View Full Version : Jim Bates' First Move: Cut the Heart out of the Defense
epicSocialism4tw
03-28-2007, 12:33 AM
Do you approve?
Jim Bates' first significant change to the defense appears to be getting Al Wilson out of town as quickly as possible.
So far, it has done nothing for the Broncos outside of jumble up the front office and the locker room. I would label it a considerable failure up to this point.
Al Wilson is a Bronco. He's put in his time here. He's played hurt and carried the defense for years. Is this the way that you fix the team? By throwing our warriors under the bus without even getting anything in return?
shakenbake
03-28-2007, 12:37 AM
Do you approve?
Jim Bates' first significant change to the defense appears to be getting Al Wilson out of town as quickly as possible.
So far, it has done nothing for the Broncos outside of jumble up the front office and the locker room. I would label it a considerable failure up to this point.
Al Wilson is a Bronco. He's put in his time here. He's played hurt and carried the defense for years. Is this the way that you fix the team? By throwing our warriors under the bus without even getting anything in return?
I approve. I don't think Al Wilson is a "playmaker" never has been. Sure he is a good if not very good MLB but he is getting older and has a really high salary. It's not like the "heart of our Defense" has led us to any championships.
s0phr0syne
03-28-2007, 12:40 AM
Maybe cutting out an old, decrepit heart as you prepare for the transplant of younger, healthier heart is the only way to go about the business.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure that Al falls under the criteria. The trade talks caught me by surprise, but ultimately, everything that gets done is being done for the sake of furthering the team, not setting it back. I'll wait to see where everything lands before a final judgement....
Eli_Cash
03-28-2007, 12:44 AM
Dangling a captain in a failed trade is not what I expected after breaking the bank with the recent signings.
AW's not on the upside anymore and the salary is a problem.
Tough situation, but I think we could have been less wishy washy on the whole subject.
From his comments Wilson didn't seem to be offended.
Best case scenario he restructures and feels healthy, September through February.
Where's Terry Pierce when you need him?
footstepsfrom#27
03-28-2007, 12:44 AM
Bates...like his three predecessors in the post Superbowl era...will be shown the door in the next 2-3 years if his ideas fail to bail out Mike's drafting mistakes. Bates knows this so he's scrambling to put his mark on the defense as quickly as possible. It may not work, but at least it will look like he's been busy.
telluride
03-28-2007, 12:46 AM
Calm down.
anyone who denies al's decline and the fact that he isn't the player he once was is only blinded by sentimental feelings....that is the reason shanahan has been so successful, his heart is stone when it comes to managing his team. its the only way to do it, glad bates is the same way if he is driving this.
ludo21
03-28-2007, 12:50 AM
"its just the nature of the business"
I like the fact that for once the D Cordinator is finally allowed some input on making decisions on the players he wants.
Jens1893
03-28-2007, 12:57 AM
"its just the nature of the business"
I like the fact that for once the D Cordinator is finally allowed some input on making decisions on the players he wants.
Definitely.
broncolife
03-28-2007, 12:59 AM
I liked that they tried trading him. If we were trying to trade Al and he was performing like he did during his contract year, I would be pissed.But to me he has never improved since his contract year. In fact, I think he been declining ever since that year. He still a above average linebacker, so if we dont get value out of him we might as well keep him. I really dont want to see him cut, so hopefully he takes a paycut. So if Al comes back and has a decent year are we going to try and trade him next year?
Killericon
03-28-2007, 01:07 AM
Do we know if it's Jim Bates? I mean, Maybe it's just Shanahan, or maybe Sundquist, or maybe they've actually overspent, or maybe his injury actually is that bad, or maybe Al's the one perpetrating this whole thing, and he's just publicly saying that he wants to stay to save face?
We can't know, we can't say. All I know for sure is that we know next to nothing, just like Shanahan wants. I'm not going to judge Bates until i see his product on the field, but I tell you this much; It does not sound like Shanahan or Sundquist to give their newly hired defensive mastermind(If you can call him that) enough leeway to trade away a guy like Wilson.
Garcia Bronco
03-28-2007, 01:07 AM
It's time for a change.
NFLBRONCO
03-28-2007, 01:11 AM
Lets get started on revamping D. AL at best will last 2 yrs max anyways.
