PDA

View Full Version : Putzier a Bronco again


SpiritGuy
03-13-2009, 10:10 PM
The Denver Broncos reached a one-year contract agreement with TE Jeb Putzier, Scout.com has confirmed.

Putzier ended last season with the Broncos after spending most of it with the Seattle Seahawks. He played for the Houston Texans in 2006 and 2007 and was drafted in the sixth round by Denver in 2002.

Found Here (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=2&cid=847074&nid=4100790&fhn=1)

Pick Six
03-13-2009, 10:11 PM
I guess he's a good insurance policy for Scheffler...

Popps
03-13-2009, 10:20 PM
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2008/0124/20080124__Parade1998~p1.jpg

SoCalBronco
03-13-2009, 10:24 PM
That might mean that they are close to moving Scheffler as has been noted a few times in the press. :(

socalorado
03-13-2009, 10:26 PM
The Putz is back!

Taco John
03-13-2009, 10:27 PM
At some point in time, this guy is going to have to make a move that is really different than Shanahan that we can look at and go: "that's it! That's the reason this guy is here."

Killericon
03-13-2009, 10:28 PM
Awesome. I've always loved this guy.

Don Flamenco
03-13-2009, 10:30 PM
Yep he also runs a 4.5 except he can stay healthy for longer than two games... and he's white

Taco John
03-13-2009, 10:30 PM
Hmmm... Looks like he hasn't been getting the same production the last few years as the modest production he had with us.

http://www.nfl.com/players/jebputzier/profile?id=PUT553720

Anyone know why he's only started two games in the last two years? Actually, I just realized that I answered my own question. (http://www.nfl.com/players/owendaniels/profile?id=DAN576298)

phisig150
03-13-2009, 10:56 PM
Is the TE important in McDaniels scheme? Can Graham fit the bill?

Chris
03-13-2009, 10:59 PM
The TE is important to run blocking and goal line receiving. Graham fits it perfectly.

Taco John
03-13-2009, 11:00 PM
Is the TE important in McDaniels scheme? Can Graham fit the bill?

Only for blocking... Ben Watson caught 22 balls all season last year. (http://www.nfl.com/players/benjaminwatson/profile?id=WAT311042)

ZONA
03-13-2009, 11:00 PM
There might be some plays in the ole McD handbook that calls for a pass catching TE and he can do that and he's cheap. I've been saying for awhile I think Schef is "trade bait" come draft day.

phisig150
03-13-2009, 11:01 PM
So Scheff for a 4th or is that too much?

dbfan4life
03-13-2009, 11:23 PM
Now what can we do to get Jake back. The cycles almost complete. Bwahahaha.

phisig150
03-13-2009, 11:25 PM
Might be the only one but I miss Jake the Snake.

Bronco Yoda
03-13-2009, 11:29 PM
Is the TE important in McDaniels scheme? Can Graham fit the bill?

Not as important as in Shanahans WCO.

Taco John
03-13-2009, 11:32 PM
Now what can we do to get Jake back. The cycles almost complete. Bwahahaha.




March 7, 2009 -- Former Broncos quarterback Jake Plummer visited Broncos owner Pat Bowlen at the team's Dove Valley's headquarters Friday for the first time since he retired following the 2006 season.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_11862663

Taco John
03-13-2009, 11:33 PM
Might be the only one but I miss Jake the Snake.

Me too.



/every time I get in my car. ;D

SoCalBronco
03-13-2009, 11:37 PM
Not as important as in Shanahans WCO.

