scientist before coming to denver. We had a real bright QB how did that work out for us?

Elway was terrific. Stanford accounting graduate with an A average.

ludo21

03-22-2006, 07:02 PM

IF IF IF... what if it doesn't get us a ring then what? Would you be satisfied passing on a possible blue chipper at a pivotal position? Like I said earlier..its all a gamble.. but we are in a position that we normally are not in.. good draft position with plenty of ammo. All I'm asking is that we take a risk and go for a gamebreaking QB...

And for the record i believe if D. Williams doesn't get hurt.. we beat pittsburgh and win the superbowl. He played much tighter coverage than foxworth all year.. Foxy is good no doubt.. but DWill had the ability to stick to recievers like white on rice.. when he was healthy.. his preseason coverage of M. Harrison showed me all I needed to know about his skills.

I dont think QB position puts us over the top at all. Jake is a proven winner here. A guy like Mario, or VD would help us a lot more next year.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 07:05 PM

Nobody is saying that Young is going to be a starter. There is certainly reason to believe that he would see the field in certain packages though. Hell, Shanny brought BVP on the field this year. If you think that Vince Young doesn't bring 10x that of BVP you're crazy.

If Plummer were to get hurt we miss the playoffs - BVP or Young, wouldn't make that much of a difference. Any QB pick (but especially Young because of the Texas system) is a pick for the future. If you take a RB or DE or safety (for example) they can help NOW. This team was in the AFC championship game just a few months ago. If you believe they are player or 2 away from the trophy then it makes sense to fill holes and take players who can step in and contribute. If you don't then it makes sense to draft guys to develop for the future.

A pick of Young means you draft a guy who won't see the field THIS year. It doesn't mean he won't be great - but he won't be great this year. Basically if you draft Young he will be the guy after Smith retires, Elam leaves, Nalen retires, etc. He is the 'next generation'. I'm not saying that's bad - I'm just saying I'd rather take my shot now then draft a guy who is going to carry a clipboard.

I mean - pick a mock draft. This is one I pulled off Google:

http://www.draftking.com/nfl/2006/mockdraft.shtml

Do we have a better chance in the next 2 years with Ko Simpson and Tamba Hali? Or Vince Young?

Great13

03-22-2006, 07:09 PM

Everything is an if, man. You've gotta take your shots at the Super Bowl at some point. Someone is going to win it every year.

Let's just put it this way..

If we take Vince Young .. I still think we can win it this year.. but our chances to win multiple titles over the next ten years increase greatly and I'll be happy.

If we take a combination of DT and DE.. like Bunkley/Kiwi or Lawson I think we have a good chance of winning this year or next year... but we'll have some questions to answer over the long haul (offensively).. but I'll be happy

I'll take both options but I'd prefer the first

Great13

03-22-2006, 07:14 PM

A pick of Young means you draft a guy who won't see the field THIS year. It doesn't mean he won't be great - but he won't be great this year. Basically if you draft Young he will be the guy after Smith retires, Elam leaves, Nalen retires, etc. He is the 'next generation'. I'm not saying that's bad - I'm just saying I'd rather take my shot now then draft a guy who is going to carry a clipboard.

i see your point and you're entitled to your opinion... but a WR, K, and C are easy to replace with our normal "bottom half of the round" picks. A QB of the future is hard to find. And I'll take my chances on VY if Shanny is the one grooming him.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 07:14 PM

If we take Vince Young .. I still think we can win it this year.. but our chances to win multiple titles over the next ten years increase greatly and I'll be happy.

I admire your positive attitude - but teams are improving for 06 and we aren't.

The only good thing is the other teams in the AFCW haven't done much.

Chargers are going with Rivers - possible net loss
Raiders sign Brooks - small gain
Chiefs do nothing - push
We lose Pryce, Anderson, Putzier gain Webster and Lang - net loss

DrFate

03-22-2006, 07:18 PM

i see your point and you're entitled to your opinion... but a WR, K, and C are easy to replace with our normal "bottom half of the round" picks. A QB of the future is hard to find. And I'll take my chances on VY if Shanny is the one grooming him.

The reason our offense is as weak as it is is because so many people think we can just scrounge up skill players. We can just find some slob off the street and put him in the backfield and get 1500 yards. Almost nobody wants to admit how much offensive talent we have lost the last 3 years and replaced it with no one but scraps.

I am all about the QB of the future. If Shanny thinks Young is that caliber of talent then I won't put me foot through the TV if we take him. But I don't think the Broncos can make a true run in 06 without a couple of playmakers added to the mix.

Great13

03-22-2006, 07:21 PM

I admire your positive attitude - but teams are improving for 06 and we aren't.

The only good thing is the other teams in the AFCW haven't done much.

Chargers are going with Rivers - possible net loss
Raiders sign Brooks - small gain
Chiefs do nothing - push
We lose Pryce, Anderson, Putzier gain Webster and Lang - net loss

Oh yeah??.. what about this guy?

Broncos | Gordon claimed off waivers
Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:18:08 -0800

The Denver Broncos have announced the team has claimed DL Amon Gordon off waivers from the Cleveland Browns.

That should get us out of the red..
NET GAIN!

I'm kidding and your first sentance was a great point, but the offseason is still young.

DrFate

03-22-2006, 07:24 PM

LOL

That's funny

Hercules Rockefeller

03-22-2006, 07:29 PM

I mean - pick a mock draft. This is one I pulled off Google:

http://www.draftking.com/nfl/2006/mockdraft.shtml

Do we have a better chance in the next 2 years with Ko Simpson and Tamba Hali? Or Vince Young?