Kaylore
03-28-2007, 01:12 AM
We haven't even had a draft yet. If at the end of the year we're better than last year, then it was the right move. If we're the same or worse than last year, it was a good move. Too many pieces to put in place, right now.
epicSocialism4tw
03-28-2007, 01:18 AM
If the goal is to use Al's money to get a clue-chip lineman, then I am all for this move.
On the other hand, any other move is a lateral move and is not worth the hassle of causing so much change in the culture of the defense.
Taco John
03-28-2007, 01:19 AM
It does not sound like Shanahan or Sundquist to give their newly hired defensive mastermind(If you can call him that) enough leeway to trade away a guy like Wilson.
Uhhhh... Yes it does.
Shanahan didn't fire Coyer and Bring in Bates to sit on his thumbs and hope things work out for the best. Bates is here to put his mark on this team. Nothing on defense is happening without the advice and consent of Jim Bates. Nothing.
watermock
03-28-2007, 01:27 AM
What has the wisdom of baby Zee told you?
footstepsfrom#27
03-28-2007, 01:41 AM
Uhhhh... Yes it does.
Shanahan didn't fire Coyer and Bring in Bates to sit on his thumbs and hope things work out for the best. Bates is here to put his mark on this team. Nothing on defense is happening without the advice and consent of Jim Bates. Nothing.
I recall hearing that about Ray Rhodes too.
epicSocialism4tw
03-28-2007, 01:52 AM
I recall hearing that about Ray Rhodes too.
It seems as though Greg Robinson was the last coordinator that we had that actually left a noticeable impact on the defense. Everyone since Greg has implemented essentially the same type of scheme/personnel with the same mediocre result.
Crushaholic
03-28-2007, 02:19 AM
Where's Terry Pierce when you need him?
He was actually with Houston from January of '06 and cut during training camp. Maybe Kubiak knows of his whereabouts...
cutthemdown
03-28-2007, 02:25 AM
people were pissed when mike harden got cut also. that atwater kid was pretty good though. dj williams needs to be on the field more. this does that.
DBroncos4life
03-28-2007, 02:56 AM
Who in the hell is going to get the money we save from Al? Not one player out there will mean more to us then Al. Its one thing if he can't play again, but just to save some money makes this move gay.
OrangeShadow
03-28-2007, 06:45 AM
its called a buisness for a reason
Atlas
03-28-2007, 07:51 AM
I think it might work out. Al has had a great career and it's not over. I think some reflection is in order for al people concerned. The defense needs to improve and Bates' ass is on the line so he is going to do what he thinks is best. I don't see how cutting Wilson and saving $1.5 mil is going to make Denver a better team, all it does is create another hole.
chrisp
03-28-2007, 08:10 AM
Why does everyone just assume that this is 100% down to Bates? If it was a cap move (as has been widely suggested) then it is just as likely this has come from Shanny, Sundquist or Bowlen.
Now it might be down to Bate's reccomendation or it may be a conclusion the FO reached before bates was hired. We actually have no way of knowing that right now. However the way a lot of people are talking here its as if Bates has gone on TV and said "Yeah Al sucks drum him out of town.."
As far as I'm aware Bates has been silent on this matter thus far.
fontaine
03-28-2007, 08:25 AM
Why does everyone just assume that this is 100% down to Bates? If it was a cap move (as has been widely suggested) then it is just as likely this has come from Shanny, Sundquist or Bowlen.
Now it might be down to Bate's reccomendation or it may be a conclusion the FO reached before bates was hired. We actually have no way of knowing that right now. However the way a lot of people are talking here its as if Bates has gone on TV and said "Yeah Al sucks drum him out of town.."
As far as I'm aware Bates has been silent on this matter thus far.
I would agree with this. Trying to trade Al seems like a move for the cap and for draft picks, not something that is meant to bolster the front 7 for Bates.
Jim Bates already made a few moves. His first one was to trade for Dan Wilkinson which pretty much exploded in his face once it was realized that Big Daddy was off on a cruise somewhere heading into retirement.
I would agree with this. Trying to trade Al seems like a move for the cap and for draft picks, not something that is meant to bolster the front 7 for Bates.
Jim Bates already made a few moves. His first one was to trade for Dan Wilkinson which pretty much exploded in his face once it was realized that Big Daddy was off on a cruise somewhere heading into retirement.
You're making groundless speculation just like Crisp said everyone else is about the Wilson deal.
Do we have any reason to think Bates was behind the Wilkinson trade? And if so its hardly blown up in his face, we'll be getting our pick back shortly if Wilkinson doesn't report ready to play soon.
HorseHead
03-28-2007, 08:49 AM
I love Al, but come on everybody, how many times in the last two-three seasons have we seen him try to light somebody up, only to whiff? I know, he's played hurt, and he's played his as- off, he is a true fighter, but we need to be honest here.
BroncoInferno
03-28-2007, 09:06 AM
I find it very hard to believe that this move would be attempted without the thumbs up from Bates.I believe that the plan to move Al would just be the first in a series of moves designed to upgrade the team. The front office is clearly in win now mode, so I find it difficult to believe after all big moves they would make a move that they know would weaken the team. I'm wondering if after getting the 3rd from NY, they weren't planning to send a first day pick off for someone like Grant or Rogers. That would have still left them with four first day picks to play with.
RaiderH8r
03-28-2007, 09:20 AM
I think it might work out. Al has had a great career and it's not over. I think some reflection is in order for al people concerned. The defense needs to improve and Bates' ass is on the line so he is going to do what he thinks is best. I don't see how cutting Wilson and saving $1.5 mil is going to make Denver a better team, all it does is create another hole.
Yeah, what you said.
Understanding that these moves are meant to further the team it's very easy to get lost in the capology of the moves, essentially putting the blinders on, looking to free up money and neglecting to appreciate the on field impact.
If Bates wants to get job security and quickly get attention, shoring up the front four and getting them to perform would do wonders for his career. That's the position of need and the place that affords the best chance for the largest improvement. Downgrading at MLB for cap savings isn't going to do much for one's "mastermind" status.
RaiderH8r
03-28-2007, 09:24 AM
I love Al, but come on everybody, how many times in the last two-three seasons have we seen him try to light somebody up, only to whiff? I know, he's played hurt, and he's played his as- off, he is a true fighter, but we need to be honest here.
Far fewer than the number of times I've seen Gold or DJ out of position when Al's got his gap covered.
More importantly, how many times have we seen our DL pushed into the the LB corps disrupting their ability to scrape and make a tackle for a minimal gain? Answer: somewhere around too f&*kin much.
Fix the line, fix the D. Simple as that.
orinjkrush
03-28-2007, 09:33 AM
anyone who denies al's decline and the fact that he isn't the player he once was is only blinded by sentimental feelings....that is the reason shanahan has been so successful, his heart is stone when it comes to managing his team. its the only way to do it, glad bates is the same way if he is driving this.
wonder if that extends to Shannyhanman too? a string of 9-7, 10-6 seasons with one and out in the playoffs and scary bad drafting? after all, its just bidness.
fontaine
03-28-2007, 09:35 AM
You're making groundless speculation just like Crisp said everyone else is about the Wilson deal.
Do we have any reason to think Bates was behind the Wilkinson trade? And if so its hardly blown up in his face, we'll be getting our pick back shortly if Wilkinson doesn't report ready to play soon.
Groundless speculation? I doubt it.
Under Coyer we went after fast, athletic DTs. Much like the Tampa Cover 2 type guys that can get after the QB.
With Bates, he prefers big road blocks at DT and so the first guy we go for? A 330 + run stuffer in Dan Wilkinson.
illbroncsfn
03-28-2007, 09:46 AM
I truly believe that Al Wilson can excel in Bate's defensive system. Yes, we all saw the missed tackles/lack of plays made by Al during the last 10 games of the season- but who knows how banged up he was during that time? My vantagepoint for Big Al is a comparison to a former Bates Player- Zach Thomas. Who would you rather have at MLB in a Bate's style defense- Zach Thomas or Big Al? Big Al is no doubt more physically gifted than Zach Thomas, maybe not as instinctual, but a more talented player overall. With an offseason, contract restructuring, Big Al will be back to a pro bowl level!
Natedogg
03-28-2007, 02:10 PM
As far as I can tell even if Al has lost a step, his gap is almost always covered.
A lot of these posters are probably the same ones saying Lynch is the weak link in our secondary (when in fact he is in position almost every time). I don't have game film or knowledge of game plans... but appears to me that Al Wilson is a middle linebacker you don't want to line up against.
I bet he has more gas in his tank than Romo did during the Super Bowl runs. Speaking of... how many times then did I hear "I wish we had a mean nasty linebacker instead of Glen Cadrez."? If it is true and is the end, then at least it was a good run.
While I'm ranting I bet some of you Judases were calling for Elway to be traded to the skins in 91.... Come on, be honest.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-20057523.html
RaiderH8r
03-28-2007, 02:18 PM
As far as I can tell even if Al has lost a step, his gap is almost always covered.
A lot of these posters are probably the same ones saying Lynch is the weak link in our secondary (when in fact he is in position almost every time). I don't have game film or knowledge of game plans... but appears to me that Al Wilson is a middle linebacker you don't want to line up against.
I bet he has more gas in his tank than Romo did during the Super Bowl runs. Speaking of... how many times then did I hear "I wish we had a mean nasty linebacker instead of Glen Cadrez."? If it is true and is the end, then at least it was a good run.
While I'm ranting I bet some of you Judases were calling for Elway to be traded to the skins in 91.... Come on, be honest.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-20057523.html
The simple fact that Chief fans are happy about Al's potential departure tells me all I need to know.
Rock Chalk
03-28-2007, 02:46 PM
Until there is a scenario presented where a very good pro-bowl LB is a replacement for losing Al, I think at best it is an idiotic move.
By pro-bowl LB I mean someone not in the draft because knowing our teams mostly horrible draft decisions I have zero...ZERO confidence in any draft prospects.
BroncosBeerMan
03-29-2007, 01:18 AM
Not to toot my own horn, but with all the talk of Al Wilson being cut, I always remember this webpage I made when I was in high school. He was our first pick, and therefore, made the "headline."
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Pressbox/4753/index.html
Groundless speculation? I doubt it.
Under Coyer we went after fast, athletic DTs. Much like the Tampa Cover 2 type guys that can get after the QB.
With Bates, he prefers big road blocks at DT and so the first guy we go for? A 330 + run stuffer in Dan Wilkinson.
Yeah, Gerard Warren fits that to a 'T' doesn't he?
McKinley fits Bates preference as well huh?
Tredici
03-29-2007, 10:07 AM
Do you approve?
Jim Bates' first significant change to the defense appears to be getting Al Wilson out of town as quickly as possible.
So far, it has done nothing for the Broncos outside of jumble up the front office and the locker room. I would label it a considerable failure up to this point.
Al Wilson is a Bronco. He's put in his time here. He's played hurt and carried the defense for years. Is this the way that you fix the team? By throwing our warriors under the bus without even getting anything in return?
Where's the option of pointless speculation and accusation of Jim Bates with no evidence to support the inane assumption of this poll?
fontaine
03-29-2007, 10:35 AM
Yeah, Gerard Warren fits that to a 'T' doesn't he?
McKinley fits Bates preference as well huh?
Are you denying that under Coyer we didn't run tweaked scheme like Tampa Bay's cover 2?
Because, you know, Coyer was hired by Tampa Bay right off the bat when he was fired here.
epicSocialism4tw
03-29-2007, 11:50 AM
Where's the option of pointless speculation and accusation of Jim Bates with no evidence to support the inane assumption of this poll?
So you wouldnt agree that the defensive coordinator has any say in significant defensive personnel decisions?
The trading of Al Wilson is undoubtedly the most significant personnel decision that has been made on defense in regards to player removal that has happened in years. It is not a coincidence that the team gets rid of the hub of one defensive philosophy in a move that signifies a change in philosophy when a new defensive coordinator comes aboard.
It is downright ignorant to believe that the coordinator had nothing to do with this move.
Tredici
03-29-2007, 12:05 PM
So you wouldnt agree that the defensive coordinator has any say in significant defensive personnel decisions?
The trading of Al Wilson is undoubtedly the most significant personnel decision that has been made on defense in regards to player removal that has happened in years. It is not a coincidence that the team gets rid of the hub of one defensive philosophy in a move that signifies a change in philosophy when a new defensive coordinator comes aboard.
It is downright ignorant to believe that the coordinator had nothing to do with this move.
Well then call me ignorant. -- Which I guess is redundant since you already did.
I believe Wilson is at a crossroads. He has to accept a pay restructure to stay in Denver. I believe his AGENT is doing his job and trying to find a situation which allows Al to keep the money and still benefit the Broncos. I believe the Broncos GM - Ted Sundquist works with the players to their and the team's advantage.
Believe what you want. I think it's plain stupid to think a new Defensive Coordinator would come into the job, look around and say, get rid of the defensive leader on the team.
And I repeat you have no evidence to base this assumption on. -But hey, I'm the ignorant one.
Paladin
03-29-2007, 12:27 PM
Well, it seems the "damm if you do, damm if you don't" discussion is clearly reaching high pitch here. Again.
Frankly, I have to believe that the Broncos are interested in winning football games. If making serious changes in the LB corps is believed important to do, then so be it. Frankly, my sentiments will get about a smallish gleam of possible mayber consideration by the coaches who are building the team for next year. Maybe. Not a day goes by that I say to myself: I wonder if I should trade Al Wilson today? Maybe I will have a scout check out where we could dump Foxworth. I wonder if I could trade Nails for a fourth rounder to the Lions? Etc., etc., etc. Know what? The Broncos never call me for my ideas, ever.
Scream all you want. If the coaches think moving Al because of the need for better productivity by putting DJ in the middle is the thing to do, it will happen.
I say wait until the moves play out. I think the Broncos are on to something.....
epicSocialism4tw
03-29-2007, 12:29 PM
I'm the ignorant one.
Well, we agree on that. :thumbs:
Tredici
03-29-2007, 12:33 PM
Well, we agree on that. :thumbs:
Yup. For even posting on a thread with the title Jim Bates' First Move started by a hysterical drama queen with absolutely not a shred of any evidence to support the statement.
Ignorant yes. But learning.
BroncoInferno
03-29-2007, 12:34 PM
Well, I think it's unlikely that Bates would not have been asked to give his opinion on a possible move; however, just because that opinion was sought does not mean that he might not be overruled.
BroncoInferno
03-29-2007, 12:35 PM
Well, we agree on that. :thumbs:
You're a douchebag. Agreed?
Billy Clyde Puckett
03-29-2007, 01:18 PM
Well, we agree on that. :thumbs:
Lay off.
Tred is one of the most logical posters we have who always has well reasoned posts. We need more like her and less hysteria.
DB84FAN
03-29-2007, 01:20 PM
ne wins because, they are not sentimental about there players. just because someone played well 5 yrs back and does ok now.. we cannot keep them. businesses cannot be run that way.. so get over it. Al must go or reduce his salary
broncsyanks
03-29-2007, 01:29 PM
only bates knows what he will do on defense and with that he needs to have certain kind of players. who knows if al stays maybe hemight be able to get somthing out of him. feel bad for al but there comes a time where 5 mil with the play he gave last year shows he isnt worth that much. every coach needs there own kind of players. maybe al isnt one of his.
Dedhed
03-29-2007, 02:15 PM
I didn't think the D showed much heart the 2nd half of the season. I don't understand the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality around here, when clearly it was broken.
We've had the same MO on D for the last few years; start strong and finish pathetic. I, for one, have no qualms with a shakeup. If it invlves Wilson (which it clearly does), so be it.
ludo21
03-29-2007, 02:20 PM
if by cutting the heart of the defense it improves our DL and LB spot, im all for it.
-Slap-
03-30-2007, 06:01 PM
Typically mealy-mouthed and ill-informed thread from the resident drama king.
Al's agent put him in this predicament by accepting such a backloaded deal. He didn't give a **** that the Broncos were never going to pay an undersized and overmileage MLB all that money past the age of 30. Agents get their money up front, so what did he care?
Of course, all of that is rather immaterial. Anybody who thinks Mike Shanahan automatically ceded control of player personnel to a career assistant like Jim Bates is just plain off the chart stupid.
Tredici
03-30-2007, 06:31 PM
Now. Now.
Everyone who isn't ignorant knows how involved with player personnel Denver's Defensive Coordinators have been. All those free agents Greg Robinson brought in. Ray Rhode's personnel influences were off the charts. Larry Coyer said get rid of Portis and get Bailey. The power of the Defensive Coordinators in Denver is legendary.
Kaylore
03-30-2007, 06:52 PM
Actually I happen to think these moves are motivated by Bates. I think Shanahan likes Bates and obviously works with him, but I happen to think these moves are happening to put together the kind of players that will work in Bates scheme.
Now I don't think Shanahan is just giving Bates a blank check to go on a shopping spree. Shanahan is obviously the personnel guy. But I do think that Bates sat down with his new staff, they looked at tape and then presented their opinions on what they have, who they can use, who they can't and what their recommendations for personnel are at this point to Shanahan. I think that information is what is motivating these moves from the front office.
watermock
03-30-2007, 07:03 PM
*sigh*...well that's 10 minutes wasted. First, those thinking that there is a 1Percent chance that Denver will run a 4-3 are delusional. Second, I don't seen the angst on who is calling the shots! Everyone should know that Shanahan goes thru his assistants for opinions and Sundquist about things regarding cap ect. i.e. What is his market value? Bottom line is that Bowlen doesn't meddle, and Shanahan makes the final call, good or bad.
It's just like how every call from Kubiak had to go thru Shanahan, again for better or worse. Al Wilson wouldn't of been shopped without Shanahan's approval, for better or worse. Obviously there were concerns about a combination of injury and salary, along with a noticable dropoff in play.
As far as the offseason so far, IMO, it's been outstanding with a few setbacks. Jake and Wilkinson are concerned, this still remains up in the air IMO. If we have a draft even close to our 06 offensive draft, I'll be estatic.
-Slap-
03-30-2007, 08:11 PM
If we have another draft like '06, Rings are unavoidable.
BroncoInferno
03-30-2007, 08:14 PM
Actually I happen to think these moves are motivated by Bates. I think Shanahan likes Bates and obviously works with him, but I happen to think these moves are happening to put together the kind of players that will work in Bates scheme.
Now I don't think Shanahan is just giving Bates a blank check to go on a shopping spree. Shanahan is obviously the personnel guy. But I do think that Bates sat down with his new staff, they looked at tape and then presented their opinions on what they have, who they can use, who they can't and what their recommendations for personnel are at this point to Shanahan. I think that information is what is motivating these moves from the front office.
I agree. I find it difficult to believe that any defensive move would be made without serious imput from Bates. He would not have that final word, obviously, but it's almost a certainity he gets strong imput since he knows what best fits his defensive scheme. If Bates had given Al a ringing endorsement, I don't think this would be happening, especially since we appear OK on the '07 cap.
usedupbraids
03-30-2007, 08:15 PM
thats a crazy idea get rid of al matter of fact thats plan dumb no no forget that thats just dumb in **** no forget that thats like really really kind of idiotic!!!!
SureShot
03-30-2007, 10:13 PM
thats a crazy idea get rid of al matter of fact thats plan dumb no no forget that thats just dumb in **** no forget that thats like really really kind of idiotic!!!!
Feel free to throw in some punctuation. Oh its usedupbrains. Nevermind.
SureShot
03-30-2007, 10:17 PM
If we have another draft like '06, Rings are unavoidable.
If we have a draft like last years we will have a young nucleus that will rival any in the league.
Mediator12
03-30-2007, 11:46 PM
If we have another draft like '06, Rings are unavoidable.
You know what is completely sad about this draft? Every position of need is very deep in this draft and a decent scouting value laden draft is completely possible. Even two gap DT's are available in the later rounds this year. DE, safety, WR, and even value LB's can be had. The draft is just freakin set up for them. It scares me that Playmakers are available at need positions that are in our ranges.
SureShot
03-31-2007, 12:36 AM
You know what is completely sad about this draft? Every position of need is very deep in this draft and a decent scouting value laden draft is completely possible. Even two gap DT's are available in the later rounds this year. DE, safety, WR, and even value LB's can be had. The draft is just freakin set up for them. It scares me that Playmakers are available at need positions that are in our ranges.
Good point. Thats one of the reasons I'm hoping for BPA this year. Well except WR.
NFLBRONCO
03-31-2007, 12:52 AM
You know what is completely sad about this draft? Every position of need is very deep in this draft and a decent scouting value laden draft is completely possible. Even two gap DT's are available in the later rounds this year. DE, safety, WR, and even value LB's can be had. The draft is just freakin set up for them. It scares me that Playmakers are available at need positions that are in our ranges.
This is why alot of us want to stay at 21 or move down we can address all our biggest needs this year.
Odysseus
03-31-2007, 01:10 AM
If we have another draft like '06, Rings are unavoidable.
Last year's draft would have been pretty good had we gotten Cutler and then stopped.
We've done so well with the FA pickups this year that I cannot imagine doing that well in the draft.
fontaine
03-31-2007, 05:54 AM
You know what is completely sad about this draft? Every position of need is very deep in this draft and a decent scouting value laden draft is completely possible. Even two gap DT's are available in the later rounds this year. DE, safety, WR, and even value LB's can be had. The draft is just freakin set up for them. It scares me that Playmakers are available at need positions that are in our ranges.
Yup. I'm loving the fact that we have 4 picks in the first day and a great choice of DE/S. I'm not up to speed with DTs so I don't know which direction we're going there. The FO has done a pretty solid job in addressing CB/RB/TE so that we don't have as many full blown needs as other teams going into this draft so they should be able to mix it up a bit and build for the future as well.
Odysseus
03-31-2007, 07:23 AM
Yup. I'm loving the fact that we have 4 picks in the first day and a great choice of DE/S. I'm not up to speed with DTs so I don't know which direction we're going there. The FO has done a pretty solid job in addressing CB/RB/TE so that we don't have as many full blown needs as other teams going into this draft so they should be able to mix it up a bit and build for the future as well.
Med makes a great point. I like the fact we can actually build quite a bit of depth this team for years to come.
John Lynch is in his 14th year yet Rod Smith in his 12th is old? I don't have any real knocks on Lynch.
If you stare at the roster you'll look at this team and think Wow! The Broncos are doing great! I see holes but you are right not any REAL full blown needs.
(Muttering to self *%&^$ DT! *$%(#$%!!!)
Med makes a great point. I like the fact we can actually build quite a bit of depth this team for years to come.
John Lynch is in his 14th year yet Rod Smith in his 12th is old? I don't have any real knocks on Lynch.
If you stare at the roster you'll look at this team and think Wow! The Broncos are doing great! I see holes but you are right not any REAL full blown needs.
(Muttering to self *%&^$ DT! *$%(#$%!!!)
FYI, Lynch is a year and a half younger. Don't forget how long it took Rod to crack into the league.
I think Rod will have a bounce back year next season though, he and Marshall should have a good battle for #2 in camp, with the loser and Stokley posing a real thread as our #3 and #4 tandem.
Odysseus
03-31-2007, 09:33 AM
FYI, Lynch is a year and a half younger. Don't forget how long it took Rod to crack into the league.
I think Rod will have a bounce back year next season though, he and Marshall should have a good battle for #2 in camp, with the loser and Stokley posing a real thread as our #3 and #4 tandem.
Good point.
I hope Rod, Stokely and Marshall battle it out so that no matter who is on the field the ball is getting snagged and the chains are moving.
BlaK-Argentina
03-31-2007, 12:51 PM
Good point.
I hope Rod, Stokely and Marshall battle it out so that no matter who is on the field the ball is getting snagged and the chains are moving.
As much as I like Marshall, I'd love to see an effective Rod at number 2 this year. Besides, Marshall in the slot should be a great match up against smaller nickle DBs, right?
usedupbraids
03-31-2007, 01:01 PM
Feel free to throw in some punctuation. Oh its usedupbrains. Nevermind.
get of my meat ya loser holla back similac :kiss:
Odysseus
03-31-2007, 01:01 PM
As much as I like Marshall, I'd love to see an effective Rod at number 2 this year. Besides, Marshall in the slot should be a great match up against smaller nickle DBs, right?
You bastige! You smoked me out! :flower:
Of course I would love to see Rod in the number two. ;D
I cannot imagine that happening but it's fun to have a wish list.
usedupbraids
03-31-2007, 01:04 PM
check this out the Bly pick up was breezy so i love this guy matter of fact i might marry him :)
want2bAbronco2
03-31-2007, 03:30 PM
I've had like 3 or 4 friends tell me that they heard Denver is talking to Detroit about the #2 pick. If CJ is on the board at #2, Denver will trade #21, 08 #1, 08 #2, and Al Wilson. I really want us to draft Reggie Nelson FS/Brandon Meriweather FS in rnd 1, but I would be doing backflips in my yard on draft day if we get CJ. Walker, Marshall, and CJ........wow.
oh, and I love Al, but he is getting older and hasn't played as well as I would have liked/been injured last 2-3 yrs. It doesn't make me happy, but if it is better for the present/future of the team, make it happen.
Pat Bowlen
03-31-2007, 04:15 PM
Feel free to throw in some punctuation. Oh its usedupbrains. Nevermind.
Probably one of the more accurate screen names out there. Guy's a moron, and seems pretty pleased with that fact.