I think that illustrates McDaniels's immaturity and lack of flexibility. The wise coach is the one that tailors his scheme to his talent. When you have a system that does not highlight a very good recieving tight end, the solution is to adapt the system accordingly. Scheffler is a near Pro Bowl caliber recieving TE when healthy. It is true that he is only healthy 2/3 to 3/4 of the time, but that's not sufficient reason to trade him. I'll take a monster 2/3 to 3/4 of the time. He's got heart, too. He isn't soft. He really gutted it out against Cleveland this year. He is injury prone, but its not due to being inherently soft. He's got great chemistry with Jay. You just absolutely have to utilize a talent like this. If you want to run a spread offense, you still gotta use your stud TE. You can still use those formations, just keep the TE on the field in place of the 3rd WR or 4th WR. Scheffler scares defenses more than any 3rd WR or 4th WR. He is a legitimate threat to be screaming down the seam in an instant. He's a beast. He has to be accounted for.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that either the staff is too rigid with their system, or that they are trying to intentionally give Jay the finger by trying to trade his best friend. Maybe its both, because injuries cannot justify trading this type of talent. He's a real ****ing talent. Graham is the superior blocker, no doubt, but Graham scares no one in the passing game and McDaniels was brought here presumably because we are now transitioning to a full time, wide open passing attack. This means that the recieving TE has the priority over the blocking TE. If McDaniels system is overly WR-centric in the passing game (to the detriment of the TE), when you've got this talent, then he's (McDaniels) just an idiot.

It would be a HUGE SHAME if this guy is traded. He opens things up for the two WRs and the offense is noticeably different without him.

phisig150
03-13-2009, 11:38 PM
Me too.



/every time I get in my car. ;D

Hahaha. But all things considered. Jay gets dealt. You wouldn't take him back with open arms?

GreatBronco16
03-13-2009, 11:43 PM
Here is a stab in the dark. Sheff gets moved to WR this year with Putz being the second blocking TE next to Graham.

phisig150
03-13-2009, 11:48 PM
Here is a stab in the dark. Sheff gets moved to WR this year with Putz being the second blocking TE next to Graham.

But we already have Bmarsh, Royal, Stokely, Gaffney, etc. Do we have room for a WR Scheff?

Taco John
03-13-2009, 11:49 PM
Hahaha. But all things considered. Jay gets dealt. You wouldn't take him back with open arms?

Sweet Jesus, no. The guy can't pass from the pocket, has terrible vision on the left side of the field, and we're running a pocket passing offense. I know I'll get laughed at for this, but in McDaniels offense I'd rather go back to Griese than to Plummer. I don't want either of them, but Griese is a better fit for the kind of offense that New England runs than Jake is.

Jake, and Jay for that matter, is a gun slinger. This system is more of a cerebral quarterback system.

Someone with Griese's smarts, a moderate arm who can get the ball out quick and with lots of touch, and the toughness of Steve McNair would be perfect.

Hell, let's bring back BOB Griese! :~ohyah!:

phisig150
03-13-2009, 11:53 PM
Sweet Jesus, no. The guy can't pass from the pocket, has terrible vision on the left side of the field, and we're running a pocket passing offense. I know I'll get laughed at for this, but in McDaniels offense I'd rather go back to Griese than to Plummer. I don't want either of them, but Griese is a better fit for the kind of offense that New England runs than Jake is.

Jake, and Jay for that matter, is a gun slinger. This system is more of a cerebral quarterback system.

Someone with Griese's smarts, a moderate arm who can get the ball out quick and with lots of touch, and the toughness of Steve McNair would be perfect.
We all would rather have a happy Jay as QB without a doubt. But let's say he gets moved and we don't restart all over and draft another QB. Who's your QB next year? Personally I take Leftwich or if Bulger's available I nab him.

cutthemdown
03-13-2009, 11:53 PM
I still think Sheff will be traded. This makes it seem even more so.

I think Sheff to good to rot in Mcdaniels offense. Facts are that mcdaniels wants to throw to the RBS a whole lot more. He also prefers 3 wr set's.

IMO he will start Graham and the WR type TE won't play a whole lot.

I like Scheff but the fact is that different coaches attack different ways. Shanny loved having a TE that could line up outside because he felt he could get good matchups.

Mcdaniels also trys to get good matchups but he likes to do it with Rbs a little more then TE.

Taco John
03-13-2009, 11:56 PM
We all would rather have a happy Jay as QB without a doubt. But let's say he gets moved and we don't restart all over and draft another QB. Who's your QB next year? Personally I take Leftwich or if Bulger's available I nab him.


I personally would hope that if he got moved, it would be a move that would address the issue directly. My bright (bright for me at least ;) ) idea tonight was to trade Seattle for Hasselbeck, swap their 4 for our 12, and milk their second. And then draft Raji at the 4 spot.

phisig150
03-14-2009, 12:01 AM
I personally would hope that if he got moved, it would be a move that would address the issue directly. My bright (bright for me at least ;) ) idea tonight was to trade Seattle for Hasselbeck, swap their 4 for our 12, and milk their second. And then draft Raji at the 4 spot.

Hmmm. I could live with Hasselbeck. Just throwing it out there how about Cutler and the 12th for Willis and the 9ers 10th. We select Sanchez they take Rey.

watermock
03-14-2009, 12:23 AM
This is a disaster.

phisig150
03-14-2009, 12:34 AM
This is a disaster.


How so? Cutler "demanding" a trade or Mcdaniels "shopping" Cutler or the thread in genral?

watermock
03-14-2009, 12:47 AM
Cutler, Marshall and Sheff are all friends. All will be gone by 2010.

McDummy doesn't use the TE, cept for blocking.

DeusExManning
03-14-2009, 12:55 AM
Only for blocking... Ben Watson caught 22 balls all season last year. (http://www.nfl.com/players/benjaminwatson/profile?id=WAT311042)

This just has me concerned, Jay likes to throw to the Tight End and this is an important offensive positioin. New England is making a mistake by marginalizing it. A separate thread should be created to discuss this.

SouthStndJunkie
03-14-2009, 01:23 AM
At some point in time, this guy is going to have to make a move that is really different than Shanahan that we can look at and go: "that's it! That's the reason this guy is here."

Just as long as that move is not trading the franchise QB.

UberBroncoMan
03-14-2009, 01:30 AM
You guys do realize that we could possibly move Scheffler to WR right?

WR blocking is important in the spread (always important actually), and Scheffler while not amazing at it would be more than suited enough. It would also give us another big body with Marshall.

Scheffler has some really good hands, and is as fast as Marshall to the best of my knowledge... I think he's taller too. He'd actually make a good transition there.

broncocalijohn
03-14-2009, 01:34 AM
I guess he's a good insurance policy for Scheffler...

I thought Chad Mustard was for that purpose? See ya Chad. We will keep your locker covered until you show back up in August.

UberBroncoMan
03-14-2009, 01:37 AM
I thought Chad Mustard was for that purpose? See ya Chad. We will keep your locker covered until you show back up in August.

Great sig lol

Taco John
03-14-2009, 01:41 AM
This just has me concerned, Jay likes to throw to the Tight End and this is an important offensive positioin. New England is making a mistake by marginalizing it. A separate thread should be created to discuss this.


This offense is for the most part a "run first offense," that uses the run to establish the pass. But once it gets to passing, the Pats system uses a lot of 5 receiver sets that spread the field and isolate defenders. They'll often start in a zero base formation, and then shift into a 5 wide set, and then it's up to the quarterback to take a three step drop and hit his pre-selected target. It's about making the pre-snap read at the line of scrimmage - finding the favorable match-up, and then the receivers getting YAC to move the chains. It's not a system conducive to "finding the outlet tight end." Gun slingers aren't particularly well suited for this style of offense.

The system relies more on finding favorable match-ups than trying to get nifty. Thus the system will use a lot of different group formations giving the defense different looks to run a lot of the same plays. So there are fewer actual plays, and just a bunch of different ways to run them. The quarterback makes a pre-snap read, and gets the ball out quick. It's an easier system than what we're running now.

You have doubts about losing Scheffler, but my doubts are about Hillis. Hillis matches the running portion of the system very well, but as a spread receiver, I personally don't think Hillis is going to be a great fit. He's about 20 pounds too heavy for that role. And as fleet of feet as he is with the ball in his hand, I have my doubts that he'll have the quickness that this system requires from their backfield. I have a hunch that the DPO is right when it reported that Hillis is going to be used as a role player, and not a feature back. We'll probably see plenty of him in short yardage or third down situations, but I don't think he's going to be an every down back.

montrose
03-14-2009, 01:50 AM
I think that illustrates McDaniels's immaturity and lack of flexibility. The wise coach is the one that tailors his scheme to his talent. When you have a system that does not highlight a very good recieving tight end, the solution is to adapt the system accordingly. Scheffler is a near Pro Bowl caliber recieving TE when healthy. It is true that he is only healthy 2/3 to 3/4 of the time, but that's not sufficient reason to trade him. I'll take a monster 2/3 to 3/4 of the time. He's got heart, too. He isn't soft. He really gutted it out against Cleveland this year. He is injury prone, but its not due to being inherently soft. He's got great chemistry with Jay. You just absolutely have to utilize a talent like this. If you want to run a spread offense, you still gotta use your stud TE. You can still use those formations, just keep the TE on the field in place of the 3rd WR or 4th WR. Scheffler scares defenses more than any 3rd WR or 4th WR. He is a legitimate threat to be screaming down the seam in an instant. He's a beast. He has to be accounted for.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that either the staff is too rigid with their system, or that they are trying to intentionally give Jay the finger by trying to trade his best friend. Maybe its both, because injuries cannot justify trading this type of talent. He's a real ****ing talent. Graham is the superior blocker, no doubt, but Graham scares no one in the passing game and McDaniels was brought here presumably because we are now transitioning to a full time, wide open passing attack. This means that the recieving TE has the priority over the blocking TE. If McDaniels system is overly WR-centric in the passing game (to the detriment of the TE), when you've got this talent, then he's (McDaniels) just an idiot.

It would be a HUGE SHAME if this guy is traded. He opens things up for the two WRs and the offense is noticeably different without him.

I think your first sentence might be a little harsh SoCal. I mean, I love Scheffler's talent and skills but I don't think immaturity on McDaniels' part has anything to do with it. There have been other coaches, older than McDaniels, that crafted their team to the system they have experience running. The fact he kept on Turner and Dennison to run the ZBS leads me to believe he's not terribly inflexible.

It wouldn't be the first time a coach didn't capitalize on a player's skills. It took nearly the entire season before Shanahan realized Hillis' awesomeness despite all of us clamoring for his usage in the passing game based on his college career and preseason. Even after the Miami game, Hillis was invisible again the next week until Torain went down and he moved to HB. Not trying to pick on the greatest coach in Broncos history, just illustrating an example that comes to mind.

I'm sure there are other examples as well, but my personal feeling is that this could have less to do with his skill set and more to do with attitude. Pure speculation on my part, but his recent comments may have rubbed McDaniels the wrong way. As talented as I think Tony is, they may see him as an asset that can help them add another defensive player while dispensing a guy who might not fit the profile of what they're looking for. If anything, from where McDaniels has come from and at least appears what he's trying to implement, I doubt we're going to be seeing the team doing much accommodating of players but rather finding/expecting players to adapt to what they want. Time will tell if McDaniels and his crew are qualified to accomplish this, but the theory is sound based on New England and Pittsburgh's success.

We all would rather have a happy Jay as QB without a doubt. But let's say he gets moved and we don't restart all over and draft another QB. Who's your QB next year? Personally I take Leftwich or if Bulger's available I nab him.

I'd be okay with Bulger by Leftwich's god awful mechanics lead to a lot of hits and sacks. I'd pass on him. I'd say, if Jay had to go and we didn't get a QB in return, to let Simms compete with a drafted QB like Josh Freeman or Nate Davis.

I personally would hope that if he got moved, it would be a move that would address the issue directly. My bright (bright for me at least ;) ) idea tonight was to trade Seattle for Hasselbeck, swap their 4 for our 12, and milk their second. And then draft Raji at the 4 spot.

I could live with that, I probably wouldn't want Raji since he's not a true NT - I'd prefer to get the best pass rusher available at the spot. Hasselbeck would be a nice transition to a QB we could hopefully find in the draft that McDaniels could groom.

New England is making a mistake by marginalizing it.

I don't know if it's a case of marginalizing the spot, it's just that the Pats offense has focused on all five skilled position players running routes with the TE as a checkdown. But with the 3 WR's plus a the RB always a big option in the passing game, they've found the TE to be most valuable as a dominant blocker, checkdown threat and red zone weapon. That's why Graham is perfect for the position, and nearly every Pats fan I know really misses him and many of them wish the team had put the franchise tag on him instead of Asante Samuel. Keep in mind they were the best offensive in league history with their TE grabbing less than 40 passes.

On a somewhat related note, I expect a really nice season out of my Adopt-a-Bronco Jabar Gaffney who will not help others assimilate into the system, but I expect to at least match his average numbers in this system - 37 rec, 458.5 yards, 3.5 TDs.

This offense is for the most part a "run first offense," that uses the run to establish the pass. But once it gets to passing, the Pats system uses a lot of 5 receiver sets that spread the field and isolate defenders. They'll often start in a zero base formation, and then shift into a 5 wide set, and then it's up to the quarterback to take a three step drop and hit his pre-selected target. It's about making the pre-snap read at the line of scrimmage - finding the favorable match-up, and then the receivers getting YAC to move the chains. It's not a system conducive to "finding the outlet tight end." Gun slingers aren't particularly well suited for this style of offense.

The system relies more on finding favorable match-ups than trying to get nifty. Thus the system will use a lot of different group formations giving the defense different looks to run a lot of the same plays. So there are fewer actual plays, and just a bunch of different ways to run them. The quarterback makes a pre-snap read, and gets the ball out quick. It's an easier system than what we're running now.

You have doubts about losing Scheffler, but my doubts are about Hillis. Hillis matches the running portion of the system very well, but as a spread receiver, I personally don't think Hillis is going to be a great fit. He's about 20 pounds too heavy for that role. And as fleet of feet as he is with the ball in his hand, I have my doubts that he'll have the quickness that this system requires from their backfield. I have a hunch that the DPO is right when it reported that Hillis is going to be used as a role player, and not a feature back. We'll probably see plenty of him in short yardage or third down situations, but I don't think he's going to be an every down back.

Great description of the offense Taco. It also shows why McDaniels may have had some reservations about Cutler running this system. The one, more challenging element than the previous offense, are the pre-snap decisions/alterations the QB has to make. Jay obviously had some of these decisions to make under Shanahan with some level of audible allowance but the Pats system requires calls to be made on nearly every play. Think Peyton Manning-lite. If Jay does wind up being the QB here, I'm sure he's going to feel handcuffed by this very controlled system - but Cutler's 18 picks (2nd in the NFL) opposed to Cassel's 11 or Brady's 8 in 2007 illustrate why McDaniels prefers running his offense that way.

Good points on Hillis too. I don't think any of these guys will be full-time RB's but the fact Hillis can play FB too leads me to believe he'll find a role on this team. He may even work in with the newly acquired backs in the many singleback sets will be running. Hillis looked really good out of the singleback last year and I could see he, Buckhalter and Arrington forming a nice trio there with Jordan around as insurance since Hillis doubles as a FB.

Killericon
03-14-2009, 01:58 AM
Cutler, Marshall and Sheff are all friends. All will be gone by 2010.

McDummy doesn't use the TE, cept for blocking.

Signing Simms means we're getting rid of Cutler, signing Putzier means we're getting rid of Scheffler...

Man, this place is kind of insane sometimes.

Taco John
03-14-2009, 02:04 AM
Good points on Hillis too. I don't think any of these guys will be full-time RB's but the fact Hillis can play FB too leads me to believe he'll find a role on this team. He may even work in with the newly acquired backs in the many singleback sets will be running. Hillis looked really good out of the singleback last year and I could see he, Buckhalter and Arrington forming a nice trio there with Jordan around as insurance since Hillis doubles as a FB.


I think the concern with Hillis is going to be that his presence on the field will serve as a telegraph to the defense for what kind of play we're going to run. This isn't a problem in third and short. But on first and second downs, it might be.

azbroncfan
03-14-2009, 02:32 AM
I think that illustrates McDaniels's immaturity and lack of flexibility. The wise coach is the one that tailors his scheme to his talent.

That statement is wrong. NE did a ton of system changing to match the talent once Brady went down last year. McD like him or not showed he could adjust the scheme to the talent. Now I'd like him to keep Schef too and he isn't gone yet.

montrose
03-14-2009, 03:30 AM
I think the concern with Hillis is going to be that his presence on the field will serve as a telegraph to the defense for what kind of play we're going to run. This isn't a problem in third and short. But on first and second downs, it might be.

I think it could be, although from rewatching last years Pats games there didn't seem to be a terrible amount of telegraphing by personnel. In fact, outside of 3rd and longs when Faulk was almost exclusively on the field - there weren't too many patterns of why a RB was in the game at a certain time. I think once the Broncos go through OTAs and camp, McDaniels will get a look at Hillis' skill set and be pleasantly surprised by what he can do. I'm still thinking we could see Hillis, Buckhalter and Arrington rotating at that spot with Jordan a weekly inactive. We'll have to see, especially with what happens in the draft and if Torain can show them something. While this is McDaniels offense from New England, his retention of Dennison and Turner shows me he is quite flexible and I expect the ZBS running attack to remain. The "Patriot Way" is to never get married to a player but find guys who can fill roles, so I imagine it'll be a rotation without any one guy getting too many reps.

Rohirrim
03-14-2009, 03:50 AM
At some point in time, this guy is going to have to make a move that is really different than Shanahan that we can look at and go: "that's it! That's the reason this guy is here."

I think it's more like you look at what Shanahan didn't do and say, "That's it! That's the reason this guy is here."

eddie mac
03-14-2009, 03:53 AM
Only for blocking... Ben Watson caught 22 balls all season last year. (http://www.nfl.com/players/benjaminwatson/profile?id=WAT311042)

That's why they signed Chris Baker.

eddie mac
03-14-2009, 03:59 AM
This is nothing more than a depth signing-no way Putz is the 2nd TE. Broncos only have 4 TE's on the roster at present after cutting Jackson, Mustard and Leach. Putzier will battle Adam Bergen and a drafted/undrafted rookie for a roster spot and dont forget he was with us already at the end of last season as cover for Jackson when he hit IR.

Rohirrim
03-14-2009, 04:07 AM
I think it could be, although from rewatching last years Pats games there didn't seem to be a terrible amount of telegraphing by personnel. In fact, outside of 3rd and longs when Faulk was almost exclusively on the field - there weren't too many patterns of why a RB was in the game at a certain time. I think once the Broncos go through OTAs and camp, McDaniels will get a look at Hillis' skill set and be pleasantly surprised by what he can do. I'm still thinking we could see Hillis, Buckhalter and Arrington rotating at that spot with Jordan a weekly inactive. We'll have to see, especially with what happens in the draft and if Torain can show them something. While this is McDaniels offense from New England, his retention of Dennison and Turner shows me he is quite flexible and I expect the ZBS running attack to remain. The "Patriot Way" is to never get married to a player but find guys who can fill roles, so I imagine it'll be a rotation without any one guy getting too many reps.

We're all making a lot of assumptions based on what McD did in New England, but we don't know what his level of control was there. One thing we do know; Bellychix is a control freak. I think any time a coordinator jumps to HC he's going to feel the freedom to try new ideas. Maybe he's been harboring a few new wrinkles that he didn't feel confident sharing in his old system. Maybe what he wants to do more than anything is get out from the shadow of the old boss and create something new, with his own signature. We won't truly know until the preseason starts. To assume it's going to be a carbon-copy of New England is a big assumption. Like you say, he kept Dennison and Turner. That tells me he's not messing with the core elements of the running attack, for one thing.

What worries me about the continuation with Cutler now is that Cutler is so self-centered he may just play along with the McD system in camp and when the whistle blows in a real game he'll just go back to his "**** the plan, my arm can do anything" gunslinger approach. That's why I am of the opinion that once things go this far, the trade is inevitable. Broncos fans have all seen what happens when QBs and coaches are on different pages (cough, Reeves, Elway, cough).

Anaximines
03-14-2009, 04:10 AM
**** yes! oh yeah, yes!!!! ****

The MVPlaya
03-14-2009, 04:29 AM
I think that illustrates McDaniels's immaturity and lack of flexibility. The wise coach is the one that tailors his scheme to his talent. When you have a system that does not highlight a very good recieving tight end, the solution is to adapt the system accordingly. Scheffler is a near Pro Bowl caliber recieving TE when healthy. It is true that he is only healthy 2/3 to 3/4 of the time, but that's not sufficient reason to trade him. I'll take a monster 2/3 to 3/4 of the time. He's got heart, too. He isn't soft. He really gutted it out against Cleveland this year. He is injury prone, but its not due to being inherently soft. He's got great chemistry with Jay. You just absolutely have to utilize a talent like this. If you want to run a spread offense, you still gotta use your stud TE. You can still use those formations, just keep the TE on the field in place of the 3rd WR or 4th WR. Scheffler scares defenses more than any 3rd WR or 4th WR. He is a legitimate threat to be screaming down the seam in an instant. He's a beast. He has to be accounted for.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that either the staff is too rigid with their system, or that they are trying to intentionally give Jay the finger by trying to trade his best friend. Maybe its both, because injuries cannot justify trading this type of talent. He's a real ****ing talent. Graham is the superior blocker, no doubt, but Graham scares no one in the passing game and McDaniels was brought here presumably because we are now transitioning to a full time, wide open passing attack. This means that the recieving TE has the priority over the blocking TE. If McDaniels system is overly WR-centric in the passing game (to the detriment of the TE), when you've got this talent, then he's (McDaniels) just an idiot.

It would be a HUGE SHAME if this guy is traded. He opens things up for the two WRs and the offense is noticeably different without him.

Yeah, McDaniels is an idiot...

That Patriots offense sucks balls...

Nothing against you, but that was a horrible post that lacked any sort of rationality and realistic judgments from the POV of other ideas.

The MVPlaya
03-14-2009, 04:31 AM
We're all making a lot of assumptions based on what McD did in New England, but we don't know what his level of control was there. One thing we do know; Bellychix is a control freak.

He called every single play.

Rohirrim
03-14-2009, 04:40 AM
He called every single play.

Okay. That's one vote for "The Broncos offense will be exactly what New England was running." Thanks for the in-depth analysis.

elsid13
03-14-2009, 05:47 AM
See I know keep on hearing about what NE did last year, but remember three years ago that offense centered on two TE, two WR look. Graham was it leading receiver. I expect we will not see an offense exactly like NE spread formation last year, but more mix of the two. Plus there will be some influence from the Carolina offense on the time, unless the OC is just collecting a paycheck.

Personally I am surprised the Scheffer is on the trading block, if done right he is match up problem in a Dallas Clark role.

orinjkrush
03-14-2009, 06:42 AM
i thought we needed to fix the D.
we appear to be reengineering the O.
guess that came with hiring an O head coach and not Spags.
i think its gonna get worse before it gets better.

Pony Boy
03-14-2009, 08:43 AM
It' all about roll players and a team that's designed to use cheap interchangable parts

Broncos_OTM
03-14-2009, 08:54 AM
i thought we needed to fix the D.
we appear to be reengineering the O.
guess that came with hiring an O head coach and not Spags.
i think its gonna get worse before it gets better.Ya know. we keep singing O pieces. while tossing the D a already picked bone.

B Dawkins is probably the best signing we had. but the dude is 35 years old!! The feeling from fans in phili is that he hit the wall. he preformed well in the SS role but he is no more then a in the box safety. Basically he is right now what John lynch was his last year or so. he was a liablity in pass but a assest agasint the run.

Hill is just another mcree.

Goodman is decent but so was bly.

I mean why sign a bunch of over the hill players who probably will only be the same thing we cut anyways

Sceffler would be cool as a Slot guy. i wouldnt mind it.

I have no confidence at this point this team is gonna do anything good for this defense. This was a good year to pick up a safety. and we botched it IMO

Broncos4tw
03-14-2009, 09:12 AM
I always liked Putz-ear.. he plays hard, and I'm glad he is back!

montrose
03-14-2009, 09:13 AM
We're all making a lot of assumptions based on what McD did in New England, but we don't know what his level of control was there. One thing we do know; Bellychix is a control freak. I think any time a coordinator jumps to HC he's going to feel the freedom to try new ideas. Maybe he's been harboring a few new wrinkles that he didn't feel confident sharing in his old system. Maybe what he wants to do more than anything is get out from the shadow of the old boss and create something new, with his own signature. We won't truly know until the preseason starts. To assume it's going to be a carbon-copy of New England is a big assumption. Like you say, he kept Dennison and Turner. That tells me he's not messing with the core elements of the running attack, for one thing.

My understanding is that McDaniels and full control over the Patriots offense. He said at his press conference that the NE offense was exactly what he was bringing over and the signing of Gaffney helps support that. I'm sure we'll see some wrinkles including the old Broncos ZBS scheme, but for the most part - it probably makes sense to work with the assumption we'll be running what the Patriots have.

What worries me about the continuation with Cutler now is that Cutler is so self-centered he may just play along with the McD system in camp and when the whistle blows in a real game he'll just go back to his "**** the plan, my arm can do anything" gunslinger approach. That's why I am of the opinion that once things go this far, the trade is inevitable. Broncos fans have all seen what happens when QBs and coaches are on different pages (cough, Reeves, Elway, cough).

I don't think McDaniels will put up with that. If Cutler's directly defying the coaching they'll yank his @$$ for Simms.

telluride
03-14-2009, 09:16 AM
As often as Scheff is hurt, having Putz around is a smart move. Quit reading so much into it.

montrose
03-14-2009, 09:17 AM
Classic pics of the Putz!
http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2005/07/27/inside2-2005-07-27-putzier.jpg http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/28/288682.jpg

Major rep to anyone who can find the clip of Asante Samuel absolutely killing him in 2005.

Rohirrim
03-14-2009, 10:54 AM
All I remember of Putz is that he was the headliner on "Jacked Up!" every week. ;D

Kaylore
03-14-2009, 12:22 PM
Can we wait and see how our system is run this season before we rip on McDaniels for never using our tight ends right and trading Scheffler when he's still on the team? I mean call me crazy, but so far we have no idea how this team is going to look. We don't know if it's going to suck, be awesome, average. We don't know if Woodyard is benched, traded or if Scheffler is going to be underutilized and Hillis is going to get canned. But you read this and other threads and it's like all of things are not only foregone conclusions, they've already happened. It's like people are sitting around lamenting the 2009 season as a dismal failure when we haven't even played a single game yet. Good grief.

barryr
03-14-2009, 12:51 PM
Signing Putzier doesn't automatically mean Scheffler is tradebait. Most teams carry at least 3 TE's and he has played ST before.

Mogulseeker
03-14-2009, 12:52 PM
A crazy thought... but while we're trying Larsen at FB, at 4.5 speed and 250 pounds ... could Putzier make a decent MLB?

barryr
03-14-2009, 12:54 PM
A crazy thought... but while we're trying Larsen at FB, at 4.5 speed and 250 pounds ... could Putzier make a decent MLB?

Not at this stage of his career.

The MVPlaya
03-14-2009, 03:50 PM
Okay. That's one vote for "The Broncos offense will be exactly what New England was running." Thanks for the in-depth analysis.

You had just said we don't know what level of control he had, and I told you he called every single play. Therefore, looking at their success... he had much control.

Damn can you guys be this dumb?

cutthemdown
03-14-2009, 04:11 PM
A crazy thought... but while we're trying Larsen at FB, at 4.5 speed and 250 pounds ... could Putzier make a decent MLB?

you're joking right..........please be joking.

Bronco Yoda
03-14-2009, 04:15 PM
I heard we're looking at him at RB :spit:

Punisher
03-14-2009, 04:15 PM
Can this be the Derek Fisher effect?

Killericon
03-14-2009, 05:15 PM
A crazy thought... but while we're trying Larsen at FB, at 4.5 speed and 250 pounds ... could Putzier make a decent MLB?

http://tmideast.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/facepalm2ly3.jpg