That's a **** draft

Watson at 14
Simpson at 15
Marcedes Lewis at 26
Bunkley at 32

3 guys way too high and Bunkley who the Browns don't even think will last until their pick at 12

DrFate

03-22-2006, 07:34 PM

How about this one?
http://football.about.com/cs/nfldraft/a/bl_mockdraft.htm

Or this one?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10909906/

Or:
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/

Or a whole list of drafts:
http://www.hailredskins.com/MockDraft.htm

:afro:

Oops - one of those has us drafting Cutler.

:)

eddie mac

03-22-2006, 07:39 PM

Here's a more realistic up to date one.

http://www.nflmockdraft.us/

15. Denver Chad Jackson WR
22. Denver Lendale White RB

Clockwork Orange

03-22-2006, 07:56 PM

Here's a more realistic up to date one.

http://www.nflmockdraft.us/

15. Denver Chad Jackson WR
22. Denver Lendale White RB

I'd be happy with that, though someone should tell whoever put that mock together that Atlanta doesn't have the 29th pick.

bpc

03-22-2006, 09:20 PM

The only thing I recall about Prince Vince's speed is that neither Michigan, OU, or USC could keep him in check the past two years and those two team are loaded with speed. He was running past everybody.

yavoon

03-22-2006, 09:32 PM

That's all you're gonna hear until he plays in the pro's. The guy is the best player in the draft, IMO.

Young is a legit freak of nature. A football phenomenon. He might be the guy to finally shut some people up about this black quarterback stuff. You've heard all of the labels already: can only run, isnt smart, throws funny, game wont translate, etc.

He plays unlike any player that has ever played QB. Cunningham is the only comparison I can think of, but Cunningham couldnt run as well as Young can. Young has outstanding field vision. He makes great clutch throws too.

how is young gna disprove the "isnt smart" thing?

=D

yavoon

03-22-2006, 09:34 PM

Here's a more realistic up to date one.

http://www.nflmockdraft.us/

15. Denver Chad Jackson WR
22. Denver Lendale White RB

ewww that would definitely not make me happy. and I dont say that often

broncohaven

03-22-2006, 09:40 PM

As a matter of fact I am aware of that. Are YOU aware that he played against college DBs and college defensive coordinators?
So Leinart and Cutler were playing against pro DBs and NFL coordinators last year. That's why Youngs rating was better?

shakenbake

03-22-2006, 10:02 PM

As a matter of fact I am aware of that. Are YOU aware that he played against college DBs and college defensive coordinators? As much as I hate Gunther I'm sure he has a few more tricks up his sleeve than the D coordinator of Rice or Louisiana-Lafayette. Name the NFL team that runs out of the shotgun as much as Texas does? It isn't an NFL pro-style offense.

It doesn't mean Young can't succeed. It just means he will have more adjustments than Leinart would (who played in a pro-style offense at USC) He'll have to learn how to make 3, 5, and 7 step drops and get rid of the ball quickly. To make the right read from under center. The thing that separates good NFL QBs from Kyle Orton.

I like how you talk about Rice and Louisiana-Lafayette but leave out Ohio State. If I remember correctly they had some pretty good players on that defense. Not to mention the game was on the road and in a hostile enviroment.

Orange_Beard

03-22-2006, 11:20 PM

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Vince Young threw sideline passes, deep routes and across the middle. Some were touch passes, others he fired as hard as he could.

Almost all were on target.

The former Texas quarterback worked out for 30 minutes Wednesday in front of more than 100 NFL scouts, coaches and executives who are paying close attention to the quirky throwing motion that still raises questions despite delivering a national championship.

"Very impressed," said new Houston Texans coach Gary Kubiak, whose team owns the No. 1 pick. "The kid put on a show."

Orange_Beard

03-22-2006, 11:22 PM

Correct me if I am wrong,
I think college players against college players, while,
Pro players play against pros.

epicSocialism4tw

03-22-2006, 11:31 PM

I like how you talk about Rice and Louisiana-Lafayette but leave out Ohio State. If I remember correctly they had some pretty good players on that defense. Not to mention the game was on the road and in a hostile enviroment.

People see what they want to. Young has been excellent for the past three seasons. You could see his brilliance all the way back in 2003 against (at) #10 K State when he drove them down the field to score a game winning TD with 5 minutes left and ultimately stole minutes from Chance Mock. Young is a gamer.

Ugly Duck

03-22-2006, 11:49 PM

I just hope he doesn't end up in Oakland. I don't think it would be fun to face him twice a year.No worries, mate. Oakland won't pick Young because ProFootballBullsh!t.com is predicting that it will happen. That site has never been right about anything yet, so you won't see Young in Silver & Black:

POSTED 12:01 a.m. EST, March 22, 2006

RAIDERS WANTS VINCE

A league source tells us that the Oakland Raiders "were all over" quarterback Vince Young at his March 22 pro day workout in Austin, and that there's a strong belief in league circles the Raiders will select him with the seventh overall pick in the draft, if he's still available.

We're also told that the Raiders are worried that Young won't be available in the seven hole.

The Titans, with the third pick, could be the best bet to take Young. The Jets, at No. 4, are a more remote possibility. Other teams could try to strike a trade with one of the teams who pick before the Raiders in order to move up and get Young before the Raiders can gobble him up.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm