PDA

View Full Version : Excellent take as Klis sets a Numbskull straight


Hulamau
05-05-2009, 03:24 AM
Klis gives a very good response to a guy clearly not seeing the big picture


Disgust with draft spurs Walter from Colo. Springs to spurn season tickets
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Posted: 05/05/2009 12:30:27 AM MDT


First of all, with the defense broken and the offense fine, Josh McDaniels runs off the Pro Bowl quarterback. Then McDaniels stockpiles running backs through free agency. We give him a B-plus for that. Brian Dawkins is a good move; give him an A for that. Then it's draft weekend. Glaring need: D-line. So McDaniels ... drafts six out of 10 on offense! And zero on D-line. Yes, he got some good players. Knowshon Moreno will be good right away. But what's the plan for defensive line? I cancelled my season tickets. ( great news! one more ticket of the rest of us!)
-- Walter Friend, Colorado Springs

Walter - If I'm following your train of thought, did you just cancel your season tickets because the Broncos didn't select Peria Jerry or Ron Brace? It's a discerning group, Bronco fans.

So long as we don't lose you from this mailbag, Walter, I don't care what you do with your entertainment dollar. But if they instituted a new policy where I'd have to pay for my press pass this year, I'd get more bang watching Moreno run than Brace plugging a two-gap. But that's me.

Here's the deal about the D-line: Yes, the Broncos were hoping to take nose tackle B.J. Raji or defensive end Tyson Jackson with their No. 12 overall draft pick. But both were gone -- Kansas City is confronting a $24 million guarantee to a D-end in Jackson whose forte isn't rushing the passer -- and there wasn't another player at those positions, in the Broncos' opinion, who was considered a franchise-type player. And for the
money the No. 12 pick gets, he better make an immediate impact.

The Broncos did address their front seven with their No. 18 pick in Robert Ayers. They liked Ayers slightly better than Aaron Maybin, who Buffalo took at No. 11; Brian Orakpo, who Washington took at No. 13; and Larry English, who the Chargers took at No. 16. It will be interesting to see who emerges as the best of that DE/OLB foursome.

From there, the Broncos liked the D-linemen they already have -- Kenny Peterson is a former third-round pick; Marcus Thomas, Matthias Askew and Ryan McBean were fourth-rounders; Carlton Powell was a fifth rounder -- more than anyone they could have taken from the fourth round on for their 3-4 system. That group is bigger than the Broncos' D-linemen of years past. And it won't take much for them to be better.

One more thing, Walter, as you consider watching the Broncos from the comforts of home: They will be immeasurably improved in their secondary this year. I know Bronco fans haven't seen much of it aside from Champ Bailey the past two years, but safeties and cornerbacks are supposed to tackle running backs.

I thought the team's biggest weakness the past two years was its safety play. They now have two good ones in Brian Dawkins and Renaldo Hill, and they took Darcel McBath in the second round. The defensive line wouldn't look so bad if some of those 30-yard runs were only 5-yard runs.

The Broncos were 30th in defensive scoring last year; 28th in 2007. The
2009 defense can do better merely by showing up. Here's my first prediction of the year: With their new 3-4 system, the Broncos will finish somewhere inside the top 25 in scoring defense this year. (That's a safe bet Klis :-)

yerner
05-05-2009, 03:38 AM
Who the hell is Ryan Mcbean? Askew?

cutthemdown
05-05-2009, 03:44 AM
Mcbean was a rookie last yr right? practice squad, 290 pound end.

Askew came from cinci, is a 300 pound DT who hasn't played much in 3 yrs in NFL.

Both big strong guys Broncos will try at Dend in a 3-4 and see if they play the 4 or 5 technique lined up over or str8 up on the OT.

Blueflame
05-05-2009, 04:07 AM
So.. he predicts that we'll still rank in the bottom third defensively? Nice guess Einstein. We still aren't gonna have a pass rush.

cutthemdown
05-05-2009, 04:15 AM
So.. he predicts that we'll still rank in the bottom third defensively? Nice guess Einstein. We still aren't gonna have a pass rush.

You don't think Doom and Ayers can get some outside pressure? Doom I think last yr struggled because of the broken hand and Ayers from the Senior bowl practice stuff I heard about seems like he can beat people 1 on 1. Supposedly he was schooling Oher who was a first round pick.

Don't go writing us off so quickly.

Hulamau
05-05-2009, 05:33 AM
So.. he predicts that we'll still rank in the bottom third defensively? Nice guess Einstein. We still aren't gonna have a pass rush.

Great insight Blue Flame! .. "we aren't going to have a pass rush" . .granted Klis was being highly conservative in his prediction, almost tongue in cheek!

Anyway I'm beginning to see your logic ... Lets see ... Ayers is obviously a bust and what a waste of a first round pick .. just like Moreno with Hillis with Graham and Quinn and that 'one year wonder' of a O-line sure to flame out .. who cares if they help elevate our scoring production from 16th to the top 5 and vastly improves the red zone success as well as keeps our defense off the field and the other teams D on the field an extra 5 to 10 minutes a game!

And what is McD and Nolan thinking that guys like Doom and Reid as well as Ayers might improve our pass rush from the OLB, and with the versatility to slide in when required? And look at this train wreck of a front three with Thomas in his third year and now that fat ass Chris Baker ,,, Gee he was accused of beating up some poor guy a couple years ago (though no proof was ever made) and even though hes been a model citizen the past year and a half and played well as a solid run-stuffing DT of NT proportions, we are certainly lost with him at NT.

McD is a joke thinking a marine like Rulon "Jones' Davis and Everett P will ever amount to anything. And we KNOW Kenny Peterson is a bust as well! Not to mention that chump Carlton Powell who set NCAA all time college record for least amount of yards against him by any running back his last year at Clemson with something like 'Minus 12 yrds rushing' on the season! So Yes I'm with you blue flame we're SUNK!

Look at the ridiculous coaches they have too. Nolan, Nunnely, Martindale, Donnatel etc. none of which has EVER had a lick of success in the 3-4 as a DC or position coach, obviously! What could McD have been thinking the little 33 year old incompetent TWERP!

And these LBs Ha!,Talk about a sick joke! Is it too late to dump DJ, Andra Davis as well as Woodyard and Larsen in year two? Also, Griesen who knows nothing at all of 3-4 work either. And this UDFA Johnson kid ... another Bust for sure.

But the thing that gets me is the outrage to think adding Ayers and Doom as rush guys from the OLB spot as well might ever result in a few more sacks and pressures than the past two years! What morons!

And lets not even talk about the secondary, and how pathetic they are going to be Tjesus! Don't get me started there!

Come to think of it, now that I see the light like some of you doom and gloomers, I'm only sad I don't have season tickets myself, just so I could turn mine into Bowlen's office by Fed Express registered delivery in protest at this absolute Farce!

Man. Shanny and Slowik must be laughing their asses off! HaHaha! :rofl: :twokisses

Drek
05-05-2009, 05:56 AM
You don't think Doom and Ayers can get some outside pressure? Doom I think last yr struggled because of the broken hand and Ayers from the Senior bowl practice stuff I heard about seems like he can beat people 1 on 1. Supposedly he was schooling Oher who was a first round pick.

Don't go writing us off so quickly.

Ayers schooled everyone at the senior bowl. If he seriously plays like that on Sundays he'll be all world out of the gate.

I think the biggest problem Doom had last year was the defensive coaches trying to use him as an every down DE, including trying to have him stuff the run. The guy just can't handle it and it left him too tired to be effective on pass rushing downs.

He's got good pass rush skills and I think he'll be a great fit for the 3-4 OLB job Nolan looks to be fitting him into. In some ways though I'm more looking forward to when we run a 4-3 front with Dumervil at RDE, Ayers at LDE, Thomas at UT, and Powell or Fields at NT. That could be a surprisingly effective line.

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 06:21 AM
Great insight Blue Flame! .. "we aren't going to have a pass rush" . .granted Klis was being highly conservative in his prediction, almost tongue in cheek!

Anyway I'm beginning to see your logic ... Lets see ... Ayers is obviously a bust and what a waste of a first round pick .. just like Moreno with Hillis with Graham and Quinn and that 'one year wonder' of a O-line sure to flame out .. who cares if they help elevate our scoring production from 16th to the top 5 and vastly improves the red zone success as well as keeps our defense off the field and the other teams D on the field an extra 5 to 10 minutes a game!

And what is McD and Nolan thinking that guys like Doom and Reid as well as Ayers might improve our pass rush from the OLB, and with the versatility to slide in when required? And look at this train wreck of a front three with Thomas in his third year and now that fat ass Chris Baker ,,, Gee he was accused of beating up some poor guy a couple years ago (though no proof was ever made) and even though hes been a model citizen the past year and a half and played well as a solid run-stuffing DT of NT proportions, we are certainly lost with him at NT.

McD is a joke thinking a marine like Rulon "Jones' Davis and Everett P will ever amount to anything. And we KNOW Kenny Peterson is a bust as well! Not to mention that chump Carlton Powell who set NCAA all time college record for least amount of yards against him by any running back his last year at Clemson with something like 'Minus 12 yrds rushing' on the season! So Yes I'm with you blue flame we're SUNK!

Look at the ridiculous coaches they have too. Nolan, Nunnely, Martindale, Donnatel etc. none of which has EVER had a lick of success in the 3-4 as a DC or position coach, obviously! What could McD have been thinking the little 33 year old incompetent TWERP!

And these LBs Ha!,Talk about a sick joke! Is it too late to dump DJ, Andra Davis as well as Woodyard and Larsen in year two? Also, Griesen who knows nothing at all of 3-4 work either. And this UDFA Johnson kid ... another Bust for sure.

But the thing that gets me is the outrage to think adding Ayers and Doom as rush guys from the OLB spot as well might ever result in a few more sacks and pressures than the past two years! What morons!

And lets not even talk about the secondary, and how pathetic they are going to be Tjesus! Don't get me started there!

Come to think of it, now that I see the light like some of you doom and gloomers, I'm only sad I don't have season tickets myself, just so I could turn mine into Bowlen's office by Fed Express registered delivery in protest at this absolute Farce!

Man. Shanny and Slowik must be laughing their asses off! HaHaha! :rofl: :twokisses


When you're going out of your way to be a smart ass to "try" and put somebody in their place, it's usually wise to know the players you're talking about. I mean, considering that Powell has done NOTHING in the NFL thus far making his college production all you can use, you would think that if you really knew something about the kid you would know what college he went to.

TheReverend
05-05-2009, 06:29 AM
When you're going out of your way to be a smart ass to "try" and put somebody in their place, it's usually wise to know the players you're talking about. I mean, considering that Powell has done NOTHING in the NFL thus far making his college production all you can use, you would think that if you really knew something about the kid you would know what college he went to.

That's as bad as the Baker "no proof" comment.

I mean, there was absolutely no proof... aside from the guy he beat mercilessly with a stool and the dozens of people that saw them force their way into his room and then witness the beating...

Other than that... no proof!

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 06:29 AM
Ayers schooled everyone at the senior bowl. If he seriously plays like that on Sundays he'll be all world out of the gate.

I think the biggest problem Doom had last year was the defensive coaches trying to use him as an every down DE, including trying to have him stuff the run. The guy just can't handle it and it left him too tired to be effective on pass rushing downs.

He's got good pass rush skills and I think he'll be a great fit for the 3-4 OLB job Nolan looks to be fitting him into. In some ways though I'm more looking forward to when we run a 4-3 front with Dumervil at RDE, Ayers at LDE, Thomas at UT, and Powell or Fields at NT. That could be a surprisingly effective line.

Man, and the hits keep on coming by Drek. Nice post as always. Actually makes me feel a little better about Ayers. I confess I haven't watched much of him the last two years. I did see plenty of him in the Sr. Bowl and thought he looked like a prospect. But then I go back to thinking about the "book" on guys like Albert Haynesworth and this whole contract year thing. Essentially, that is what Ayers did the last month of his Sr. year and then the Sr. Bowl. But then you throw in this interesting perspective that I'd guess is right on... If I understood you correctly, his sack numbers weren't what they could have been b/c he was always gassed. To me, that is good news b/c his conditioning is going to get A LOT better. His coaching is going to get better as well. That gives me a lot of hope Drek, I hope I understood you correctly, and I hope you're right.

btw Huma, I agreed with everything you were posting. But it wasn't really necessary to be a smart ass about it. You made a lot of good points, why make the intended target (Blue) go defensive b/c of sarcasm? She won't even see the message b/c the delivery sucks (I'm guilty of it too at times, just pointing it out to you as others have so graciously done for me ;D). Again, I think we have a lot of promise. Not sure if it will pan out, but as my good buddy Popps pointed out, We are already improved on defense by the mere addition/subtraction of Mike Nolan/Bob Slowick.

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 06:32 AM
That's as bad as the Baker "no proof" comment.

I mean, there was absolutely no proof... aside from the guy he beat mercilessly with a stool and the dozens of people that saw them force their way into his room and then witness the beating...

Other than that... no proof!

They already said he was at the wrong place at the wrong time. It's akin to a lot of people voting for Obama. Had they not happened to wonder by the polls at the wrong time, he wouldn't be a president... Okay poor analogy. It's still early and I'm only half way thru my first cup'o'joe.

Mogulseeker
05-05-2009, 06:44 AM
I've noticed Ayers is wearing #56 - Wilson's old number. I guess he won't be playing DE, then.

Of course, I've seen people switch numbers and positions coming out of camp before.

TheReverend
05-05-2009, 06:50 AM
I've noticed Ayers is wearing #56 - Wilson's old number. I guess he won't be playing DE, then.

Of course, I've seen people switch numbers and positions coming out of camp before.

That doesn't prevent him from playing on the line, it allows him the flexibility to do both, though.

Hopefully Ayers lives up to the number.

SoDak Bronco
05-05-2009, 06:51 AM
You don't think Doom and Ayers can get some outside pressure? Doom I think last yr struggled because of the broken hand and Ayers from the Senior bowl practice stuff I heard about seems like he can beat people 1 on 1. Supposedly he was schooling Oher who was a first round pick.

Don't go writing us off so quickly.

Not only that, but he really took it to Andre Smith of Alabama in that game. I like Ayers explosive step, this guy reminds me of the KC version of Neil Smith.

Florida_Bronco
05-05-2009, 06:57 AM
I've noticed Ayers is wearing #56 - Wilson's old number. I guess he won't be playing DE, then.

Of course, I've seen people switch numbers and positions coming out of camp before.

Defensive ends can wear numbers in the 50's if I'm not mistake. Hugh Douglas always wore a number in the 50's.

Broncos_OTM
05-05-2009, 06:58 AM
Everyone i have read keeps pigeon holeing ayers as a WOLB which i just dont see3 happening i think they got there SOLB and i am really happy about it. i wish crowder had come on. oh well

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 06:58 AM
I've noticed Ayers is wearing #56 - Wilson's old number. I guess he won't be playing DE, then.

Of course, I've seen people switch numbers and positions coming out of camp before.

??? Is there some rule that says a LB that wears #56 can put his hand in the dirt on the DL... or that a DL that wear's #99 can't stand up and line up at OLB (or safety or CB for that matter)? Not sure where you are coming from?

Paladin
05-05-2009, 07:19 AM
Great insight Blue Flame! .. "we aren't going to have a pass rush" . .granted Klis was being highly conservative in his prediction, almost tongue in cheek!

Anyway I'm beginning to see your logic ... Lets see ... Ayers is obviously a bust and what a waste of a first round pick .. just like Moreno with Hillis with Graham and Quinn and that 'one year wonder' of a O-line sure to flame out .. who cares if they help elevate our scoring production from 16th to the top 5 and vastly improves the red zone success as well as keeps our defense off the field and the other teams D on the field an extra 5 to 10 minutes a game!

And what is McD and Nolan thinking that guys like Doom and Reid as well as Ayers might improve our pass rush from the OLB, and with the versatility to slide in when required? And look at this train wreck of a front three with Thomas in his third year and now that fat ass Chris Baker ,,, Gee he was accused of beating up some poor guy a couple years ago (though no proof was ever made) and even though hes been a model citizen the past year and a half and played well as a solid run-stuffing DT of NT proportions, we are certainly lost with him at NT.

McD is a joke thinking a marine like Rulon "Jones' Davis and Everett P will ever amount to anything. And we KNOW Kenny Peterson is a bust as well! Not to mention that chump Carlton Powell who set NCAA all time college record for least amount of yards against him by any running back his last year at Clemson with something like 'Minus 12 yrds rushing' on the season! So Yes I'm with you blue flame we're SUNK!

Look at the ridiculous coaches they have too. Nolan, Nunnely, Martindale, Donnatel etc. none of which has EVER had a lick of success in the 3-4 as a DC or position coach, obviously! What could McD have been thinking the little 33 year old incompetent TWERP!

And these LBs Ha!,Talk about a sick joke! Is it too late to dump DJ, Andra Davis as well as Woodyard and Larsen in year two? Also, Griesen who knows nothing at all of 3-4 work either. And this UDFA Johnson kid ... another Bust for sure.

But the thing that gets me is the outrage to think adding Ayers and Doom as rush guys from the OLB spot as well might ever result in a few more sacks and pressures than the past two years! What morons!

And lets not even talk about the secondary, and how pathetic they are going to be Tjesus! Don't get me started there!

Come to think of it, now that I see the light like some of you doom and gloomers, I'm only sad I don't have season tickets myself, just so I could turn mine into Bowlen's office by Fed Express registered delivery in protest at this absolute Farce!

Man. Shanny and Slowik must be laughing their asses off! HaHaha! :rofl: :twokisses



FRIGGIN' OWNED!!!!!!!

crawdad
05-05-2009, 07:31 AM
I wish all you naysayers would wait until the season starts before saying "I told you so" or whining. We don't know what we have til we see the whole team. One man will not a team make. You know that!

Personnally, I am giving McCoach a shot and let's see what he can do with this group, this year.

barryr
05-05-2009, 07:31 AM
It's hard to imagine the defense not being better. I think just adding Nolan to run it makes it better just doing that, not to mention the other moves made.

Ayers and Dumervil will need to be the pass rush guys and the others when given blitz opportunities. Stopping the run of course is key for any defense and they haven't done well there either.

Giving up big plays has also hurt, not to mention not able to get off the field and allowing too many 3rd down conversions. And not creating turnovers either. They have ranked at or near the bottom in that category for awhile now.

Hmm, not stopping the run, no pass rush, too many 3rd down conversions, losing the battle of field position most games since the defense can't get many 3 plays and punt, giving up long runs or passes, and not creating turnovers and this being a pattern for a few years now. Yet some are shocked the defensive staff needed replacing? Ok.

no-pseudo-fan
05-05-2009, 07:40 AM
I have been saying for the longest time that you can draft DL all over the place, even Elite DL prospects, but they very very rarely give you any production the first year or two. If this draft was weak on DL and the Elite ones are gone, draft else where. You can not force square pegs into round holes, and blanket drafting at a position doesn't work either. We are going to be bigger on the front 7 this year, and if one or 2 of the UDFA DLineman pan out to be solid starters than we killed it this draft.

s0phr0syne
05-05-2009, 07:45 AM
In some ways though I'm more looking forward to when we run a 4-3 front with Dumervil at RDE, Ayers at LDE, Thomas at UT, and Powell or Fields at NT. That could be a surprisingly effective line.


I have been thinking the same. We actually have a lot of the parts that we've needed all along to be a good 4-3 defense this year. I mean, Shanahan had been building towards it, most accentuated by our 2006 draft, but also his player acquisitions along the lines have been mostly retained by McD.

McD coming in has been great in terms of his deconstruction of the defensive roster, what with letting six of our "starters" walk.

oubronco
05-05-2009, 08:04 AM
You don't think Doom and Ayers can get some outside pressure? Doom I think last yr struggled because of the broken hand and Ayers from the Senior bowl practice stuff I heard about seems like he can beat people 1 on 1. Supposedly he was schooling Oher who was a first round pick.

Don't go writing us off so quickly.

Doom is a major liability when teams run at his side

ludo21
05-05-2009, 08:17 AM
Ya what a numbskull thinking that a UDFA is a sure fire answer to our DL woes..

idiot! Doesnt he know that UDFA are all Rod Smith look a likes. sheesh

Mogulseeker
05-05-2009, 08:20 AM
??? Is there some rule that says a LB that wears #56 can put his hand in the dirt on the DL... or that a DL that wear's #99 can't stand up and line up at OLB (or safety or CB for that matter)? Not sure where you are coming from?

There's a rule concerning a players number and what position they play.

Granted, a DE can pull out and a LB can go down.

But still - not too many DEs wearing 50's numbers, so I took that as a hint that Ayers would be playing LB.

Of course, I remember Dwane Carswell who switched between RT and Tight End... when he was our reserve tackle, but saw a lot of playing time in the Tight End slot. He had to check in with the refs first, though.

TheReverend
05-05-2009, 08:21 AM
Doom is a major liability when teams run at his side

In all fairness, you could replace "Doom" with anyone on defense except Champ

Mogulseeker
05-05-2009, 08:23 AM
In all fairness, you could replace "Doom" with anyone on defense except Champ

Or Woodyard... but it wasn't like Champ was fending off offensive guards.

footstepsfrom#27
05-05-2009, 08:32 AM
From there, the Broncos liked the D-linemen they already have -- Kenny Peterson is a former third-round pick; Marcus Thomas, Matthias Askew and Ryan McBean were fourth-rounders; Carlton Powell was a fifth rounder -- more than anyone they could have taken from the fourth round on for their 3-4 system. That group is bigger than the Broncos' D-linemen of years past. And it won't take much for them to be better.
Wow...amazing insight...especially since it goes without saying because they're now playing a 3-4 and you need bigger D-linemen for that system anyway.

I question his statement that it "won't take much...". Predicting a bunch of (mainly) castoffs are going to improve is tenuous at best. Peterson has shown nothing...McBean might be promising and Powell likewise based on his college performance, but if this is part of the "big picture" Klis wants us to see...I'm not terribly impressed by his analysis. If you want to make the case that the best players available when we picked weren't D-line...OK...there's at least a case for that, but please don't try to snow us into believing that just plugging bigger bodies into a system where they MUST be bigger to begin with...(and we're STILL undersized for the 3-4 BTW)...is going to show results because "it won't take much" for them to do so.

Klis's argument is essentially that we sucked so badly last year that it's virtually impossible to be any worse.

Drek
05-05-2009, 08:50 AM
Doom is a major liability when teams run at his side

Doom needs to be a situational player if he's going to be seeing much time on the line at all. He's too small to handle fighting a 300+ pound LT on running downs to then suddenly have a spark to get up field when a passing down comes up.

Playing him at WOLB in the base 3-4 front should let him move and be disruptive better on those downs, and really let him shine on obvious passing downs when he can either stay at WOLB or move up as the RDE and rush the passer exclusively.

The fact that Doom lead the DL in defensive snaps the last two years is just a damn sad statement about the kind of "talent" Shanahan assembled there.

lostknight
05-05-2009, 09:01 AM
I have far far far more confidence in Nolan and the D at this point then I do McDaniels and the offense, despite the amazing offense he inherited from Shanahan.

I worry about Ron Fields and the NT position, but I think that Ayers will step up, and some true competition at DT/DE will bring out the best.

Remember that Shanahan was trying to move to the 3-4 in a evolutionary way. One wonders what life would have been like with Shanny as a HC, and Nolan as a DC.

TonyR
05-05-2009, 09:03 AM
I have far far far more confidence in Nolan and the D at this point then I do McDaniels and the offense, despite the amazing offense he inherited from Shanahan.


Yes, McD clearly knows nothing about offense. Kudos for living up to the first half of your screen name...

ant1999e
05-05-2009, 09:20 AM
It's hard to imagine the defense not being better. I think just adding Nolan to run it makes it better just doing that, not to mention the other moves made.

Ayers and Dumervil will need to be the pass rush guys and the others when given blitz opportunities. Stopping the run of course is key for any defense and they haven't done well there either.

Giving up big plays has also hurt, not to mention not able to get off the field and allowing too many 3rd down conversions. And not creating turnovers either. They have ranked at or near the bottom in that category for awhile now.

Hmm, not stopping the run, no pass rush, too many 3rd down conversions, losing the battle of field position most games since the defense can't get many 3 plays and punt, giving up long runs or passes, and not creating turnovers and this being a pattern for a few years now. Yet some are shocked the defensive staff needed replacing? Ok.

My thoughts exactly.

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 09:21 AM
For the smurf man...

Position(s) Primary Alternate
QB, P, K 1-19
RB, DB 20-49
C 50-59 60-79
G, T 60-79
WR 80-89 10-19
TE 80-89
DL (NT/DT/DE) 60-79 90-99
LB 50-59 90-99

Tombstone RJ
05-05-2009, 09:27 AM
Wow...amazing insight...especially since it goes without saying because they're now playing a 3-4 and you need bigger D-linemen for that system anyway.

I question his statement that it "won't take much...". Predicting a bunch of (mainly) castoffs are going to improve is tenuous at best. Peterson has shown nothing...McBean might be promising and Powell likewise based on his college performance, but if this is part of the "big picture" Klis wants us to see...I'm not terribly impressed by his analysis. If you want to make the case that the best players available when we picked weren't D-line...OK...there's at least a case for that, but please don't try to snow us into believing that just plugging bigger bodies into a system where they MUST be bigger to begin with...(and we're STILL undersized for the 3-4 BTW)...is going to show results because "it won't take much" for them to do so.

Klis's argument is essentially that we sucked so badly last year that it's virtually impossible to be any worse.

I think you missed the part about the safeties. Good safety play really helps the run game too.

Many here have been screaming about the bad safety play for years, me included.

Broncoman13
05-05-2009, 09:35 AM
I have far far far more confidence in Nolan and the D at this point then I do McDaniels and the offense, despite the amazing offense he inherited from Shanahan.

I worry about Ron Fields and the NT position, but I think that Ayers will step up, and some true competition at DT/DE will bring out the best.

Remember that Shanahan was trying to move to the 3-4 in a evolutionary way. One wonders what life would have been like with Shanny as a HC, and Nolan as a DC.

Shanny was not close to going to a 3-4 defense in any sort of evolutionary way! That is absurd. Shanny wanted to go to a 3-4 defense as much as Marty Schottenheimer wanted to go to a spread offense!

outdoor_miner
05-05-2009, 09:35 AM
Wow...amazing insight...especially since it goes without saying because they're now playing a 3-4 and you need bigger D-linemen for that system anyway.

I question his statement that it "won't take much...". Predicting a bunch of (mainly) castoffs are going to improve is tenuous at best. Peterson has shown nothing...McBean might be promising and Powell likewise based on his college performance, but if this is part of the "big picture" Klis wants us to see...I'm not terribly impressed by his analysis. If you want to make the case that the best players available when we picked weren't D-line...OK...there's at least a case for that, but please don't try to snow us into believing that just plugging bigger bodies into a system where they MUST be bigger to begin with...(and we're STILL undersized for the 3-4 BTW)...is going to show results because "it won't take much" for them to do so.

Klis's argument is essentially that we sucked so badly last year that it's virtually impossible to be any worse.

Serious question: What do you think of Mike Nolan?

If you think he's over-rated, I can see why you'd have serious concerns. If you don't think he's over-rated, doesn't it give you some confidence that he likely told McDaniels what he needed in FA & Draft? We've seen with the Ayers quotes that the coaches are given input into the drafting process (Ayers mentioned that the LB coach told him he was "his guy"). So, it stands to reason that Nolan believes he can win with what he currently has at DL. And, we can further see that with 6 new players in the secondary, Nolan likely told McD that the secondary was the area that needed the most improvement...

SonOfLe-loLang
05-05-2009, 09:47 AM
I have far far far more confidence in Nolan and the D at this point then I do McDaniels and the offense, despite the amazing offense he inherited from Shanahan.

I worry about Ron Fields and the NT position, but I think that Ayers will step up, and some true competition at DT/DE will bring out the best.

Remember that Shanahan was trying to move to the 3-4 in a evolutionary way. One wonders what life would have been like with Shanny as a HC, and Nolan as a DC.

I love Mike Shanahan, but Broncos fans have been blinded by those super bowl victories and seem to forget that the offense hasn't been explosive since Elway and Davis left. You don't trust McDaniels on offense? Really? What about him don't you trust? Is it his record? His attention to detail? The depth he created or the franchise runner he drafted? What is it exactly?

SportinOne
05-05-2009, 10:13 AM
I don't think the first two picks in the draft are nearly as questionable as:

A. Trading a sure top 20 pick next year for a 5'9'' cornerback.
B. Trading two third round picks for a tight end that we already have on our roster. Especially stupid considering the fact that the main reason we were given for not needing Scheffler was that McDaniels likes to run 1 TE sets. By the way, Scheffler is still a Bronco.

~Crash~
05-05-2009, 10:15 AM
Ayers schooled everyone at the senior bowl. If he seriously plays like that on Sundays he'll be all world out of the gate.

I think the biggest problem Doom had last year was the defensive coaches trying to use him as an every down DE, including trying to have him stuff the run. The guy just can't handle it and it left him too tired to be effective on pass rushing downs.

He's got good pass rush skills and I think he'll be a great fit for the 3-4 OLB job Nolan looks to be fitting him into. In some ways though I'm more looking forward to when we run a 4-3 front with Dumervil at RDE, Ayers at LDE, Thomas at UT, and Powell or Fields at NT. That could be a surprisingly effective line.

so let me get this right ? you are saying Ayer did nothing in College but no problem instant pro bowler . Right ?

Popps
05-05-2009, 10:21 AM
So.. he predicts that we'll still rank in the bottom third defensively? Nice guess Einstein. We still aren't gonna have a pass rush.

http://canuckjihad.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/crybaby.png?w=300&h=425

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 10:29 AM
It's hard to imagine the defense not being better. I think just adding Nolan to run it makes it better just doing that, not to mention the other moves made.

Ayers and Dumervil will need to be the pass rush guys and the others when given blitz opportunities. Stopping the run of course is key for any defense and they haven't done well there either.

Giving up big plays has also hurt, not to mention not able to get off the field and allowing too many 3rd down conversions. And not creating turnovers either. They have ranked at or near the bottom in that category for awhile now.

Hmm, not stopping the run, no pass rush, too many 3rd down conversions, losing the battle of field position most games since the defense can't get many 3 plays and punt, giving up long runs or passes, and not creating turnovers and this being a pattern for a few years now. Yet some are shocked the defensive staff needed replacing? Ok.

I like your points, but to be fair, no one is defending Slowick.

I agree with the article for the most part. As bad as our defensive line was, our safeties were worse. We had starting safeties that wouldn't make most teams at all last year. That will help. And with most of our talent in the linebacking corps, moving to a 3-4 will put the best players on the field. More than any of that, the defense got better when Slowick left the team.

gyldenlove
05-05-2009, 10:58 AM
It's hard to imagine the defense not being better. I think just adding Nolan to run it makes it better just doing that, not to mention the other moves made.

Ayers and Dumervil will need to be the pass rush guys and the others when given blitz opportunities. Stopping the run of course is key for any defense and they haven't done well there either.

Giving up big plays has also hurt, not to mention not able to get off the field and allowing too many 3rd down conversions. And not creating turnovers either. They have ranked at or near the bottom in that category for awhile now.

Hmm, not stopping the run, no pass rush, too many 3rd down conversions, losing the battle of field position most games since the defense can't get many 3 plays and punt, giving up long runs or passes, and not creating turnovers and this being a pattern for a few years now. Yet some are shocked the defensive staff needed replacing? Ok.

I bet they felt adding Nolan in San Fran would help their D too, and yet they failed to crack the top 25 in his 3 years running the show.

Taco John
05-05-2009, 11:00 AM
Seriously? Klis thought our biggest weakness was our safety play?

Now, I know our safety play hasn't been great. But I have a hard time with the opinion that our safety play was our biggest weakness when my two year old could tell you that our defensive line was our biggest weakness. It's like having no drive line, and saying that the muffler is why the car isn't going. Uh, no. The hole in the muffler is sure problematic, but it's not the reason the car won't perform.

Klis isn't setting anyone straight with this take. We could have taken Ron Brace in the second round and still ended up with Moreno and Ayers.

That said, I'd never cancel season tickets over it.

eddie mac
05-05-2009, 11:04 AM
Doom is a major liability when teams run at his side

Maybe that's why he'll have an extra LB inside of him to help out and CB's and safeties who can actually ****ing tackle.

Taco John
05-05-2009, 11:05 AM
To further demonstrate my point - not a single person on this forum said that Safety was a priority in this draft. And that includes all of the people who are suddenly saying that Safety was a priority after the fact:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2674

vancejohnson82
05-05-2009, 11:10 AM
To further demonstrate my point - not a single person on this forum said that Safety was a priority in this draft. And that includes all of the people who are suddenly saying that Safety was a priority after the fact:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2674

well, I dont neccessarily think that safety was a "priority." I mean we just picked up Dawkins and Hill....however, we are only going to have Dawkins for two years so now would be the perfect time to groom somebody...weird that we took TWO safeties...I would have taken a flyer on another DT or maybe taken our QB that round instead of 7th...

overall though, I think it was just a pre-emptive move to cover up what could be a hole in the near future

CHANGSTER
05-05-2009, 11:17 AM
Seriously? Klis thought our biggest weakness was our safety play?

Now, I know our safety play hasn't been great. But I have a hard time with the opinion that our safety play was our biggest weakness when my two year old could tell you that our defensive line was our biggest weakness. It's like having no drive line, and saying that the muffler is why the car isn't going. Uh, no. The hole in the muffler is sure problematic, but it's not the reason the car won't perform.

Klis isn't setting anyone straight with this take. We could have taken Ron Brace in the second round and still ended up with Moreno and Ayers.

That said, I'd never cancel season tickets over it.

I see your point, but we had some epicly crappy players at the position last season. Wasn't the biggest weakness but it definitely had the least talent. A couple D-line players at least glimpsed talent. Perhaps he meant something along that train of thought.

lex
05-05-2009, 11:19 AM
Seriously? Klis thought our biggest weakness was our safety play?

Now, I know our safety play hasn't been great. But I have a hard time with the opinion that our safety play was our biggest weakness when my two year old could tell you that our defensive line was our biggest weakness. It's like having no drive line, and saying that the muffler is why the car isn't going. Uh, no. The hole in the muffler is sure problematic, but it's not the reason the car won't perform.

Klis isn't setting anyone straight with this take. We could have taken Ron Brace in the second round and still ended up with Moreno and Ayers.

That said, I'd never cancel season tickets over it.

The 10 yard cushions undermined a pass rush time after time. If the 10 yard cushion was some backwards reasoning (a pass rush is the best way to help the secondary, not 10 yard cushions) for compensating for poor safeties, then its hard to know how poor our dline was actually. Over the prior two seasons Doom averaged over 10 sacks a season. That dropped off last year. There may have been other factors for Doom not getting more sacks such as using him on too many downs but the 10 yard cushions were death.

Tombstone RJ
05-05-2009, 11:32 AM
Seriously? Klis thought our biggest weakness was our safety play?

Now, I know our safety play hasn't been great. But I have a hard time with the opinion that our safety play was our biggest weakness when my two year old could tell you that our defensive line was our biggest weakness. It's like having no drive line, and saying that the muffler is why the car isn't going. Uh, no. The hole in the muffler is sure problematic, but it's not the reason the car won't perform.

Klis isn't setting anyone straight with this take. We could have taken Ron Brace in the second round and still ended up with Moreno and Ayers.

That said, I'd never cancel season tickets over it.

Ever wonder why a guy like Rodney Harrison just makes a defense better? Here's another example: Bob Sanders. The year the Colts won the SB, Sanders was injured much of that year and the defense was pretty bad. Then the playoffs roll around, Sanders is healthy and WHAMMO, they beat the Patriots and win the SB.

It's all in your perspective I guess. But if you have strong safety play, coupled with a decent defensive line that knows their assigments, then the overall defense becomes better against the run.

Drek
05-05-2009, 11:38 AM
so let me get this right ? you are saying Ayer did nothing in College but no problem instant pro bowler . Right ?

Nope. I said IF he plays like he did at the senior bowl he will be.

I think the chances of that are highly unlikely. Therefore the fact that he whooped up on Oher, Smith, etc. in small samples isn't indicative as to how good he'll be.

I think he's got a lot of talent but up until recently had been unresponsive to coaching. The end result is he's a very raw player. I've said in other threads, he needs probably two years before we have a legit idea what his floor and ceiling are respectively.

If he does show up and suddenly start shifting off top tier OLs like he did at the senior bowl though, he'll be the biggest impact rookie pass rusher since Javon Kearse. He was just freakish there.

lex
05-05-2009, 11:59 AM
Klis is a sycophant to the front office. Because of this, the notion that he is telling anyone off is slightly comical.

Inkana7
05-05-2009, 12:10 PM
Klis is a sycophant to the front office. Because of this, the notion that he is telling anyone off is slightly comical.

No one at the Post has any connection to the Front Office or anyone inside Dove Valley. It's why that paper is ajoke anymore.

footstepsfrom#27
05-05-2009, 12:12 PM
Serious question: What do you think of Mike Nolan?
I think he's to small to stop the run and two slow to rush the passer.

lex
05-05-2009, 12:27 PM
No one at the Post has any connection to the Front Office or anyone inside Dove Valley. It's why that paper is ajoke anymore.


Regardless, the guy is constantly spinning/defending anything the front office does. Say what you want about Woody but at least he has the seeds to take a position and call people out.

outdoor_miner
05-05-2009, 01:16 PM
I think he's to small to stop the run and two slow to rush the passer.

To true... Two true. Two many people are being to easy on McDaniels and Nolan... I would have been cool with too draft picks two fix the line. But one? That's two few, and too be perfectly honest, I'm two upset too even thing straight.

vancejohnson82
05-05-2009, 01:17 PM
To true... Two true. Two many people are being to easy on McDaniels and Nolan... I would have been cool with too draft picks two fix the line. But one? That's two few, and too be perfectly honest, I'm two upset too even thing straight.

haha....nicely done

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 01:58 PM
To true... Two true. Two many people are being to easy on McDaniels and Nolan... I would have been cool with too draft picks two fix the line. But one? That's two few, and too be perfectly honest, I'm two upset too even thing straight.

:spit:

Mile High Mojoe
05-05-2009, 01:58 PM
I bet they felt adding Nolan in San Fran would help their D too, and yet they failed to crack the top 25 in his 3 years running the show.Iíve read many of the posts in this thread but in short this is best, you nailed it. You can argue all day long that this draft choice or that one would have been wiserÖpicking best player available or picking for position need firstÖwhatever. What about Nolan himself as a Coach?

Taking 3 DBís in this draft and only one possible DL/LB (whatever Ayers lines up at) seems strange when the DL and LB positions was and still is the biggest need and still the worst weakness of any unit on the team.

We needed run stoppers and pass rushers, not another rookie smurf DB. I just donít see why so many have confidence in Nolanís ability to take a group of mediocre players that are currently on the roster at the 7 and crossing his fingers hoping that if they canít get it done a more talented secondary (questionable) can bail them out. Crazy logic if you ask me.

The bottom line is Nolan capable of making his scheme work, especially with this group of players? His resume just doesnít support it, like it or not.

goldengopher1976
05-05-2009, 02:00 PM
Great insight Blue Flame! .. "we aren't going to have a pass rush" . .granted Klis was being highly conservative in his prediction, almost tongue in cheek!

Anyway I'm beginning to see your logic ... Lets see ... Ayers is obviously a bust and what a waste of a first round pick .. just like Moreno with Hillis with Graham and Quinn and that 'one year wonder' of a O-line sure to flame out .. who cares if they help elevate our scoring production from 16th to the top 5 and vastly improves the red zone success as well as keeps our defense off the field and the other teams D on the field an extra 5 to 10 minutes a game!

And what is McD and Nolan thinking that guys like Doom and Reid as well as Ayers might improve our pass rush from the OLB, and with the versatility to slide in when required? And look at this train wreck of a front three with Thomas in his third year and now that fat ass Chris Baker ,,, Gee he was accused of beating up some poor guy a couple years ago (though no proof was ever made) and even though hes been a model citizen the past year and a half and played well as a solid run-stuffing DT of NT proportions, we are certainly lost with him at NT.

McD is a joke thinking a marine like Rulon "Jones' Davis and Everett P will ever amount to anything. And we KNOW Kenny Peterson is a bust as well! Not to mention that chump Carlton Powell who set NCAA all time college record for least amount of yards against him by any running back his last year at Clemson with something like 'Minus 12 yrds rushing' on the season! So Yes I'm with you blue flame we're SUNK!

Look at the ridiculous coaches they have too. Nolan, Nunnely, Martindale, Donnatel etc. none of which has EVER had a lick of success in the 3-4 as a DC or position coach, obviously! What could McD have been thinking the little 33 year old incompetent TWERP!

And these LBs Ha!,Talk about a sick joke! Is it too late to dump DJ, Andra Davis as well as Woodyard and Larsen in year two? Also, Griesen who knows nothing at all of 3-4 work either. And this UDFA Johnson kid ... another Bust for sure.

But the thing that gets me is the outrage to think adding Ayers and Doom as rush guys from the OLB spot as well might ever result in a few more sacks and pressures than the past two years! What morons!

And lets not even talk about the secondary, and how pathetic they are going to be Tjesus! Don't get me started there!

Come to think of it, now that I see the light like some of you doom and gloomers, I'm only sad I don't have season tickets myself, just so I could turn mine into Bowlen's office by Fed Express registered delivery in protest at this absolute Farce!

Man. Shanny and Slowik must be laughing their asses off! HaHaha! :rofl: :twokisses

I don't feel like going through all the pages to see if someone has actually listed the correct school or not. He went to VaTech, not Clemson.

That being said, I applaud your optimism and join you in it.

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 02:01 PM
To further demonstrate my point - not a single person on this forum said that Safety was a priority in this draft. And that includes all of the people who are suddenly saying that Safety was a priority after the fact:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2674

Scroll down...

It's nose tackle specifically, but it's front seven generally. We could also use help at RB and safety. The problem is this is one of the worst classes for defensive tackles. There's slim pickens and it's unlikely to expect much from what is available.
And

Here's a few things to remember about defensive tackles.


There aren't really any 3-4 nose tackles in this draft. Raji is really more a 4-3 guy that some think could play nose in a 3-4. Not everyone agrees he could.
The quality of defensive tackles in general in this draft are pretty low. It's a poor year for them.
Defensive tackles take as long as QB's to develop (about 3 years). This means that even if we land the guy we need, we won't know for several years if he's legit.


So expecting anything to save our front line in this draft, especially at DT, is misplaced hope. This is a good case where BPA is optimum choice. Fortunately for us there are a lot of other areas besides NT that need upgrading and youth.

And I still maintain this is true. :thanku:

Mile High Mojoe
05-05-2009, 02:17 PM
Kaylore, maybe what you say is true about defending the idea that the draft class was weak at DL but why draft 3 DB's and why trade a #1 for a smurf DB? How does this make sense? Give me a big strong stud DL who's under-developed and not an immediate starter who may in time add something to the front 7 over another midget DB any day. Why would this move be a bad thing, I don't get it.

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 02:31 PM
Kaylore, maybe what you say is true about defending the idea that the draft class was weak at DL but why draft 3 DB's and why trade a #1 for a smurf DB? How does this make sense? Give me a big strong stud DL who's under-developed and not an immediate starter who may in time add something to the front 7 over another midget DB any day. Why would this move be a bad thing, I don't get it.

I didn't like everything we did in the draft and what we spent on the Alphonso Smith is one of a few things that happened I wasn't thrilled with. It's a weak class and using our first in a stronger class next year is unwise. I give McDaniels some slack because he wants to get ready now and teams like the Patriots can afford to trade picks into the next draft because they aren't horrible like we are. However it's still too much.

That said, I don't want a GM that takes for need especially if he has doubts about a player. If he doesn't believe a DT is good enough to play at this level but takes one anyway because "we need a DT" then he's being irresponsible and making bad decisions. McDaniels found the guys he believes will work out and went after them regardless of position. Historically the best drafts happen this way because the good players that come out each year don't magically match up to what you happen to need at that point in time every year. So he gets props for sticking to his plan.

The only thing now is that he has to be right. Even if you have a plan, pursue it methodically and accomplish what you intended, if you're just wrong, it's no better than reaching for need. That's why we have to wait and see how he actually did, and in some sense see how who we passed on did, before we decide one way or the other.

The good news for both the pro and anti-McDaniels camps is sink or swim, we'll know this team's success will be because of McDaniels and that will make firing or extending him in two years a clear-cut decision.

Odysseus
05-05-2009, 02:32 PM
So.. he predicts that we'll still rank in the bottom third defensively? Nice guess Einstein. We still aren't gonna have a pass rush.

But Blue! We went up six whole places from last year!

Drek
05-05-2009, 02:34 PM
Kaylore, maybe what you say is true about defending the idea that the draft class was weak at DL but why draft 3 DB's and why trade a #1 for a smurf DB? How does this make sense? Give me a big strong stud DL who's under-developed and not an immediate starter who may in time add something to the front 7 over another midget DB any day. Why would this move be a bad thing, I don't get it.

If Carlton Powell and Ron Brace came out in the same class I bet they go within 20 picks of one another.

Thats my basic summation of this DL class, and how weak it was.

As for the DBs:

1. how many elite CBs in the NFL are over 6'0"? How many are under it? Height is in no way a reliable predictor for CB success. Sure, 5'9" isn't the prototype, but prototype CBs don't come out of college anymore. They get converted to WR instead.

2. In 2007 our defense was ranked 19th in yardage against, giving up 336 per game. In 2008 we were 29th allowing 374.6 yards a game. In 2007 we were the where the 28th ranked scoring defense, giving up 25.6 points a game. In 2008 we were 29th, at 28 points per game even.

So our defense declined to the tune of 38.6 yards per game and 2.4 points more per game. Basically one additional drive that successfully resulted in a field goal.

In 2007 our front line was John Engelberger for almost a whole season, Sam Adams, Alvin McKinley, and Elvis Dumervil, with a handful of starts by Marcus Thomas at the end of the season. We had Bates running the defense for half the year, then scrapped it for Slowik part way through, changing systems entirely. We also had DJ Williams playing out of position at MLB, Webster out of position at SOLB, and the corpse of Ian Gold at WOLB.

In 2008 we had a front line of Ebenezer Ekuban for 2/3rds of the season (Engelberger for the other 1/3rd), Marcus Thomas, Dwayne Robertson, and Elvis Dumervil. At linebacker we had DJ Williams at WOLB (natural position) Webster at MLB (natural position), and Jamie Winborn at SOLB. We also had Woodyard and Larsen get some decent time at WOLB and MLB respectively, which most people agree was a step up for the defense.

In the backfield the primary change we made was going from Lynch and Ferguson/Abdullah to McCree/Manuel/Fox/Lowry/Barrett. We also went from Foxworth as our nickel back to Josh Bell and Karl Paymah.

One unit saw significant turnover. The other didn't. The defense gave up what basically amounted to an extra scoring drive a game though, and this despite having the same defensive system in place (theoretically) the entire season, one that better compared to what they all had played in previously.

Is the DL a big issue for the quality of this D? Sure is and it needs to be addressed if we're ever going to be an elite D again. But the first step we should look to take is just getting back to being a middle of the pack D, and the fastest way we can do that is to fix the massive black hole we had at safety and nickel corner.

We signed Dawkins and Hill to be the immediate starters, but this FO is trying to build a secondary that will be good when the DL finally is assembled, and that won't happen over night. Hence the need for young depth in the defensive backfield that can also contribute immediately in rotation with the starters, on nickel downs, and on special teams.

Rashomon
05-05-2009, 02:39 PM
The Broncos did address their front seven with their No. 18 pick in Robert Ayers. They liked Ayers slightly better than Aaron Maybin, who Buffalo took at No. 11; Brian Orakpo, who Washington took at No. 13; and Larry English, who the Chargers took at No. 16. It will be interesting to see who emerges as the best of that DE/OLB foursome.


It is amazing how every time you hear a team talk about their draft, the player they wanted the most always falls to them.

Mile High Mojoe
05-05-2009, 02:45 PM
I didn't like everything we did in the draft and what we spent on the Alphonso Smith is one of a few things that happened I wasn't thrilled with. It's a weak class and using our first in a stronger class next year is unwise. I give McDaniels some slack because he wants to get ready now and teams like the Patriots can afford to trade picks into the next draft because they aren't horrible like we are. However it's still too much.

That said, I don't want a GM that takes for need especially if he has doubts about a player. If he doesn't believe a DT is good enough to play at this level but takes one anyway because "we need a DT" then he's being irresponsible and making bad decisions. McDaniels found the guys he believes will work out and went after them regardless of position. Historically the best drafts happen this way because the good players that come out each year don't magically match up to what you happen to need at that point in time every year. So he gets props for sticking to his plan.

The only thing now is that he has to be right. Even if you have a plan, pursue it methodically and accomplish what you intended, if you're just wrong, it's no better than reaching for need. That's why we have to wait and see how he actually did, and in some sense see how who we passed on did, before we decide one way or the other.

The good news for both the pro and anti-McDaniels camps is sink or swim, we'll know this team's success will be because of McDaniels and that will make firing or extending him in two years a clear-cut decision.If he thinks taking a guy like Smith helps him win now is his goal I just don't understand it or agree with it. How many DB's did we need? Of the 10 or 20 DL selected in the draft even if they were not selected in the first day what makes you really believe that the answers to our D lied in taking DB's? Even if they get to start or get limited playing time if we can't get a pass rush or stop the run how will they save a 60 minute game? Right now Doom and DJ are the only proven commodity up front. All the rest is speculation, very optimistic speculation that Nolan can coach up this team knowing that coming in.

Odysseus
05-05-2009, 02:50 PM
I wish all you naysayers would wait until the season starts before saying "I told you so" or whining. We don't know what we have til we see the whole team. One man will not a team make. You know that!

Personnally, I am giving McCoach a shot and let's see what he can do with this group, this year.

You need to stop this line of reasoning. What kind of fan are you? You sound like you are trying to be reasonable and level headed. I am sorry but that will never do. Unless you are bashing your face into the computer monitor, teary eyed or completely frustrated you are not putting enough into this. I am going to have to ask you to relinquish your fan card.

cmhargrove
05-05-2009, 02:51 PM
I don't think the first two picks in the draft are nearly as questionable as:

A. Trading a sure top 20 pick next year for a 5'9'' cornerback.
B. Trading two third round picks for a tight end that we already have on our roster. Especially stupid considering the fact that the main reason we were given for not needing Scheffler was that McDaniels likes to run 1 TE sets. By the way, Scheffler is still a Bronco.

Is everyone going to screw this one up for the rest of history?

We traded two third rounders for a second and a fourth, what gives?
We got Quinn - the Blocking TE that our coaches think can help our run game score more often, and we picked Seth Olsen - a Mauler of a Guard for O-line depth.

We gave two picks, we got two picks. It was a "fair trade" by the books and allowed us to get the player we wanted.

If Alphonso Smith turns out to be our starting corner by next year, you will sure look dumb. I don't care what anyone says. If you can get a good starting NFL corner in the first round, you have made an excellent pick.

BTW - we used a "top 20" pick on Jarvis Moss. It's about finding starters, not "having picks." Case closed.

TailgateNut
05-05-2009, 02:56 PM
You need to stop this line of reasoning. What kind of fan are you? You sound like you are trying to be reasonable and level headed. I am sorry but that will never do. Unless you are bashing your face into the computer monitor, teary eyed or completely frustrated you are not putting enough into this. I am going to have to ask you to relinquish your fan card.

No shiate. Ya can't be a true fan if ya don't bitch and moan daily about the "loss" of Cutler, and the boneheaded picks during the draft. All GOOD fans know whats GOOD for the team. Why wait. Pick 'em apart before they get a chance to show what they can do.

Odysseus
05-05-2009, 02:58 PM
Ever wonder why a guy like Rodney Harrison just makes a defense better? Here's another example: Bob Sanders. The year the Colts won the SB, Sanders was injured much of that year and the defense was pretty bad. Then the playoffs roll around, Sanders is healthy and WHAMMO, they beat the Patriots and win the SB.

It's all in your perspective I guess. But if you have strong safety play, coupled with a decent defensive line that knows their assigments, then the overall defense becomes better against the run.

Our safeties DID suck. If you cannot fix your DL then fixing the safeties, in my opinion, is not a stupid move.

I think the DL needs one impact player to improve significantly. If you have one guy that has to be covered then the whole line will get better. I think fans are over reacting. You cannot fix everything overnight. If some team cuts the right guy our defense can go from back of the pack to middle of the road overnight. No. I am not excited about that but it's better than being a fan of Detroit Lions who are going to regret picking up Stafford.

broncosteven
05-05-2009, 03:08 PM
Mcbean was a rookie last yr right? practice squad, 290 pound end.

Askew came from cinci, is a 300 pound DT who hasn't played much in 3 yrs in NFL.

Both big strong guys Broncos will try at Dend in a 3-4 and see if they play the 4 or 5 technique lined up over or str8 up on the OT.


Other than Ayers they are trying to fill out the new 3-4 D with Shanny's recent drafts or cast offs. Nothing has changed on that front maybe Nolan and McStalin will have more luck than Shanny did.

Wow talk about youth on the DL! Other than Doom everyone listed on the roster are either 1st or 2nd year.

Doom is the longest tenured player with the team coming in 2006.

I find it interesting that all the DT's are over 300lbs.
96 Crowder, Tim DE 6' 4" 275 23 3rd Texas D2-'07
98 McBean, Ryan DE 6' 5" 290 24 3rd Oklahoma State FA-'08
92 Dumervil, Elvis DE 5' 11" 260 25 4th Louisville D4b-'06
65 Davis, Rulon DE 6' 5" 281 25 R California CFA- '09
64 Pedescleaux, Everette DE 6' 6" 305 23 R Northern Iowa CFA- '09
94 Moss, Jarvis DE 6' 6" 265 24 3rd Florida D1- '07
56 Ayers, Robert DE/LB 6' 3" 272 23 R Tennessee D1b-'09
90 Peterson, Kenny DL 6' 3" 300 30 7th Ohio State FA-'07
95 Reid, Darrell DL/LB 6' 2" 288 26 5th Minnesota UFA (Ind)-'09
69 Parker, J'Vonne DT 6' 4" 325 26 5th Rutgers FA-'09
75 Powell, Carlton DT 6' 3" 300 23 2nd Virginia Tech D5b-'08
79 Thomas, Marcus DT 6' 3" 305 23 3rd Florida D4-'07
93 Clemons, Nic DT 6' 6" 300 29 3rd Georgia FA-'08
91 Fields, Ronald DT 6' 2" 315 27 5th Mississippi State UFA (SF)-'09
71 Baker, Chris DT 6' 2" 326 21 R Hampton CFA- '09
99 Askew, Matthias DT 6' 5" 302 26 2nd Michigan State FA-'08


Most of our ends (other than Elvis) are listed at 6'-6" with a couple 6'-4" guys thrown in.

DenverBrit
05-05-2009, 03:12 PM
Is everyone going to screw this one up for the rest of history?

We traded two third rounders for a second and a fourth, what gives?
We got Quinn - the Blocking TE that our coaches think can help our run game score more often, and we picked Seth Olsen - a Mauler of a Guard for O-line depth.

We gave two picks, we got two picks. It was a "fair trade" by the books and allowed us to get the player we wanted.

If Alphonso Smith turns out to be our starting corner by next year, you will sure look dumb. I don't care what anyone says. If you can get a good starting NFL corner in the first round, you have made an excellent pick.

BTW - we used a "top 20" pick on Jarvis Moss. It's about finding starters, not "having picks." Case closed.

You're correcting the 'evidence' that McDaniels screwed up the draft, these urban legends must be preserved if the whining is to continue. ;D

Blueflame
05-05-2009, 03:13 PM
But Blue! We went up six whole places from last year!

Ha!

If we can't pressure the opposing QB, the defense is still going to struggle. And I'm not convinced that another team's scrub third-stringer is the answer as the anchor of our D-line. Looks like we'll be depending on him tho.

Blueflame
05-05-2009, 03:18 PM
No shiate. Ya can't be a true fan if ya don't b**** and moan daily about the "loss" of Cutler, and the boneheaded picks during the draft. All GOOD fans know whats GOOD for the team. Why wait. Pick 'em apart before they get a chance to show what they can do.

It's a message board... debate is what it's for. If we all saw everything just the same way, it would be dull indeed.

footstepsfrom#27
05-05-2009, 03:19 PM
To true... Two true. Two many people are being to easy on McDaniels and Nolan... I would have been cool with too draft picks two fix the line. But one? That's two few, and too be perfectly honest, I'm two upset too even thing straight.
Ha ha...just saw that two.

DenverBrit
05-05-2009, 03:19 PM
Other than Ayers they are trying to fill out the new 3-4 D with Shanny's recent drafts or cast offs. Nothing has changed on that front maybe Nolan and McStalin will have more luck than Shanny did.

Wow talk about youth on the DL! Other than Doom everyone listed on the roster are either 1st or 2nd year.

Doom is the longest tenured player with the team coming in 2006.

I find it interesting that all the DT's are over 300lbs.
96 Crowder, Tim DE 6' 4" 275 23 3rd Texas D2-'07
98 McBean, Ryan DE 6' 5" 290 24 3rd Oklahoma State FA-'08
92 Dumervil, Elvis DE 5' 11" 260 25 4th Louisville D4b-'06
65 Davis, Rulon DE 6' 5" 281 25 R California CFA- '09
64 Pedescleaux, Everette DE 6' 6" 305 23 R Northern Iowa CFA- '09
94 Moss, Jarvis DE 6' 6" 265 24 3rd Florida D1- '07
56 Ayers, Robert DE/LB 6' 3" 272 23 R Tennessee D1b-'09
90 Peterson, Kenny DL 6' 3" 300 30 7th Ohio State FA-'07
95 Reid, Darrell DL/LB 6' 2" 288 26 5th Minnesota UFA (Ind)-'09
69 Parker, J'Vonne DT 6' 4" 325 26 5th Rutgers FA-'09
75 Powell, Carlton DT 6' 3" 300 23 2nd Virginia Tech D5b-'08
79 Thomas, Marcus DT 6' 3" 305 23 3rd Florida D4-'07
93 Clemons, Nic DT 6' 6" 300 29 3rd Georgia FA-'08
91 Fields, Ronald DT 6' 2" 315 27 5th Mississippi State UFA (SF)-'09
71 Baker, Chris DT 6' 2" 326 21 R Hampton CFA- '09
99 Askew, Matthias DT 6' 5" 302 26 2nd Michigan State FA-'08


Most of our ends (other than Elvis) are listed at 6'-6" with a couple 6'-4" guys thrown in.

It does look like a lot of depth and no starters.
There's a lot to be said for youth and 'hungry, maybe Nolan and Nunnely can make a 'team' out of them.
The last two DCs couldn't organize a party in a brewery.

lostknight
05-05-2009, 03:19 PM
To further demonstrate my point - not a single person on this forum said that Safety was a priority in this draft. And that includes all of the people who are suddenly saying that Safety was a priority after the fact:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2674

I beg to differ:
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2390472&highlight=safety#post2390472

Tombstone RJ
05-05-2009, 03:21 PM
Other than Ayers they are trying to fill out the new 3-4 D with Shanny's recent drafts or cast offs. Nothing has changed on that front maybe Nolan and McStalin will have more luck than Shanny did.

Wow talk about youth on the DL! Other than Doom everyone listed on the roster are either 1st or 2nd year.

Doom is the longest tenured player with the team coming in 2006.

I find it interesting that all the DT's are over 300lbs.
96 Crowder, Tim DE 6' 4" 275 23 3rd Texas D2-'07
98 McBean, Ryan DE 6' 5" 290 24 3rd Oklahoma State FA-'08
92 Dumervil, Elvis DE 5' 11" 260 25 4th Louisville D4b-'06
65 Davis, Rulon DE 6' 5" 281 25 R California CFA- '09
64 Pedescleaux, Everette DE 6' 6" 305 23 R Northern Iowa CFA- '09
94 Moss, Jarvis DE 6' 6" 265 24 3rd Florida D1- '07
56 Ayers, Robert DE/LB 6' 3" 272 23 R Tennessee D1b-'09
90 Peterson, Kenny DL 6' 3" 300 30 7th Ohio State FA-'07
95 Reid, Darrell DL/LB 6' 2" 288 26 5th Minnesota UFA (Ind)-'09
69 Parker, J'Vonne DT 6' 4" 325 26 5th Rutgers FA-'09
75 Powell, Carlton DT 6' 3" 300 23 2nd Virginia Tech D5b-'08
79 Thomas, Marcus DT 6' 3" 305 23 3rd Florida D4-'07
93 Clemons, Nic DT 6' 6" 300 29 3rd Georgia FA-'08
91 Fields, Ronald DT 6' 2" 315 27 5th Mississippi State UFA (SF)-'09
71 Baker, Chris DT 6' 2" 326 21 R Hampton CFA- '09
99 Askew, Matthias DT 6' 5" 302 26 2nd Michigan State FA-'08


Most of our ends (other than Elvis) are listed at 6'-6" with a couple 6'-4" guys thrown in.

Thanks Steve, nice information. I could be completely wrong about this, but the overall size of this young defense, sans the defensive backs, just seems bigger.

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 03:21 PM
If he thinks taking a guy like Smith helps him win now is his goal I just don't understand it or agree with it. How many DB's did we need? Of the 10 or 20 DL selected in the draft even if they were not selected in the first day what makes you really believe that the answers to our D lied in taking DB's?

Because our defensive backs sucked horribly. Our safeties were the worst in the league and we had Champ left after cutting Bly. We had no second corner. And we had Dawkins and other similarly well-aged veterans at the safety position. It needed a heavy overhaul.

It's very simple. There were two realities we were dealing with.

1.Our safeties were worse than our defensive line last year.
2.This draft had a lot of good players at defensive back, particularly safety and number 2 corners.
3.This draft sucked for defensive tackles, especially nose tackles in a 3-4.

You can piss and moan that "we didn't to take a DT OMG!!!!" but the popular opinion is there were really none to be had and McDaniels took surer things at the many, many other positions that sucked on our team rather than roll the dice on a guy who will likely bust or take years to emerge even if he had worked out.

Even if we took a NT, and through some miracle he would have worked out, they would have had no effect on how the defensive would look this year.

cutthemdown
05-05-2009, 03:24 PM
The Broncos did address their front seven with their No. 18 pick in Robert Ayers. They liked Ayers slightly better than Aaron Maybin, who Buffalo took at No. 11; Brian Orakpo, who Washington took at No. 13; and Larry English, who the Chargers took at No. 16. It will be interesting to see who emerges as the best of that DE/OLB foursome.


It is amazing how every time you hear a team talk about their draft, the player they wanted the most always falls to them.

Not true at all. They said they liked Tyson Jackson or Raji with first pick but he wasn't there so they took Moreno who they felt warranted that high of pick.

Then out of the OLB/DE prospects they like Ayers the most and they got him. What's amazing is people not understanding the process of the draft and how teams build a board.

gyldenlove
05-05-2009, 03:34 PM
Because our defensive backs sucked horribly. Our safeties were the worst in the league and we had Champ left after cutting Bly. We had no second corner. And we had Dawkins and other similarly well-aged veterans at the safety position. It needed a heavy overhaul.

It's very simple. There were two realities we were dealing with.

1.Our safeties were worse than our defensive line last year.
2.This draft had a lot of good players at defensive back, particularly safety and number 2 corners.
3.This draft sucked for defensive tackles, especially nose tackles in a 3-4.

You can piss and moan that "we didn't to take a DT OMG!!!!" but the popular opinion is there were really none to be had and McDaniels took surer things at the many, many other positions that sucked on our team rather than roll the dice on a guy who will likely bust or take years to emerge even if he had worked out.

Even if we took a NT, and through some miracle he would have worked out, they would have had no effect on how the defensive would look this year.

Look at Oakland last year, they started the season with 3 pro bowlers in the secondary, and yet got eaten alive because the defensive front was so crappy.

We could start Champ, Asomougha, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, but if we don't get to the QB and stop the run, it won't help.

Dawkins is on his last legs, Hill is a stopgap measure and Goodman may have 2 years of solid contribution left in him, and probably the same for Champ. If we had focused on the defensive front, we would have seen a return and those DBs that we pay so many millions of dollars would have been able to make plays in 2010. Now, we are throwing away effectively a lot of money on veteran DBs who will never get decent working conditions and will never be able to contribute as a result.

Its very simple, here are 3 realities we are dealing with:

1. We addressed the safety position in FA, but left the DL slightly modified.
2. This draft also had a lot of talent at the WR position and ILB, but we didn't draft those.
3. There will never be a wonder draft for NTs, we can't wait until there are 10 NTs who are projected as day 1 picks, because that will never happen.

Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

We cut Bly and had no problems replacing him, we let go of all our safeties and had no problems signing guys in FA. How come we can replace DBs with free agents with no problems at all, but can't find a decent DL? that is because good DL players rarely become free agents, unlike DBs. We could have gotten more FA DBs next year, but we won't get any new DLs.

Paladin
05-05-2009, 03:38 PM
I'm not sure; are you whining?

broncosteven
05-05-2009, 03:44 PM
Because our defensive backs sucked horribly. Our safeties were the worst in the league and we had Champ left after cutting Bly. We had no second corner. And we had Dawkins and other similarly well-aged veterans at the safety position. It needed a heavy overhaul.

It's very simple. There were two realities we were dealing with.

1.Our safeties were worse than our defensive line last year.
2.This draft had a lot of good players at defensive back, particularly safety and number 2 corners.
3.This draft sucked for defensive tackles, especially nose tackles in a 3-4.

You can piss and moan that "we didn't to take a DT OMG!!!!" but the popular opinion is there were really none to be had and McDaniels took surer things at the many, many other positions that sucked on our team rather than roll the dice on a guy who will likely bust or take years to emerge even if he had worked out.

Even if we took a NT, and through some miracle he would have worked out, they would have had no effect on how the defensive would look this year.

I know they got the guy the wanted/targetted. I hope he pans out better than Moss did.

If Hotrods info was true and they did try to land Peppers then they at least attempted to bring in an established vet to address the DL even if he would be playing out of position in a 3-4. I like that and hope it was true.

It appears there is no one at DL available to us in this years draft and no one worth trading for. Apparently we have to eat it this year and hope we get better play from Shanny's picks and the cast offs.

Maybe having 2 real Safties improves the D, I hope they are willing to corner blitz Smith and one of our shiny new safeties early and often. I thought in a 3-4 the blitz came from the 4 Lb's but sending a rook who had some sort of record tackles behind the LOS would be nice if he can make the team and do the same thing at NFL level.

Blueflame
05-05-2009, 03:45 PM
Look at Oakland last year, they started the season with 3 pro bowlers in the secondary, and yet got eaten alive because the defensive front was so crappy.

We could start Champ, Asomougha, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, but if we don't get to the QB and stop the run, it won't help.

Dawkins is on his last legs, Hill is a stopgap measure and Goodman may have 2 years of solid contribution left in him, and probably the same for Champ. If we had focused on the defensive front, we would have seen a return and those DBs that we pay so many millions of dollars would have been able to make plays in 2010. Now, we are throwing away effectively a lot of money on veteran DBs who will never get decent working conditions and will never be able to contribute as a result.

Its very simple, here are 3 realities we are dealing with:

1. We addressed the safety position in FA, but left the DL slightly modified.
2. This draft also had a lot of talent at the WR position and ILB, but we didn't draft those.
3. There will never be a wonder draft for NTs, we can't wait until there are 10 NTs who are projected as day 1 picks, because that will never happen.

Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

We cut Bly and had no problems replacing him, we let go of all our safeties and had no problems signing guys in FA. How come we can replace DBs with free agents with no problems at all, but can't find a decent DL? that is because good DL players rarely become free agents, unlike DBs. We could have gotten more FA DBs next year, but we won't get any new DLs.

Good post...

broncosteven
05-05-2009, 03:51 PM
...
Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

We cut Bly and had no problems replacing him, we let go of all our safeties and had no problems signing guys in FA. How come we can replace DBs with free agents with no problems at all, but can't find a decent DL? that is because good DL players rarely become free agents, unlike DBs. We could have gotten more FA DBs next year, but we won't get any new DLs.

I am guessing Shanny had the same issues and with Lepsis retiring last year needed to spend the pick on Clady. I know everyone now loves the BPA draft strategy but we needed a LT last year or we fight KFC for 2-14 record.

I also love how Shanny took it up the ass for not addressing DL even after drafting Moss and Thomas in the same year.

I know Slowick being DC hurt the D, I hope Nolan can make the D a top 20 D with the talent we have drafted over last 2 years. That would allow us to develop Ayers and maybe draft the BPA next year, a NT, in the 1st round to get us over the hump.

I am hoping, right now the runes show a young DL full of castoff's and UDFA's which does not bode well. Would bode better if we had one DL that could command a double team.

Mile High Mojoe
05-05-2009, 03:55 PM
Look at Oakland last year, they started the season with 3 pro bowlers in the secondary, and yet got eaten alive because the defensive front was so crappy.

We could start Champ, Asomougha, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, but if we don't get to the QB and stop the run, it won't help.

Dawkins is on his last legs, Hill is a stopgap measure and Goodman may have 2 years of solid contribution left in him, and probably the same for Champ. If we had focused on the defensive front, we would have seen a return and those DBs that we pay so many millions of dollars would have been able to make plays in 2010. Now, we are throwing away effectively a lot of money on veteran DBs who will never get decent working conditions and will never be able to contribute as a result.

Its very simple, here are 3 realities we are dealing with:

1. We addressed the safety position in FA, but left the DL slightly modified.
2. This draft also had a lot of talent at the WR position and ILB, but we didn't draft those.
3. There will never be a wonder draft for NTs, we can't wait until there are 10 NTs who are projected as day 1 picks, because that will never happen.

Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

We cut Bly and had no problems replacing him, we let go of all our safeties and had no problems signing guys in FA. How come we can replace DBs with free agents with no problems at all, but can't find a decent DL? that is because good DL players rarely become free agents, unlike DBs. We could have gotten more FA DBs next year, but we won't get any new DLs.:thumbs: The Raiders failure is perfect example of what having a so called strong secondary can do for you.

Bly was a bum at S the other CB spot was suspect no one disagrees, we needed help at those positions but without a front 7 who can slow down the run or get any pressure on a QB what good do they do you? The strength of the D should be up front, the deficiencies at DB are easier to make up for with some beef, speed and muscle up front rather than the the other way around.

Hulamau
05-05-2009, 03:55 PM
Yes, McD clearly knows nothing about offense. Kudos for living up to the first half of your screen name...

:spit:

cutthemdown
05-05-2009, 03:58 PM
I am guessing Shanny had the same issues and with Lepsis retiring last year needed to spend the pick on Clady. I know everyone now loves the BPA draft strategy but we needed a LT last year or we fight KFC for 2-14 record.

I also love how Shanny took it up the ass for not addressing DL even after drafting Moss and Thomas in the same year.

I know Slowick being DC hurt the D, I hope Nolan can make the D a top 20 D with the talent we have drafted over last 2 years. That would allow us to develop Ayers and maybe draft the BPA next year, a NT, in the 1st round to get us over the hump.

I am hoping, right now the runes show a young DL full of castoff's and UDFA's which does not bode well. Would bode better if we had one DL that could command a double team.


Right but last yr and this yr were plentiful with LT prospects. It was a smart move to take one of them. This yr it wasn't like that on dline.

Besides most times Shanny theory didn't work. Middlebrooks, Nash, Moss etc. Shanny hit on only a couple drafts his whole time in Denver. Good for us his last 3 weren't so bad.

Hulamau
05-05-2009, 04:00 PM
To further demonstrate my point - not a single person on this forum said that Safety was a priority in this draft. And that includes all of the people who are suddenly saying that Safety was a priority after the fact:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2674

Well Taco, before the draft he ALREADY did address the safety position with Wolverine and Renaldo Hill. Anyone would be hard pressed to say it wasn't addressed

Tombstone RJ
05-05-2009, 04:02 PM
Look at Oakland last year, they started the season with 3 pro bowlers in the secondary, and yet got eaten alive because the defensive front was so crappy.

We could start Champ, Asomougha, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, but if we don't get to the QB and stop the run, it won't help.

Dawkins is on his last legs, Hill is a stopgap measure and Goodman may have 2 years of solid contribution left in him, and probably the same for Champ. If we had focused on the defensive front, we would have seen a return and those DBs that we pay so many millions of dollars would have been able to make plays in 2010. Now, we are throwing away effectively a lot of money on veteran DBs who will never get decent working conditions and will never be able to contribute as a result.

Its very simple, here are 3 realities we are dealing with:

1. We addressed the safety position in FA, but left the DL slightly modified.
2. This draft also had a lot of talent at the WR position and ILB, but we didn't draft those.
3. There will never be a wonder draft for NTs, we can't wait until there are 10 NTs who are projected as day 1 picks, because that will never happen.

Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

We cut Bly and had no problems replacing him, we let go of all our safeties and had no problems signing guys in FA. How come we can replace DBs with free agents with no problems at all, but can't find a decent DL? that is because good DL players rarely become free agents, unlike DBs. We could have gotten more FA DBs next year, but we won't get any new DLs.

I'm just gonna make one comment on you post above. Shanny never ignored the problems of the defensive line.

Let me say that again for all who don't understand: Shanny never ignored the problems of the defensive line.

What Shanahan did is let talented players leave (Pryce, Heyward, Berry) and he brought in either bad FAs (Dewayne Robertson, that big fat huge defensive tackle that called Shanny "the little man upstairs", just to name a few), or stop gap FAs (Cleveland players) and he drafted poorly

Now, you can re-write history and deny all this all you want, but the facts remain the same: Shanahan tried to address the bad defensive line play in different ways, including hiring and firing defensive coordinators.

I really don't see a whole lot of similarities with what McD is doing right now. McD simply contends that the talent already on the team is on par with much of the talent in this last draft. So, he concentrated on other areas.

Hulamau
05-05-2009, 04:08 PM
When you're going out of your way to be a smart ass to "try" and put somebody in their place, it's usually wise to know the players you're talking about. I mean, considering that Powell has done NOTHING in the NFL thus far making his college production all you can use, you would think that if you really knew something about the kid you would know what college he went to.

Is that your only complaint Oskie ?? Yes, Powell is all Virginia Tech like Eddie ... 'My bad" :wave: We've had so many Clemson boys on the D line those southerners are startin to blend in after a while?

footstepsfrom#27
05-05-2009, 04:09 PM
3.This draft sucked for defensive tackles, especially nose tackles in a 3-4.
Well here's what I'm wondering...Klis states in the article that they liked BJ Raji, and since they later demonstrated a willingness to pay MORE to move up for a blocking TE...why not pay a bit to more up for Raji if they liked him? Which one did we need more? Obviously the argument that the talent wasn't worth it doesn't apply here since they say they liked him and we're only talking a couple spots.
Even if we took a NT, and through some miracle he would have worked out, they would have had no effect on how the defensive would look this year.
Not necessarily true, especially since the NT spot is so crucial in this defense, but more to the point, EVERY YEAR I hear this argument given on why we shouldn't draft a D-line guy in the first round, which is part of the reason we're in this positoin. It was also being used last year to support the idea we shouldn't draft an OT high etiher. Good thing we took Clady huh?

broncosteven
05-05-2009, 04:18 PM
Right but last yr and this yr were plentiful with LT prospects. It was a smart move to take one of them. This yr it wasn't like that on dline.

Besides most times Shanny theory didn't work. Middlebrooks, Nash, Moss etc. Shanny hit on only a couple drafts his whole time in Denver. Good for us his last 3 weren't so bad.

It is hard to draft well when your picking 20-25 every year.

Even then he was able to get guys like Hayward and FA's like Berry. Like footsteps said he was willing to part with them because we had so much dead cap $ on the books.

There were so many other issues contributing to the circumstances it is hard to compare his draft history to anyone.

One good thing is that McStalin does not inherit a large pool of dead cap $ and has 3 good draft years to rebuild with. I am sure if he is successfull McStalin will get all the credit and the foundation that was here is forgotten.

Popps
05-05-2009, 04:18 PM
Because our defensive backs sucked horribly. Our safeties were the worst in the league and we had Champ left after cutting Bly. We had no second corner. And we had Dawkins and other similarly well-aged veterans at the safety position. It needed a heavy overhaul.

It's very simple. There were two realities we were dealing with.

1.Our safeties were worse than our defensive line last year.
.

It was close... they were both so awful. But, you may be right.

We basically had two guys so bad "starting," that no one has signed them in free agency, even as back-ups.

I said pre-draft that we'd have to address the secondary. People acted surprised, but I can't imagine why. We clearly needed DL help, and took some... but had no depth in the secondary, and hence a big shortage of special teams guys.

People bitch about special teams, but then they bitch when we take the kind of players that can improve them.

As I said, I would have maybe preferred one more DL on day one, but I still like what we ended up with, especially including our UDFAs.

We landed potentially...

-The best DE/LB in the draft
-The best blocking TE in the draft
-The best RB in the draft
-The best ball-hawk in the draft, maybe the best CB

... and a lot of depth for STs/Secondary/WR and some very interesting guys as street FAs.

Let's see how they pan out, but it looks good on paper.

Mile High Mojoe
05-05-2009, 04:22 PM
Denver Broncos In Complete Disarray

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/168333-broncos-in-complete-disarray

I guess this guy better turn in his Broncos Fan Club membership heís questioning the draft picks too. How dare he! The nerve!

Br0nc0Buster
05-05-2009, 04:37 PM
I really dont think its about addressing one part over another.
They made a list of players who they felt would fit their system

They then attempted to get as many of those players as possible.
I think McDaniels understands this defense cannot be overhauled in a single year, so he just went ahead and grabbed the best player he felt for his system at the time regardless of the position

I dont look at it like "he ignored the dline" or "he thought the secondary was worse", I think he thought players like Smith and McBath were the best players for their scheme that was availabe.

Plus I see the point in not spending mid round picks on our dline until we see what we got this year.
For example if we would of drafted drated a DE in the 4th just to do it, and that person couldnt beat out Powell, Thomas, or Peterson, well then it was kind of a wate of a pick

DenverBrit
05-05-2009, 04:38 PM
Denver Broncos In Complete Disarray

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/168333-broncos-in-complete-disarray

I guess this guy better turn in his Broncos Fan Club membership heís questioning the draft picks too. How dare he! The nerve!


He's especially insightful with comments like this:

Instead, the Broncos gambled and may pay for it for many years to come, as they selected Knowshown Moreno with the 12th pick and Robert Ayers with the 18th pick

Oh the drama!! :holyguac!

Kaylore
05-05-2009, 06:19 PM
Look at Oakland last year, they started the season with 3 pro bowlers in the secondary, and yet got eaten alive because the defensive front was so crappy.

We could start Champ, Asomougha, Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu, but if we don't get to the QB and stop the run, it won't help.

Dawkins is on his last legs, Hill is a stopgap measure and Goodman may have 2 years of solid contribution left in him, and probably the same for Champ. If we had focused on the defensive front, we would have seen a return and those DBs that we pay so many millions of dollars would have been able to make plays in 2010. Now, we are throwing away effectively a lot of money on veteran DBs who will never get decent working conditions and will never be able to contribute as a result.
This is such a stupid point. Rookies take three years to develop there would not have been any kind of "return" had we drafted anyone. It would take two years at the earliest to see some kind of return.

1. We addressed the safety position in FA, but left the DL slightly modified.
We signed two. We needed speed and youth at those positions to take over when they retire.
2. This draft also had a lot of talent at the WR position and ILB, but we didn't draft those.
We actually did with Mckinley and We're young and loaded up at ILB.

3. There will never be a wonder draft for NTs, we can't wait until there are 10 NTs who are projected as day 1 picks, because that will never happen.
You're wrong. I guarantee you there will be more DT prospects in the next year and year after that and there will be even more NT's prospects.

Fact is that no matter how you look at it, Mcdaniels is doing the EXACT same thing so many of us were furious with Shanahan for doing, ignoring the defensive line. Even worse, we gave up good picks next year in a draft that is strong at DT and effectively prioritized an undersized 2. round CB over a 1. round DT.

You guys don't get it. It's not as simple as "We need a defensive tackle so we go draft the first one available." Good drafting is about finding guys that will fit and succeed in your system. There were none we could get our hands on.


Well here's what I'm wondering...Klis states in the article that they liked BJ Raji, and since they later demonstrated a willingness to pay MORE to move up for a blocking TE...why not pay a bit to more up for Raji if they liked him? Which one did we need more? Obviously the argument that the talent wasn't worth it doesn't apply here since they say they liked him and we're only talking a couple.
We apparently tried but the Jags wouldn't trade out because they needed an offensive tackle. As an interesting side note, after looking at him, the Packers are now saying they don't think Raji can play NT and will probably move him to DE.
[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]Not necessarily true, especially since the NT spot is so crucial in this defense, but more to the point, EVERY YEAR I hear this argument given on why we shouldn't draft a D-line guy in the first round, which is part of the reason we're in this positoin. It was also being used last year to support the idea we shouldn't draft an OT high etiher. Good thing we took Clady huh?
I never said we shouldn't draft an OT so I don't know what that has to do with anything. And I haven't heard the argument every year that it's a bad year for 3-4 defensive linemen. Last year was an awesome year for DT's coming out. Two went in the top ten. And we didn't not draft D-linemen because they took long, we didn't take them because the FO thinks the ones on the board don't fit our system and won't be good pro's. If they are right they did the right thing.

We reached for need in 2007, doing what everyone said "OMG draft all D-linemenn!!!!!1111!!!" and we all know how that worked out.:flush:

I love how all of you who are bent out of shape are so sure we let Reggie White get away when you won't even wait and see how the draft pans out before you start casting stones. Some of it I understand, like Blue who hates McDaniels because he's a Patriot and so will demonize everything he does, but the rest of you are so locked on being furious over something that hasn't happened yet that it's ridiculous.

fdf
05-05-2009, 06:29 PM
Good for us his last 3 weren't so bad.

Well, 2007 was pretty bad. But 2006 and 8 look like good draft classes.

watermock
05-05-2009, 06:43 PM
Th problem I have is not having the 1st from Chicago, since Orton is marginal and there are QB's and DT's galore in '10.

Besides, we don't know which pick will be higher. Best to keep both since we had a full draft anyway, at least till he traded up fgor a blocking TE.

Besides the '10 draft is expected to be deeper at Devner's need positions.

Spin it all you want, but having 100 players on your board is idiotic.

TonyR
05-05-2009, 06:48 PM
We apparently tried but the Jags wouldn't trade out because they needed an offensive tackle. As an interesting side note, after looking at him, the Packers are now saying they don't think Raji can play NT and will probably move him to DE.


Not only that but trading up into the top 10 is extremely expensive, not only in what you have to give up to move up but what you have to pay the players at those picks. Plus Raji is a HUGE risk not only because he may not be a true NT but he has a questionable work ethic and he has several character question marks.

gyldenlove
05-05-2009, 07:07 PM
This is such a stupid point. Rookies take three years to develop there would not have been any kind of "return" had we drafted anyone. It would take two years at the earliest to see some kind of return.

I know, and now it will take even longer before we have impact defensive linemen. Every year we postpone adding serious talent is another year into the future we push having a real shot at success. As has been clearly demonstrated you can retool your secondary with free agents without much difficulty, the same is not possible with the defensive line. We need to add talent to the defensive line sooner rather than later so we can get to a place where we can succeed. As you said yourself, it takes time, well fact is that if we add defensive line talent in next years draft, the playmakers we got this year will be free agents around the time our defense starts to click.

We signed two. We needed speed and youth at those positions to take over when they retire.

We could sign 2 more when these guys retire, we can't do that with defensive line.

We actually did with Mckinley and We're young and loaded up at ILB.

Mckinley is an afterthought, a smallish 5th round slot type of player who lacks the power to beat the jam.

How loaded are we at ILB? The star is DJ Williams who has already proven he is not a good player in the middle when he has to take on offensive linemen. Andra Davis is old and at best a two down player. Larsen is a run stuffer, but he is thought of so highly that they have no problems splitting his time between all 3 units. Woodyard is undersized, but may be the best of the bunch. It really sounds to me like we could use an infusion of talent there, and with all the people who wanted to draft Laurinaitis, Maualuga or Jason Williams this year I would say I am not alone.

You're wrong. I guarantee you there will be more DT prospects in the next year and year after that and there will be even more NT's prospects.

There may be more DTs, hell I am almost sure there will be. But since we gave up a 1st round and a 5th round pick already next year, our chances of getting one or more DTs and fill other holes are dramatically reduced.

You guys don't get it. It's not as simple as "We need a defensive tackle so we go draft the first one available." Good drafting is about finding guys that will fit and succeed in your system. There were none we could get our hands on.

Brace was good enough for Daddy Hoodie 4 picks after we got Smith, I would say we could have taken him, he was considered the best pure NT prospect in the draft after all.

I love how all of you who are bent out of shape are so sure we let Reggie White get away when you won't even wait and see how the draft pans out before you start casting stones. Some of it I understand, like Blue who hates McDaniels because he's a Patriot and so will demonize everything he does, but the rest of you are so locked on being furious over something that hasn't happened yet that it's ridiculous.

The exact same thing goes the other way. Popps is busy shouting from the rooftops how we got the best RB, best OLB, best CB, best blocking TE. Neither player has taken a single snap yet.

The problem is really not the players we did draft for the most part. We got some good players. The problem is what we paid for them and what players we didn't get.

Mcdaniels definitely seems to have gone with an approach that it is better to not lose now than to win later. That is his prerogative, I don't like it because as with the last many years of Shanahan, we have seen that it tends to lead straight to a high teen draft pick (which we won't have next year anyway). The way to have success is with a good defensive line, look at the Ravens, Steelers, Giants, Patriots, Titans even Sandy Eggo. Common for most of those teams is that the defensive line is build up of 1st round talent (Steelers being the odd one out). To get to their kind of success, it seems that we need to use some 1st round picks on the defensive line or hire Dick Lebeau (and he is probably not going to move).

I hope Mcdaniels proves me wrong, I really do. But I am not going to jump for joy and be cheerful about how amazing the team looks until they prove to me that they can bring home the W's.

footstepsfrom#27
05-05-2009, 07:10 PM
I never said we shouldn't draft an OT so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
You may not have said so, but that was a common theme by many in here when I suggested prior to last year's draft that we needed to replace Lepsis.
And I haven't heard the argument every year that it's a bad year for 3-4 defensive linemen.
That wasn't my point. I was saying that the argument has been made in here many times that rookie D-linemen can't contribute so it's a waste to draft them...the same argument you just made. Yet this is not always true. Look no farther than Dumervil who contributed nicely as a rookie. Casey Hampton and Haloti Ngata both come to mind as NT's that also started as rookies...if I think about it I can probably think of other examples.
Last year was an awesome year for DT's coming out. Two went in the top ten. And we didn't not draft D-linemen because they took long, we didn't take them because the FO thinks the ones on the board don't fit our system and won't be good pro's.
My argument was with those on the board who hold that view, not a comment on the FO's belief about this, which is unknown.
We reached for need in 2007, doing what everyone said "OMG draft all D-linemenn!!!!!1111!!!" and we all know how that worked out.:flush:
Moss was rated right around where we took him. That's not a reach, it's a product of taking a guy who was drastically under developed physically due to a lingering illness...not the best example. Thomas was supposed to go higher and character issues pushed him down...again, not a reach.

Cito Pelon
05-06-2009, 01:38 AM
I really dont think its about addressing one part over another.
They made a list of players who they felt would fit their system

They then attempted to get as many of those players as possible.
I think McDaniels understands this defense cannot be overhauled in a single year, so he just went ahead and grabbed the best player he felt for his system at the time regardless of the position

I dont look at it like "he ignored the dline" or "he thought the secondary was worse", I think he thought players like Smith and McBath were the best players for their scheme that was availabe.

Plus I see the point in not spending mid round picks on our dline until we see what we got this year.
For example if we would of drafted drated a DE in the 4th just to do it, and that person couldnt beat out Powell, Thomas, or Peterson, well then it was kind of a wate of a pick

Yup.

Kaylore
05-06-2009, 01:53 AM
How loaded are we at ILB? The star is DJ Williams who has already proven he is not a good player in the middle when he has to take on offensive linemen. Andra Davis is old and at best a two down player. Larsen is a run stuffer, but he is thought of so highly that they have no problems splitting his time between all 3 units. Woodyard is undersized, but may be the best of the bunch. It really sounds to me like we could use an infusion of talent there, and with all the people who wanted to draft Laurinaitis, Maualuga or Jason Williams this year I would say I am not alone.
Luarinaitis and Maualuga are 2-down linebackers. Maualuga is also not very smart. I'm grateful we didn't get either one. I think Larsen will bring more to our team the Rey-Rey will to the Bungles. As for our current crop of ILB's where you see problems I see a lot of depth and at least one solid starter. It was the least of our concerns.

And my point in it taking several years to develop defensive talent isn't a reason we should never draft them. I didn't say we shouldn't ever draft one. I raised the point because people were whining that we could have drafted a NT in this draft and now that haven't our front 3 are going to suck this year. It's not an instant impact position. My point was drafting a NT wouldn't have changed how our front line performs this year very much at all, so people complaining "now we'll suck up front" are fooling themselves if they think any drafted player would have changed that this year.

I'm for drafting defensive linemen. And we need a few for sure. But I am against reaching for need in any circumstances. Now I agree Ron Brace and overpaying for Smith is a head-scratcher, but if Smith becomes a better pro than Brace then it was the right move. That's why getting upset is pointless. We know we're not going to hit on all of them, but you have to do your homeworkd and make sure they're a fit.

It all comes down to how well McDaniels did, and we just don't know yet.


Moss was rated right around where we took him. That's not a reach, it's a product of taking a guy who was drastically under developed physically due to a lingering illness...not the best example. Thomas was supposed to go higher and character issues pushed him down...again, not a reach.

Yeah both Moss and Thomas were reaches because we traded up to get them. Moss we gave up a third and Thomas we traded the following years' third. Basically both busts cost us four picks. Giving that much away for players that were projected to go later is reaching. The other major flaw is that two of them didn't fit the system we were going to run that year. Again, not taking guys that fit your team is a recipe for disaster.

enjolras
05-06-2009, 02:19 AM
This draft is what drafting best player available looks like... it's just that simple.

It just turns out that a nose tackle was never the best player available.

baja
05-06-2009, 07:42 AM
This draft is what drafting best player available looks like... it's just that simple.

It just turns out that a nose tackle was never the best player available.

True but I would add best player for your system.

TonyR
05-06-2009, 07:49 AM
As for our current crop of ILB's where you see problems I see a lot of depth and at least one solid starter. It was the least of our concerns.


And showing no interest in Larry Foote is further indication that McD, Nolan and the Broncos FO feel the same way.

crawdad
05-06-2009, 07:56 AM
You need to stop this line of reasoning. What kind of fan are you? You sound like you are trying to be reasonable and level headed. I am sorry but that will never do. Unless you are bashing your face into the computer monitor, teary eyed or completely frustrated you are not putting enough into this. I am going to have to ask you to relinquish your fan card.

I will give up the fight but never, ever give up my Broncos. I loved Mike Shanahan, but we got a divorce. We're still friends!

footstepsfrom#27
05-06-2009, 08:29 AM
Luarinaitis and Maualuga are 2-down linebackers. Maualuga is also not very smart. I'm grateful we didn't get either one.
Have you looked at Knowshon Moreno's Wonderlic? It looks like he's no rocket scientist either. Hopefully he won't have to be. Laurinaitis is not a 2 down LB BTW. He probably covers downfield as well or better than any LB in this draft, which is one reason I wanted him.
I raised the point because people were whining that we could have drafted a NT in this draft and now that haven't our front 3 are going to suck this year. It's not an instant impact position.
Our front 3 sucked last year so that's not a huge leap. As to the NT making an instant impact...sometimes they do. There's no magical positional law that says a rookie NT can't start and make a difference, which is what both Hampton and Ngala did...as I noted. I might find others if I look around. Also...what exactly constitutes "whining" to you? Is it having a difference of opinion with what this rookie coach and this rookie FO do? It appears that way. Most of the NFL outside Colorado seems to hold a different opinion on the early moves, so if we aknowlege a similar stance why does that need to be portrayed as whining?
Yeah both Moss and Thomas were reaches because we traded up to get them. Moss we gave up a third and Thomas we traded the following years' third. Basically both busts cost us four picks. Giving that much away for players that were projected to go later is reaching. The other major flaw is that two of them didn't fit the system we were going to run that year. Again, not taking guys that fit your team is a recipe for disaster.
Trading up to get a player doesn't mean he's a reach. We traded up for both Quinn and Smith so if you want to make that the definition of "reach", then let's be consistent. A player's a reach if you take him higher than he was expected to go regardless of whether you traded up or not...and you only know if you gave up to much in hindsight, so no...neither player were reaches. Thomas was considered a first round talent that we got in the 4th round because he slid on the basis of character issues and based on what we gave up that's not a reach. Moss was also expected to go where he did, so while we might have slightly over spent, that was certainly not a huge reach based on where he was slotted. It sounds like your parameters for "reach" equate to every player in the NFL that doesn't live up to the highest expectations...so 90% are then reaches I suppose. Anyway, you're wrong on both counts. As to the system, all three of those guys were expected to play in a 4-3 defense so what's that got to do with anything? And don't tell me Moss was drafted for Bates system because the fact is other NFL 4-3 teams would have drafted him also since the expectation was that he'd be able to add weight.

TheReverend
05-06-2009, 08:38 AM
Footsteps, can you please change your font? I've really enjoyed reading your posts lately, but for some reason that's aggravating the bejesus out of me. That's all, thanks either way.

crawdad
05-06-2009, 08:39 AM
Footsteps, can you please change your font? I've really enjoyed reading your posts lately, but for some reason that's aggravating the bejesus out of me. That's all, thanks either way.

Rep

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 09:15 AM
SIZE]

Trading up to get a player doesn't mean he's a reach. We traded up for both Quinn and Smith so if you want to make that the definition of "reach", then let's be consistent. A player's a reach if you take him higher than he was expected to go regardless of whether you traded up or not...and you only know if you gave up to much in hindsight, so no...neither player were reaches. Thomas was considered a first round talent that we got in the 4th round because he slid on the basis of character issues and based on what we gave up that's not a reach. Moss was also expected to go where he did, so while we might have slightly over spent, that was certainly not a huge reach based on where he was slotted. It sounds like your parameters for "reach" equate to every player in the NFL that doesn't live up to the highest expectations...so 90% are then reaches I suppose. Anyway, you're wrong on both counts. As to the system, all three of those guys were expected to play in a 4-3 defense so what's that got to do with anything? And don't tell me Moss was drafted for Bates system because the fact is other NFL 4-3 teams would have drafted him also since the expectation was that he'd be able to add weight.

It is a reach if the players dont pan out. Moss has been especially dissappointing and Thomas has been average. The Broncos trading up for these guys was a reach simply because it didn't work.

You can't say the same thing about this last draft because we don't know how these players will pan out.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 09:47 AM
It is a reach if the players dont pan out. Moss has been especially dissappointing and Thomas has been average. The Broncos trading up for these guys was a reach simply because it didn't work.

You can't say the same thing about this last draft because we don't know how these players will pan out.

That is easily the worst definition of a reach ever.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 09:49 AM
This draft is what drafting best player available looks like... it's just that simple.

It just turns out that a nose tackle was never the best player available.

This draft was nowhere near BPA. Smith and Quinn weren't available to us, we traded up for them, so they were clearly not BPA. Mcbath was nowhere near the highest rated player at the time, he was clearly drafted for need.

You could argue that Moreno and Ayers were BPA, but I am not so sure a lot of people will agree that Malcolm Jenkins and Brian Orakpo are not better prospects than Moreno, they were certainly both higher rated by every source I know of.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 09:58 AM
Luarinaitis and Maualuga are 2-down linebackers. Maualuga is also not very smart. I'm grateful we didn't get either one. I think Larsen will bring more to our team the Rey-Rey will to the Bungles. As for our current crop of ILB's where you see problems I see a lot of depth and at least one solid starter. It was the least of our concerns.

And my point in it taking several years to develop defensive talent isn't a reason we should never draft them. I didn't say we shouldn't ever draft one. I raised the point because people were whining that we could have drafted a NT in this draft and now that haven't our front 3 are going to suck this year. It's not an instant impact position. My point was drafting a NT wouldn't have changed how our front line performs this year very much at all, so people complaining "now we'll suck up front" are fooling themselves if they think any drafted player would have changed that this year.

I'm for drafting defensive linemen. And we need a few for sure. But I am against reaching for need in any circumstances. Now I agree Ron Brace and overpaying for Smith is a head-scratcher, but if Smith becomes a better pro than Brace then it was the right move. That's why getting upset is pointless. We know we're not going to hit on all of them, but you have to do your homeworkd and make sure they're a fit.



I agree that Maualuga is not going to be the impact factor some people want him to be, and I am happy too that we didn't get him. But that still doesn't change the fact that we have a 2-down guy, a guy who has shown he can't be an MLB in a 4-3 and two sophomores at ILB. I would have liked to add some talent to that group.

The fact that it takes a long time to develope most DLs (Ngata being the exception) is the precise reason we should take DL now. We are already now staring down the business end of a 3 to 4 year wait before we have young impact defensive linemen and that is IF we draft some in 2010, we could have cut a year off that by getting some sooner rather than later.

There is a definite caveat to the Smith better than Brace statement. Smith not only has to be better than Brace to justify picking him, he ALSO has to be better than the group of players we could have gotten with good value with that 1st round pick in 2010.

I believe being disappointed with the way the draft was handled is appropriate. Mcdaniels have come in and made some tough decisions and molded the organization to his standards, that means the pressure is on him to show that his way works - I haven't seen a whole lot of things so far that give me confidence in his abilities to run an organization, I just hope his coaching is good enough to get us wins.

vancejohnson82
05-06-2009, 10:05 AM
I agree that Maualuga is not going to be the impact factor some people want him to be, and I am happy too that we didn't get him. But that still doesn't change the fact that we have a 2-down guy, a guy who has shown he can't be an MLB in a 4-3 and two sophomores at ILB. I would have liked to add some talent to that group.

The fact that it takes a long time to develope most DLs (Ngata being the exception) is the precise reason we should take DL now. We are already now staring down the business end of a 3 to 4 year wait before we have young impact defensive linemen and that is IF we draft some in 2010, we could have cut a year off that by getting some sooner rather than later.

There is a definite caveat to the Smith better than Brace statement. Smith not only has to be better than Brace to justify picking him, he ALSO has to be better than the group of players we could have gotten with good value with that 1st round pick in 2010.

I believe being disappointed with the way the draft was handled is appropriate. Mcdaniels have come in and made some tough decisions and molded the organization to his standards, that means the pressure is on him to show that his way works - I haven't seen a whole lot of things so far that give me confidence in his abilities to run an organization, I just hope his coaching is good enough to get us wins.


the thing I'm struggling to understand is that a lot of people bashed on McDaniels for letting Cutler loose because they felt like we are so close to being a winning team....however, some of those same people are now saying that we should have gotten a DT to develop in three to four years and basically saying that the drafting of Moreno was a "win now" move that makes no sense

i'm not trying to stir the pot here but doesnt that seem like flip flopping a little bit?

tsiguy96
05-06-2009, 10:07 AM
i love how some people on this board are trying to CONVINCE other fans that this team is going to suck and we should not support the head coach.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 10:10 AM
the thing I'm struggling to understand is that a lot of people bashed on McDaniels for letting Cutler loose because they felt like we are so close to being a winning team....however, some of those same people are now saying that we should have gotten a DT to develop in three to four years and basically saying that the drafting of Moreno was a "win now" move that makes no sense

i'm not trying to stir the pot here but doesnt that seem like flip flopping a little bit?

Not at all. Firstly I don't think a lot of people thought we were close to winning anything with Cutler, a lot of people did think that with Cutler and an improved defense we had potential to win. By trading Cutler we ended up in a situation where we have to fix all 3 units, before we could have gotten away with fixing 2 units.

It wasn't the case that we didn't need defensive linemen, if you go back, I have said all through the year that in the 2009 draft, DL was our biggest need, since well before Shanahan was fired. The defense always needed to be fixed, it didn't magically get worse when Cutler was traded, but with Cutler we had a young QB who could improve his game while the defense was being fixed and then both he and the defense would be ready for success. Now we still need to fix the defense, we have no idea who our QB is going to be this year, let alone after this year, suddenly winning seems VERY far away. (When I say winning, I mean significant playoff success, not just over .500)

tsiguy96
05-06-2009, 10:13 AM
Not at all. Firstly I don't think a lot of people thought we were close to winning anything with Cutler, a lot of people did think that with Cutler and an improved defense we had potential to win. By trading Cutler we ended up in a situation where we have to fix all 3 units, before we could have gotten away with fixing 2 units.

It wasn't the case that we didn't need defensive linemen, if you go back, I have said all through the year that in the 2009 draft, DL was our biggest need, since well before Shanahan was fired. The defense always needed to be fixed, it didn't magically get worse when Cutler was traded, but with Cutler we had a young QB who could improve his game while the defense was being fixed and then both he and the defense would be ready for success. Now we still need to fix the defense, we have no idea who our QB is going to be this year, let alone after this year, suddenly winning seems VERY far away. (When I say winning, I mean significant playoff success, not just over .500)



we havent done this in years with shanahan, give the new coach some time to show if he can do it instead of whining his entire first offseason

vancejohnson82
05-06-2009, 10:22 AM
Not at all. Firstly I don't think a lot of people thought we were close to winning anything with Cutler, a lot of people did think that with Cutler and an improved defense we had potential to win. By trading Cutler we ended up in a situation where we have to fix all 3 units, before we could have gotten away with fixing 2 units.

It wasn't the case that we didn't need defensive linemen, if you go back, I have said all through the year that in the 2009 draft, DL was our biggest need, since well before Shanahan was fired. The defense always needed to be fixed, it didn't magically get worse when Cutler was traded, but with Cutler we had a young QB who could improve his game while the defense was being fixed and then both he and the defense would be ready for success. Now we still need to fix the defense, we have no idea who our QB is going to be this year, let alone after this year, suddenly winning seems VERY far away. (When I say winning, I mean significant playoff success, not just over .500)

ok, point understood.....however, I'm part of the camp that feels that with Cutler we were looking at another .500 season, at best....when he gave McDaniels the opportunity to get some picks to fill much needed holes, we jumped at it.....getting Moreno instead of a DT at that spot helps the offense stay somewhat at the level it was last year....perhaps a even a bit more consistent (from my eternal optimist point of view)....at #18 there wasn't much on the board as far as DTs are concerned...I wasn't particularly impressed with the DT class this year anyway, so I was happy that we got Ayers at that spot because he makes an immediate impact on our defense and helps us get better now...from there on out we were addressing needs that were going to come up in 2 or 3 years....we have an old CB, a safety who has made it clear that he will be gone in two years and a WR (Marshall) who may bolt for more money or be too much of a headache to handle....so we picked up those needs...and I think the TE pickup was made because neither Scheffler or Graham may be around much longer (I thought Scheffler was going to be traded on draft day)

so in my opinion the draft:

1) put the offense from a B- to an B+....last year it was an A-
2) put the defense from a C- to a C
3) addressed the needs that will come up in 2010/2011 (CB,safety, WR)

I feel like by avoiding a DT we were able to improve the two units for this year and also safeguarded ourselves in the future at other positions....by selecting a DT in round 1 we would have not been better now and would have gambled on being better in a few years

however, we do need to either develop someone soon or get after it next year

Beantown Bronco
05-06-2009, 10:37 AM
2) put the defense from a C- to a C


Damn. How on Earth was the Broncos defense a C-minus before the draft? It was clearly an F-minus before FA began....and, aside from Dawkins, they are pretty much relying on a bunch of guys that either played behind the scrubs from last year (who are still unemployed) or were backups on other teams.

vancejohnson82
05-06-2009, 10:49 AM
Damn. How on Earth was the Broncos defense a C-minus before the draft? It was clearly an F-minus before FA began....and, aside from Dawkins, they are pretty much relying on a bunch of guys that either played behind the scrubs from last year (who are still unemployed) or were backups on other teams.

I disagree that the defense was an F going into the draft....we have 3 legitimate players on defense: DJ Williams, Brian Dawkins and Champ Bailey.... Andra Davis is an improvement over the Nate Webster/helmet duo that was there before....Bailey was injured all last year and will be an immediate improvement over his former self from last year....Renaldo HIll is going to be better than the Manuel/Fox duo that played last year

they were an F last year but I think before the draft started they had worked their way up to a C- (which in my eyes is a team that consistently gives up over 23 points a game....

here is my grading

A - defense that holds teams under 10 points a game very often
B+ defense that can hold teams to under 10 points a game on good days
B defnese that regularly gives up over 10 points a game but rarely over 20
B- defense that cant hold teams under 10 and very often gives up over 20
C+ defense that struggles to hold teams under 20
C defense that cant hold superior offenses under 20
C - defense that always gives up over 20 no matter who the opponent
D defense that struggles to hold the opponent under 30
F the 2008 version of the Denver Broncos

Drek
05-06-2009, 10:52 AM
Damn. How on Earth was the Broncos defense a C-minus before the draft? It was clearly an F-minus before FA began....and, aside from Dawkins, they are pretty much relying on a bunch of guys that either played behind the scrubs from last year (who are still unemployed) or were backups on other teams.

Goodman and Hill both started on the Dolphins, who where a division winning playoff team.

Andra Davis started on the Browns.

Ron Fields was in heavy rotation, playing as much as any other DL really, for the 49ers.

They've added a good number of quality guys. I don't know if I'd call the defense a "C-" squad even still, but its better than last year's horrible unit.

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 10:57 AM
That is easily the worst definition of a reach ever.

Why?

Enough time has passed to reasonably look back at the 2007 picks and see if they are any where close to being the players Shanahan thought they could be when he drafted them. Thomas is still a work in progress but I don't see a lot of hope for Moss. In fact, didn't McD try and trade Moss for like a 7th round pick and nobody took it, and that is in a weak draft to boot?

The question being discussed is did McD reach, or over-reach, for a few of the players he got in this draft. My contention is it's too early to know if Smith and Quinn are reaches.

What if Smith gets 10 INTs and and Quinn helps prevent Orton from being destroyed on a few possible sacks? What if Quinn also makes some big plays to help the offense?

Is it a reach then?

You just want to babble on about how McD over paid for these picks, but you have nothing to justify that other that some posters saying "oh, we gave up next year's first in a deep draft and 2 third round picks in this draft, the sky is falling, the sky is falling...."

McD had Smith graded as a first round talent. The best CB in the draft. If he believes in this guy that much, then I say it's a justified selection.

Also, why is anyone so dissappointed in the fact that McD traded away 2 third round picks IN A WEAK DRAFT? He got the TE he wanted, so who cares? You can't have it both ways, that is, you can't biotch about how weak this draft is and then complain about trading away 2 possible picks in a weak draft. If this draft is so weak, what the hell do you need the picks for? Why not just get the guys you want now, and be freaking done with it?

Some posters here just like to complain, I guess.

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 01:58 PM
i love how some people on this board are trying to CONVINCE other fans that this team is going to suck and we should not support the head coach.

It has nothing to do with convincing others or trying to change others' viewpoints; what it is... is defending our own viewpoint which has been under strenuous and unrelenting attack.

tsiguy96
05-06-2009, 02:02 PM
It has nothing to do with convincing others or trying to change others' viewpoints; what it is... is defending our own viewpoint which has been under strenuous and unrelenting attack.

why is your viewpoint, as a fan, one of how bad this team is gonna suck, how bad the coaches are and will be in the future, and essentially why everyone who is rooting for this team to achieve good is wrong? i simply dont understand it.

footstepsfrom#27
05-06-2009, 02:11 PM
Footsteps, can you please change your font? I've really enjoyed reading your posts lately, but for some reason that's aggravating the bejesus out of me. That's all, thanks either way.
My font? ??? What's it look like? It looks like every other font in here on my screen...sometimes I drag a post into MS Word since it's easier to edit...maybe that's the problem. Does it still look different in this post?

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 02:14 PM
why is your viewpoint, as a fan, one of how bad this team is gonna suck, how bad the coaches are and will be in the future, and essentially why everyone who is rooting for this team to achieve good is wrong? i simply dont understand it.

It is because I've seen nothing whatsoever to indicate that McDaniels/Xanders are not rookies who are in way over their heads, hence not yet capable of handling the jobs/responsibilities that they've been given.

Nonetheless... it's perfectly OK by me if you think that they are incapable of making any mistakes and that we're going 19-0 this year. I'll believe that take is wrong; but I won't personally attack you for forming and expressing it.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 02:16 PM
Why?

Enough time has passed to reasonably look back at the 2007 picks and see if they are any where close to being the players Shanahan thought they could be when he drafted them. Thomas is still a work in progress but I don't see a lot of hope for Moss. In fact, didn't McD try and trade Moss for like a 7th round pick and nobody took it, and that is in a weak draft to boot?

The question being discussed is did McD reach, or over-reach, for a few of the players he got in this draft. My contention is it's too early to know if Smith and Quinn are reaches.

What if Smith gets 10 INTs and and Quinn helps prevent Orton from being destroyed on a few possible sacks? What if Quinn also makes some big plays to help the offense?

Is it a reach then?

You just want to babble on about how McD over paid for these picks, but you have nothing to justify that other that some posters saying "oh, we gave up next year's first in a deep draft and 2 third round picks in this draft, the sky is falling, the sky is falling...."

McD had Smith graded as a first round talent. The best CB in the draft. If he believes in this guy that much, then I say it's a justified selection.

Also, why is anyone so dissappointed in the fact that McD traded away 2 third round picks IN A WEAK DRAFT? He got the TE he wanted, so who cares? You can't have it both ways, that is, you can't biotch about how weak this draft is and then complain about trading away 2 possible picks in a weak draft. If this draft is so weak, what the hell do you need the picks for? Why not just get the guys you want now, and be freaking done with it?

Some posters here just like to complain, I guess.

A reach is if you draft someone a lot earlier than any other team would. Lets say for arguments sake that we had drafted Marques Colston in the 1st round, would it be a reach in your definition? no - but fact is that no other team would have drafted him until the 7th round, so we could have drafted him in the 6th round and gotten the same player but for much cheaper.

Mcbath was a reach, if he turns out to be a good player than it won't have hurt us much, but we could have drafted Mcbath later than we did and taken a player with a higher rating in the middle of the 2nd round.

Last year nobody would trade a 7th to Miami for Jason Taylor, yet a few weeks later the Redskins traded a 2nd round pick. The trade value of a player during the draft is always low because at the time a draft pick has a very tangible value.

Smith didn't look like a reach, but Quinn and Mcbath were both overdrafted. We could have gotten both players later, even if they turn out to be good players, we could have gotten another good prospect along with both players, so we lost value on reaching.

footstepsfrom#27
05-06-2009, 02:33 PM
A reach is if you draft someone a lot earlier than any other team would. Lets say for arguments sake that we had drafted Marques Colston in the 1st round, would it be a reach in your definition? no - but fact is that no other team would have drafted him until the 7th round, so we could have drafted him in the 6th round and gotten the same player but for much cheaper.

Mcbath was a reach, if he turns out to be a good player than it won't have hurt us much, but we could have drafted Mcbath later than we did and taken a player with a higher rating in the middle of the 2nd round.

Last year nobody would trade a 7th to Miami for Jason Taylor, yet a few weeks later the Redskins traded a 2nd round pick. The trade value of a player during the draft is always low because at the time a draft pick has a very tangible value.

Smith didn't look like a reach, but Quinn and Mcbath were both overdrafted. We could have gotten both players later, even if they turn out to be good players, we could have gotten another good prospect along with both players, so we lost value on reaching.
Exactly right. There's some lattitude since a team might have a player ranked higher on their board than others do but if your board is totally out of wack with anyone elses, that's a warning sign that maybe your board is the problem not the rest of the NFL. I see nothing wrong with a short reach to fill a position if we're talking about a few spots, and despite what they say publicly, EVERY NFL team does that....it's when you get a reach of an entire round or more that it becomes an issue. BPA still has to make sense. If we were drafting in the first round it would be ridiculous to take an OT just because he's ranked 9th on our board and we're drafting 12th but a DE prospect is ranked 14th instead. Most of the time the way these guys careers actually plays out doesn't reflect the exact point they were drafted anyway. BPA can easily be an excuse for dismissing criticism out of hand, and that's what I think it is in this case.

footstepsfrom#27
05-06-2009, 02:41 PM
It is because I've seen nothing whatsoever to indicate that McDaniels/Xanders are not rookies who are in way over their heads, hence not yet capable of handling the jobs/responsibilities that they've been given.

Nonetheless... it's perfectly OK by me if you think that they are incapable of making any mistakes and that we're going 19-0 this year. I'll believe that take is wrong; but I won't personally attack you for forming and expressing it.
I think the problem here is that a lot of fans don't understand how one can separate the objective from the subjective. Subjectively speaking I'm going to hope for the best and root the team on no matter what's happening. Objectively speaking, I'm going to point out things that look like problems that need fixing. The only time the two line up in perfect harmony is when you win a championship...and even then you might be thinking ahead to next year and suggesting somethng that should be taken care of. Speaking objectively gets you into trouble in here because some people don't understand that you can criticize and still be a fan.

It's like my family...I can criticize them but you can't. I'll defend the team from criticism by other fans but if Denver fans criticize it I see it for what it is...an objective viewpoint on the team coming from a fan, not an attack.

vancejohnson82
05-06-2009, 02:48 PM
I think the problem here is that a lot of fans don't understand how one can separate the objective from the subjective. Subjectively speaking I'm going to hope for the best and root the team on no matter what's happening. Objectively speaking, I'm going to point out things that look like problems that need fixing. The only time the two line up in perfect harmony is when you win a championship...and even then you might be thinking ahead to next year and suggesting somethng that should be taken care of. Speaking objectively gets you into trouble in here because some people don't understand that you can criticize and still be a fan.

It's like my family...I can criticize them but you can't. I'll defend the team from criticism by other fans but if Denver fans criticize it I see it for what it is...an objective viewpoint on the team coming from a fan, not an attack.

I have no problem with people critiquing the team...

but most of the posts I have a problem with read something like this:

"Mc****face is too young for this job and he has no idea what he is doing...Kyle Orton? he sucks...and the defense sucks..this team will be 4-12 next year so I'm going to sell my tickets"

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 02:50 PM
A reach is if you draft someone a lot earlier than any other team would. Lets say for arguments sake that we had drafted Marques Colston in the 1st round, would it be a reach in your definition? no - but fact is that no other team would have drafted him until the 7th round, so we could have drafted him in the 6th round and gotten the same player but for much cheaper.

Mcbath was a reach, if he turns out to be a good player than it won't have hurt us much, but we could have drafted Mcbath later than we did and taken a player with a higher rating in the middle of the 2nd round.

Last year nobody would trade a 7th to Miami for Jason Taylor, yet a few weeks later the Redskins traded a 2nd round pick. The trade value of a player during the draft is always low because at the time a draft pick has a very tangible value.

Smith didn't look like a reach, but Quinn and Mcbath were both overdrafted. We could have gotten both players later, even if they turn out to be good players, we could have gotten another good prospect along with both players, so we lost value on reaching.

You are over simplifying things quite a bit, but if that is the case, then Paul Toviessi comes to mind, but not Quinn or McBath. These two were not taken so far out of their perspective draft slots that it leaves you scratching your head saying "WTF?"

Yah, they were taken higher than what many draft pundits had them ranked but the draft is nothing more than one big educated guessing game anyway.

Time and again you'll find that the higher rated players don't pan out, while the lower round guys do. McD took a small, calculated risk in moving up to take the guys he wanted in a weak draft.

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 03:02 PM
You are over simplifying things quite a bit, but if that is the case, then Paul Toviessi comes to mind, but not Quinn or McBath. These two were not taken so far out of their perspective draft slots that it leaves you scratching your head saying "WTF?"

Yah, they were taken higher than what many draft pundits had them ranked but the draft is nothing more than one big educated guessing game anyway.

Time and again you'll find that the higher rated players don't pan out, while the lower round guys do. McD took a small, calculated risk in moving up to take the guys he wanted in a weak draft.

What some of us don't like is that he gave up a #1 next year (in what is projected to be a much stronger draft class) in order to move up and reach for a 2nd round pick in this year's weak draft...

Odysseus
05-06-2009, 03:03 PM
I will give up the fight but never, ever give up my Broncos. I loved Mike Shanahan, but we got a divorce. We're still friends!

At least he's not asking you to help you move his stuff from his house. ROFL! I bet he made you promise to write.

gyldenlove
05-06-2009, 03:10 PM
You are over simplifying things quite a bit, but if that is the case, then Paul Toviessi comes to mind, but not Quinn or McBath. These two were not taken so far out of their perspective draft slots that it leaves you scratching your head saying "WTF?"

Yah, they were taken higher than what many draft pundits had them ranked but the draft is nothing more than one big educated guessing game anyway.

Time and again you'll find that the higher rated players don't pan out, while the lower round guys do. McD took a small, calculated risk in moving up to take the guys he wanted in a weak draft.

Willie Middlebrooks is another clear reach.

We had a lot of ammo, tradewise, so there was no reason to panic and go into the 2nd round for Quinn. We could have traded our 2nd to someone at the bottom of round 2 and picked up another mid round pick and gotten Mcbath, and Quinn would be available in round 3. As it stood we gave up solid value to overdraft both players.

barryr
05-06-2009, 04:03 PM
At least that I know of, the Broncos didn't do something this time that Shahanan did more than once when it came to the draft. Nobody the Broncos drafted has a current injury that might make them miss a lot of training camp time. Shanahan did this more than once and it never worked out well.

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 04:07 PM
What some of us don't like is that he gave up a #1 next year (in what is projected to be a much stronger draft class) in order to move up and reach for a 2nd round pick in this year's weak draft...

I think your comparing apples to oranges. Yes, this was a weak draft overall. Simply put, the depth of talent in this draft was not as strong as other drafts. But that does not mean there is no talent in the draft.

There is a difference Blue. I think your just choosing not to understand.

Also, Smith is first round talent. The fact that the Broncos got him in the 2nd round just means they get to pay him less.

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 04:17 PM
Willie Middlebrooks is another clear reach.

We had a lot of ammo, tradewise, so there was no reason to panic and go into the 2nd round for Quinn. We could have traded our 2nd to someone at the bottom of round 2 and picked up another mid round pick and gotten Mcbath, and Quinn would be available in round 3. As it stood we gave up solid value to overdraft both players.

Your point is well taken, and I understand what your saying because it's valid. My only contention is that if this was a weak draft class, what is the point in stock piling more picks? You might be correct in saying we could have gotten McBath and Quinn later in the draft, but you don't know this for sure. Unless your privy to 32 draft boards, this is pure speculation.

For me, it just makes sense to get the guys you want in a weak draft class and feel good about who you got, rather than taking a chance on a bunch of picks because well, you had the ammo and you had to pick someone!

Again, why take a DT just to take a DT? If your not sure the guy is gonna work out, your drafting a player just to cut a player and that is counter productive.

summerdenver
05-06-2009, 04:17 PM
My font? ??? What's it look like? It looks like every other font in here on my screen...sometimes I drag a post into MS Word since it's easier to edit...maybe that's the problem. Does it still look different in this post?

The font of your previous post looks different to me also.

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 04:31 PM
I think your comparing apples to oranges. Yes, this was a weak draft overall. Simply put, the depth of talent in this draft was not as strong as other drafts. But that does not mean there is no talent in the draft.

There is a difference Blue. I think your just choosing not to understand.

Also, Smith is first round talent. The fact that the Broncos got him in the 2nd round just means they get to pay him less.

No, I just think giving up a first round draft pick and getting a second rounder in return for it is stupid. It's simple, really. 1st round picks are more valuable than second round picks. Furthermore, I suspect that first rounder will likely be a top ten overall. Seattle hosed us (took advantage of a rookie FO), make no mistake about it.

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 05:09 PM
No, I just think giving up a first round draft pick and getting a second rounder in return for it is stupid. It's simple, really. 1st round picks are more valuable than second round picks. Furthermore, I suspect that first rounder will likely be a top ten overall. Seattle hosed us (took advantage of a rookie FO), make no mistake about it.

We'll just agree to disagree.

But again, I don't think you understand that Alphonso Smith is not second round talent, according to McD. McD is not alone in thinking that Alphonso Smith was the top rated CB in the entire draft.

The biggest knock on Smith is his height 5'9" but that is comparable to Darrent Williams height and it's in line with the best CB in the entire league (IMHO) Antoine Winfield.

watermock
05-06-2009, 05:12 PM
Wasn't Jenkins the first taken, and what about potential corners in NEXT years draft, along with DT's and QBs?

Tombstone RJ
05-06-2009, 05:24 PM
Wasn't Jenkins the first taken, and what about potential corners in NEXT years draft, along with DT's and QBs?

Malcom Jenkins was taken #14 by the Saints and because of his size 6'1" he was the top rated DB of the draft. The only real difference between Jenkins and Smith is their height.

I don't know about CBs in next year's draft but I do know the Broncos got an impact player in this year's draft.

footstepsfrom#27
05-06-2009, 07:11 PM
The font of your previous post looks different to me also.
I copy/paste to and from Word sometimes so that must be what's doing it. How does this one look? This post stayed here so it should look OK.

TheReverend
05-06-2009, 07:14 PM
My font? ??? What's it look like? It looks like every other font in here on my screen...sometimes I drag a post into MS Word since it's easier to edit...maybe that's the problem. Does it still look different in this post?

That must've been the issue. All better

TheReverend
05-06-2009, 07:15 PM
I have no problem with people critiquing the team...

but most of the posts I have a problem with read something like this:

"Mc****face is too young for this job and he has no idea what he is doing...Kyle Orton? he sucks...and the defense sucks..this team will be 4-12 next year so I'm going to sell my tickets"

2/3 are known commodities :wiggle:

Br0nc0Buster
05-06-2009, 07:50 PM
2/3 are known commodities :wiggle:

nope
The defense under Nolan with the players brought in is not a known commoditiy, nor is Kyle Orton in our system with our players.

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 10:27 PM
We'll just agree to disagree.

But again, I don't think you understand that Alphonso Smith is not second round talent, according to McD. McD is not alone in thinking that Alphonso Smith was the top rated CB in the entire draft.

The biggest knock on Smith is his height 5'9" but that is comparable to Darrent Williams height and it's in line with the best CB in the entire league (IMHO) Antoine Winfield.

I'm not yet convinced that McDaniels is a competent evaluator of talent...to date he has proven nothing whatsoever.

Yes, we can disagree. :)

Hulamau
05-06-2009, 11:22 PM
Because our defensive backs sucked horribly. Our safeties were the worst in the league and we had Champ left after cutting Bly. We had no second corner. And we had Dawkins and other similarly well-aged veterans at the safety position. It needed a heavy overhaul.

It's very simple. There were two realities we were dealing with.

1.Our safeties were worse than our defensive line last year.
2.This draft had a lot of good players at defensive back, particularly safety and number 2 corners.
3.This draft sucked for defensive tackles, especially nose tackles in a 3-4.

You can piss and moan that "we didn't to take a DT OMG!!!!" but the popular opinion is there were really none to be had and McDaniels took surer things at the many, many other positions that sucked on our team rather than roll the dice on a guy who will likely bust or take years to emerge even if he had worked out.

Even if we took a NT, and through some miracle he would have worked out, they would have had no effect on how the defensive would look this year.

F***in' A Straight, Khan! I'm afraid too many of these doom and gloomers are mostly hopeless fantasy footballer's whose vision is blinded by popular, but shallow, opinion. And like all fantasy football rankings its all weighted on what happened LAST year!

tsiguy96
05-06-2009, 11:24 PM
this is getting absolutely ridiculous at this point. im gonna take it easy posting here til more info comes out so you morons will stop trying to convince everyone how bad this team will be. then if they are good, all you are gonna say is how much better they would be with someone else or some other stupid comments that you can come up with. its just absolutely ridiculous, i gaurantee the lions are showing more support for their team then you guys do for the ****ing denver broncos. so sad.

cutthemdown
05-06-2009, 11:28 PM
Malcom Jenkins was taken #14 by the Saints and because of his size 6'1" he was the top rated DB of the draft. The only real difference between Jenkins and Smith is their height.

I don't know about CBs in next year's draft but I do know the Broncos got an impact player in this year's draft.

Actually smith has shown a greate4r knack for tunrovers then Jenkins. Jenkins probably a little more physical and has greater ability to also play safety.

But IMO Smith seems more fluid and has quicker hips, which IMO is the key to playing CB and being more then just a zone guy, which is how I see Jenkins.

Also Smith shown that he has great timing when leaving his feet. He knocks down and picks off a lot of balls.

IMO this pick was because Mcdaniels saw him as the type of player who can change a game with an interception. Broncos need turnovers and i think Mcdaniels felt this kid might have 4-5 picks by the time next yrs draft comes around.

He's betting this pick helps him win a few more games then he would have.

cutthemdown
05-06-2009, 11:33 PM
I'm not yet convinced that McDaniels is a competent evaluator of talent...to date he has proven nothing whatsoever.

Yes, we can disagree. :)

Well Mayock and some other pretty reputable people also had him ranked one of the top 25 players in the draft.

This kid isn't a reach he was number 1 or number 2 CB on virtually any ranking, done by anyone. Not sure why you don't like the kid. IMO it's all where he was picked. You feel since no other team grabbed him in first, then he's not a first round talent.

Had Broncos traded next yrs first, for a low first this yr and selected smith then I think you would like him more. In your opinion then he would be a first rounder.

He's a talented kid. Led his conference in interception. Played against top WR and did well against them.

When he kicks ass you will probably go buy his jersey.

Hulamau
05-06-2009, 11:35 PM
Actually smith has shown a greate4r knack for tunrovers then Jenkins. Jenkins probably a little more physical and has greater ability to also play safety.

But IMO Smith seems more fluid and has quicker hips, which IMO is the key to playing CB and being more then just a zone guy, which is how I see Jenkins.

Also Smith shown that he has great timing when leaving his feet. He knocks down and picks off a lot of balls.

IMO this pick was because Mcdaniels saw him as the type of player who can change a game with an interception. Broncos need turnovers and i think Mcdaniels felt this kid might have 4-5 picks by the time next yrs draft comes around.

He's betting this pick helps him win a few more games then he would have.

I'm betting you're right Cut! Watch smith swivel and shade the WR coming out of a break, just visually his moves look like no one I know so much as Champ himself. And now he gets to learn from the maestro for a few years! Plus the kid is VERY physical. He may give a couple inches to Champ but he weighs more and is also a very strong sure tackler.

Blueflame
05-06-2009, 11:45 PM
Well Mayock and some other pretty reputable people also had him ranked one of the top 25 players in the draft.

This kid isn't a reach he was number 1 or number 2 CB on virtually any ranking, done by anyone. Not sure why you don't like the kid. IMO it's all where he was picked. You feel since no other team grabbed him in first, then he's not a first round talent.

Had Broncos traded next yrs first, for a low first this yr and selected smith then I think you would like him more. In your opinion then he would be a first rounder.

He's a talented kid. Led his conference in interception. Played against top WR and did well against them.

When he kicks ass you will probably go buy his jersey.

Wrong. I will never buy a jersey of a current player, particularly if they play for a coach who refers to individuals as "the player". Custom (like Hogan11) or retired players are the only way to go.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 12:47 AM
He's a talented kid. Led his conference in interception. Played against top WR and did well against them.

When he kicks ass you will probably go buy his jersey.
What top receivers did he go against? I don't see any last year at least. I checked his game-by-game stats for 2008 and the highest ranked guy he went against was Mississippi's Mike Wallace who ranked 78th in the country. Maryland's Darrius Heyward-Bey caught 11 for 101 yards and a TD. Nobody else was worth mentioning. I've not checked his games from previous years, but since you're saying he played against top WR's you obviously have so can you give me a link? If this is true I'd feel better about the pick. If it's not...not so much.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 01:00 AM
What top receivers did he go against? I don't see any last year at least. I checked his game-by-game stats for 2008 and the highest ranked guy he went against was Mississippi's Mike Wallace who ranked 78th in the country. Maryland's Darrius Heyward-Bey caught 11 for 101 yards and a TD. Nobody else was worth mentioning. I've not checked his games from previous years, but since you're saying he played against top WR's you obviously have so can you give me a link? If this is true I'd feel better about the pick. If it's not...not so much.

Well I was going more by watching him at senior bowl which is only game I actually watched. That and I assume he matched up agains the other teams best WR each game. Sorry if I meant it seem I had info on his individual games in college and what WR got drafted that he played against.

I do know at Senior bowl he shut everyone down at practice and then played really well in the game. Almost had a pick and the QBS obviously were already hip to avoiding him to go the other way.

Honestly though I feel good about this pick. He turns hips quick, is a ball hawk, and played well at senior bowl in his chance to go up against colleges best seniors.

You would have to ask someone who watches more football from the conference Wake Forest plays in to know what good WR he played against.

Sorry I made it seem like I knew more.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 01:08 AM
Also only 9 corners in NCAA history have amassed the number of interceptions this kid did. Don't you people think that gives him a chance to be special.

When you do searches on him all you find are articles gushing about how well he plays.

Broncos have a ton of exciting players to watch for first time. I can't believe people so bummed. Who cares friggin Cutler is gone it's still the Broncos. Ayers and Smith both become good players and Orton Moreno can keep offense top 20 in scoring and we will be better then last yr.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 01:15 AM
Well I was going more by watching him at senior bowl which is only game I actually watched. That and I assume he matched up agains the other teams best WR each game. Sorry if I meant it seem I had info on his individual games in college and what WR got drafted that he played against.

I do know at Senior bowl he shut everyone down at practice and then played really well in the game. Almost had a pick and the QBS obviously were already hip to avoiding him to go the other way.

Honestly though I feel good about this pick. He turns hips quick, is a ball hawk, and played well at senior bowl in his chance to go up against colleges best seniors.

You would have to ask someone who watches more football from the conference Wake Forest plays in to know what good WR he played against.

Sorry I made it seem like I knew more.
Thanks for being honest on that.

One thing that concerns me about this draft was the way we placed a heavy emphasis on the performance of Robert Ayers in the Senior Bowl when he was invisible at other times duirng his career, and apparently on this kid too. In 1987 we drafted Syracuse NT Ted Gregory and I remember Dan Reeves discussing how this guy ate people alive at the Senior Bowl. Reeves exact words in talking about Gregory vs the competition were, "It's almost unfair". The guy was one of our biggest draft busts ever. He was simply to small to handle NFL linemen.

If Smith turns out to be a stud I'll be thrilled. I just don't see the huge attraction beyond his INT numbers because the physical measurables just aren't there to indicate a top pick. People poo poo his size but NFL receiverrs are bigger than ever. Somebody said the only thing separating him and Jenkins was the 4"+ height advantage Jenkins has...that's a significant physical advantage IMO...and I wasn't than high on Jenkins either.

Popps
05-07-2009, 01:24 AM
Wrong. I will never buy a jersey of a current player, particularly if they play for a coach who refers to individuals as "the player". Custom (like Hogan11) or retired players are the only way to go.

That's weird, he refers to our QBs as Chris, Kyle... etc.

Here, he talks in glowing terms about fan-favorite, Spencer Larson...

"Spencer has enough ability and enough mental capacity to be able to handle a limited role offensively and a role defensively and also help us in the kicking game," he said. "That doesn't just apply to Spencer -- if there's another player or players on our football team that could do that, we would welcome that, and that would improve someone's value as we take them to the game."

Not only calls him by name, but by first name. Sounds like he has a lot of respect for Spencer.

Weird, huh?

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 01:24 AM
Thanks for being honest on that.

One thing that concerns me about this draft was the way we placed a heavy emphasis on the performance of Robert Ayers in the Senior Bowl when he was invisible at other times duirng his career, and apparently on this kid too. In 1987 we drafted Syracuse NT Ted Gregory and I remember Dan Reeves discussing how this guy ate people alive at the Senior Bowl. Reeves exact words in talking about Gregory vs the competition were, "It's almost unfair". The guy was one of our biggest draft busts ever. He was simply to small to handle NFL linemen.

If Smith turns out to be a stud I'll be thrilled. I just don't see the huge attraction beyond his INT numbers because the physical measurables just aren't there to indicate a top pick. People poo poo his size but NFL receiverrs are bigger than ever. Somebody said the only thing separating him and Jenkins was the 4"+ height advantage Jenkins has...that's a significant physical advantage IMO...and I wasn't than high on Jenkins either.

Ayers looked good at senior bowl in the 1-1 drills, and in the game. And played well this last yr but like you I'm a little worried he didn't do it for 2-3 yrs in college. Ted Gregory like a lot of Reeves picks just not big enough to get it done. I don't worry so much about the CB height to tell you the truth. IMO it's all about how quickly they break on the ball and how quick they turn hips and run. If speed determined the better CB then Fabian Washington would have been better then Asomugha.

I just think to get that many interceptions, over his whole NCAA career, proves this kid is a ball hawk. I think we will know pretty quickly. IMO you can usually tell with corners pretty quick. Asomugha took a few yrs, but usually you can tell by how they move if they have the skills to cover WR.

Ayers may take a little longer. Moreno I think we will know right away also.

Popps
05-07-2009, 01:30 AM
If Smith turns out to be a stud I'll be thrilled. I just don't see the huge attraction beyond his INT numbers because the physical measurables just aren't there to indicate a top pick. .

I basically said the same thing about Royal last season when we took him. Thought it was silly considering our needs, and considering his size.

Obviously, he's got limitations... but not many.

D-Will was a very solid player for us. He did struggle at times against bigger receivers, but that's just going to happen. I'd rather have a top flight cover guy who can snag 10 INTs a season who gets beat on an occasional jump ball than some Lenny Walls-style stiff just because he's tall.

Odds are, we'll be looking to get the right match-ups for Smith, and chances are... this kid will surprise people with his ability to cover bigger receivers.

Antoine Winfield is 5'9". He seemed to have no trouble making a Pro Bowl last year.

I'm not saying it's not a disadvantage, but the kid looks special.

Blueflame
05-07-2009, 01:41 AM
That's weird, he refers to our QBs as Chris, Kyle... etc.

Here, he talks in glowing terms about fan-favorite, Spencer Larson...

"Spencer has enough ability and enough mental capacity to be able to handle a limited role offensively and a role defensively and also help us in the kicking game," he said. "That doesn't just apply to Spencer -- if there's another player or players on our football team that could do that, we would welcome that, and that would improve someone's value as we take them to the game."

Not only calls him by name, but by first name. Sounds like he has a lot of respect for Spencer.

Weird, huh?

The way this guy rolls, look for him to be traded any time at all.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 01:42 AM
I basically said the same thing about Royal last season when we took him. Thought it was silly considering our needs, and considering his size.

Obviously, he's got limitations... but not many.

D-Will was a very solid player for us. He did struggle at times against bigger receivers, but that's just going to happen. I'd rather have a top flight cover guy who can snag 10 INTs a season who gets beat on an occasional jump ball than some Lenny Walls-style stiff just because he's tall.

Odds are, we'll be looking to get the right match-ups for Smith, and chances are... this kid will surprise people with his ability to cover bigger receivers.

Antoine Winfield is 5'9". He seemed to have no trouble making a Pro Bowl last year.

I'm not saying it's not a disadvantage, but the kid looks special.

Sometimes the players who were told there whole lives they are too small, by the time they get this far and this good, they have a work ethic that far surpasses that of guys who were told how great they are there whole lives because they fit a size speed thing coaches love.

This kid seems smart, hard nosed player, loves football, you don't hear anything about him being lazy or taking plays off, or not playing hard.

In fact when you read about him you hear them talk about him knocking down balls all the time. This kid gets his hands on the football.

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 01:56 AM
No, I just think giving up a first round draft pick and getting a second rounder in return for it is stupid. It's simple, really. 1st round picks are more valuable than second round picks. Furthermore, I suspect that first rounder will likely be a top ten overall. Seattle hosed us (took advantage of a rookie FO), make no mistake about it.

Alphonso is a first round talent, and that's precisely what McD/Xanders had him pegged at, and a guy with potentially special skills. And as we all well know, first hand, many first rounders are a bust as well.

Having Smith on board to learn from a healthy Champ and Dawkins will help him maximize that strong talent he does have. The guy is a flat out playmaker and those are hard to come by, and certainly aren't guaranteed just because a guy is drafted in the first round.

I would have been happier had we kept our 1st rounder, but I understand they had about 2 minutes to hash it out with Seattle. Not much time to bicker back and forth and the fact is, we jsut dont know whether or not we got the winning ticket in the 1st round swaps or not?

I can;'t fault him much for that and having enough faith that we will come out on top through a better record in any event.

Its possible Cutler breaks a leg or drowns in a jumbo keg of Budweizer in Chicago and Denver rallies and surprises all you gloomers and wins the division and we get a top 5 pick next year from Chicago.

The thing I'm seeing from some of you professional complainers is that McD MUST be perfect in every way for you to pipe down and give him even a benefit of the doubt.

Some of you seem so sure that every thought that roles through his head is a fatal mistake for the Broncos that its getting absurd. Sure he's going to make some mistakes along the way, and do some really good things too. Let him do it but still support his efforts until he proves over the long haul that he isn't up to the job.

But before there's even been a single kickoff, some of you have the guy already heading out of town! And hoping he is a goner! Maybe the Prozac has stopped working and you need to boost it with a little 5HTP and Tyrosine blend?

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 02:03 AM
I basically said the same thing about Royal last season when we took him. Thought it was silly considering our needs, and considering his size.

Obviously, he's got limitations... but not many.

D-Will was a very solid player for us. He did struggle at times against bigger receivers, but that's just going to happen. I'd rather have a top flight cover guy who can snag 10 INTs a season who gets beat on an occasional jump ball than some Lenny Walls-style stiff just because he's tall.

Odds are, we'll be looking to get the right match-ups for Smith, and chances are... this kid will surprise people with his ability to cover bigger receivers.

Antoine Winfield is 5'9". He seemed to have no trouble making a Pro Bowl last year.

I'm not saying it's not a disadvantage, but the kid looks special.

And DWill, bless his heart, was 5' 7" in his shoes! Smith has more muscle than Camp at 195 versus Champ around 190. SO the kid isnt a weakling and hes a sure tackler which is what we need in the backfield.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 02:10 AM
Also only 9 corners in NCAA history have amassed the number of interceptions this kid did. Don't you people think that gives him a chance to be special.
Actually it's 15 CB's with equal more INT's. Do you know who the others above him are? Here's a list: http://collegefootball.about.com/od/history/a/rec-intcareer.htm

1. Al Brosky; Illinois- 1950-52, 29 INT/ 1 year in the NFL (Chicago Cardinals)
2. John Provost; Holy Cross- 1972-74, 27 INT, no NFL
3. Martin Bayless; Bowling Green- 1980-83, 27 INT/ 6 NFL teams/13 years/12 INT's
4. Tom Curtis; Michigan- 1967-69, 25 INT/ 14th round pick/1 year in the NFL (Colts)
5. Tony Thurman; Bost College- 1981-84, 25 INT/ no NFL
6. Tracy Saul; Texas Tech- 1989-92, 25 INT/ no NFL
7. Jeff Nixon; Richmond- 1975-78, 23 INT/ 6 years with Buffalo Bills
8. Jim Bolding, East Carolina (1973-76) 22 INT/ no NFL
9. Bennie Blades, Miami (Fla.) (1984-87) 22 INT/ 10 years, Detroit Lions, 1 Pro Bowl

Only three of these guys had much of an NFL career, and four never played in the NFL at all. College numbers are great but they don't always equal NFL success.

s0phr0syne
05-07-2009, 02:10 AM
People poo poo his size but NFL receiverrs are bigger than ever.

Arizona Cardinals - Breaston/Boldin, 6'0''/6'1''

Atlanta Falcons - Roddy White, 6'0''

Baltimore Ravens - Mark Clayton, 5'10''

Buffalo Bills - Lee Evans, 5'10''

Carolina Panthers - Steve Smith, 5'9''

Chicago Bears - Devon Hester, 5'11''

Cincinnati Bengals - Lavernus Coles, 5'11''

Cleveland Browns - Sendric Steptoe, 5'9''

...

I mean, I could do this team-by-team and keep pulling the data, but basically every team is sporting receivers that are 6 ft. or under. The height thing is not as big a deal as people want to make it.

Santonio Holmes, 5'11''. Would you not take him in a heartbeat on your team if you were making a roster from scratch?

Every team is utilizing at least one if not more of the smaller, quicker wide receiver-types to run the underneath, over the middle, and sometimes even on their edge and vertical attacks.

Add in the already belabored point about how rare the jump balls are going to be and you basically have no real reason to question the acquisition of Smith based on his height.

You can still criticize the move in terms of his speed, where he was drafted, and what was given up to acquire him, but even those points have been pretty much debated to death as well.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 02:17 AM
And DWill, bless his heart, was 5' 7" in his shoes! Smith has more muscle than Camp at 195 versus Champ around 190. SO the kid isnt a weakling and hes a sure tackler which is what we need in the backfield.
He finished with 13 combine reps on the bench, good for 24th out of the 29 CB's who tested: http://www.nfl.com/combine/top-performers?tabIndex=1

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 02:20 AM
Arizona Cardinals - Breaston/Boldin, 6'0''/6'1''

Atlanta Falcons - Roddy White, 6'0''

Baltimore Ravens - Mark Clayton, 5'10''

Buffalo Bills - Lee Evans, 5'10''

Carolina Panthers - Steve Smith, 5'9''

Chicago Bears - Devon Hester, 5'11''

Cincinnati Bengals - Lavernus Coles, 5'11''

Cleveland Browns - Sendric Steptoe, 5'9''

...

I mean, I could do this team-by-team and keep pulling the data, but basically every team is sporting receivers that are 6 ft. or under. The height thing is not as big a deal as people want to make it.

Santonio Holmes, 5'11''. Would you not take him in a heartbeat on your team if you were making a roster from scratch?

Every team is utilizing at least one if not more of the smaller, quicker wide receiver-types to run the underneath, over the middle, and sometimes even on their edge and vertical attacks.

Add in the already belabored point about how rare the jump balls are going to be and you basically have no real reason to question the acquisition of Smith based on his height.

You can still criticize the move in terms of his speed, where he was drafted, and what was given up to acquire him, but even those points have been pretty much debated to death as well.
So there are NFL receivers under 6'0"...what's your point? It's the Brandon Marshals and Larry Fitzgerald of the world he'll have trouble with. It's one thing to start a small corner, another to give up a potential top 10 pick in a strong draft to get him. Time will tell, but there are very legitimate reasons to question the move.

s0phr0syne
05-07-2009, 02:28 AM
So there are NFL receivers under 6'0"...what's your point? It's the Brandon Marshals and Larry Fitzgerald of the world he'll have trouble with. It's one thing to start a small corner, another to give up a potential top 10 pick in a strong draft to get him. Time will tell, but there are very legitimate reasons to question the move.



The point is that every team is utilizing smaller receivers as an integral part of their attack. These smaller receivers tend to be much quicker and able to get a lot of separation on the corners that are physically built to deal with larger receivers. Very rarely will the Broncos face two huge starting receivers, and in the even that they do (and in goal line situations where you might be scared of the evil jump ball), the Broncos can sub A.Smith out and put in a taller corner

The point is that unless McD goes on a splurge of drafting nothing but midget corners, your continued debate on this issue BECAUSE OF HIS HEIGHT, is retarded.

I'm going to assume that since the Broncos wanted Alphonso so badly, they have a rough idea of how they're going to want to use him to minimize his shortcomings (pun not originally intended, but I'll take it) and maximize his strengths.

That's the point.

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 02:50 AM
The point is that every team is utilizing smaller receivers as an integral part of their attack. These smaller receivers tend to be much quicker and able to get a lot of separation on the corners that are physically built to deal with larger receivers. Very rarely will the Broncos face two huge starting receivers, and in the even that they do (and in goal line situations where you might be scared of the evil jump ball), the Broncos can sub A.Smith out and put in a taller corner

The point is that unless McD goes on a splurge of drafting nothing but midget corners, your continued debate on this issue BECAUSE OF HIS HEIGHT, is retarded.

I'm going to assume that since the Broncos wanted Alphonso so badly, they have a rough idea of how they're going to want to use him to minimize his shortcomings (pun not originally intended, but I'll take it) and maximize his strengths.

That's the point.

And Andre Goodman is listed on DB.com as 5'10" 190lbs but Ive seen him listed elsewhere as 5'9" as well. Point is , Smith is basically in the same ball park but is listed between 193 and195 and McD said he was 195. Also, he has incredible leaping ability from all reports I've seen and is heavier than both Good man and Champ.

This 'midget CB' stuff is flat our wrong. The kid is solid and plays a good 3 " taller.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 02:51 AM
And Adre Goodman is listed on DB.com as 5'10" 190lbs but Ive seen him listed elsewhere as 5'9" as well. Point is , Smith is basically in the same ball park and has incredible leaping ability from all reports I've seen and is heavier than both Good man and Champ.

This 'midget CB' stuff is flat our wrong. The kid is solid and plays a good 3 " taller.

actually his vertical at combine wasn't very good.

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 02:54 AM
actually his vertical at combine wasn't very good.

I'm talking scouting reports of 'in game' leaping . Several of them I read emphasized his range in that area.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 02:55 AM
I'm just not a big drills guy. Who cares how high someone jumps when they can bend down and leap up standing still. It's knowing when to leave your feet in football that makes all the difference. It's anticipating plays that matters most of all. A guy 2 tenths of a second slower in the 40 can easily make up for it by reacting quicker then his couterparts.

Notice some players just have a knack for being around the ball? It's not because they are faster, it's because they are better football players. Smith will have to be a good football player because he won't get by on his measurables like height, speed, leaping.

True he probably can't be Champ Bailey, but how many ever reach that lofty status.

We just need him to be a good starting corner, and then he's worth the pick. I won't count him out because it seems people always do that to him and have been proven wrong time and again.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 03:00 AM
I'm talking scouting reports of 'in game' leaping . Several of them I read emphasized his range in that area.

Probably due to the fact he out timed the other players leap. For sure he had his hands on the ball alot. Tons of picks and a lot of passes defended.

Soon we get to watch him play. I can't wait to see what players become this yrs Eddie Royal and Clady. I have faith. Everything happens for a reason and if players, coaches, ownership all work together to win IMO we will win again.

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 04:14 AM
So there are NFL receivers under 6'0"...what's your point? It's the Brandon Marshals and Larry Fitzgerald of the world he'll have trouble with. It's one thing to start a small corner, another to give up a potential top 10 pick in a strong draft to get him. Time will tell, but there are very legitimate reasons to question the move.

And many scouts, draftnik sites said if not for an extra two inches height Smith would hands down have been a top 10 pick THIS year!

McD and Xanders obviously think his ability to play taller receivers as well as the whole package would have made him a solid first round pick in ANY year.

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 04:21 AM
Probably due to the fact he out timed the other players leap. For sure he had his hands on the ball alot. Tons of picks and a lot of passes defended.

Soon we get to watch him play. I can't wait to see what players become this yrs Eddie Royal and Clady. I have faith. Everything happens for a reason and if players, coaches, ownership all work together to win IMO we will win again.

Good point Cut and I can't wait to see what guys Like Eddie, Clady, Larsen Woodyard and Hillis, ... Jack Williams & Josh Barrett too look like this year in year two when most decent players in their rookie years make a solid leap forward!

When you really look at this new roster from head to toe and carefully we have a lot of good talent here and with a fresh new system and this added focus and discipline I think its gonna surprise a hell of a lot of folks once things really start to gel by mid-season or so.

After this second mini-camp Doom was saying in a blog how: "... everyone is dogging on the defense, I don't know what they are seeing ... what I see is a lot stronger and faster players here now and a lot more moving around and aggressiveness (on defense). I think we're going to surprise a lot of people."

Hulamau
05-07-2009, 04:28 AM
A couple nice shots from minicamp .... Ayers has some guns!

Blueflame
05-07-2009, 04:34 AM
Alphonso is a first round talent, and that's precisely what McD/Xanders had him pegged at, and a guy with potentially special skills. And as we all well know, first hand, many first rounders are a bust as well.

Having Smith on board to learn from a healthy Champ and Dawkins will help him maximize that strong talent he does have. The guy is a flat out playmaker and those are hard to come by, and certainly aren't guaranteed just because a guy is drafted in the first round.

I would have been happier had we kept our 1st rounder, but I understand they had about 2 minutes to hash it out with Seattle. Not much time to bicker back and forth and the fact is, we jsut dont know whether or not we got the winning ticket in the 1st round swaps or not?

I can;'t fault him much for that and having enough faith that we will come out on top through a better record in any event.

Its possible Cutler breaks a leg or drowns in a jumbo keg of Budweizer in Chicago and Denver rallies and surprises all you gloomers and wins the division and we get a top 5 pick next year from Chicago.

The thing I'm seeing from some of you professional complainers is that McD MUST be perfect in every way for you to pipe down and give him even a benefit of the doubt.

Some of you seem so sure that every thought that roles through his head is a fatal mistake for the Broncos that its getting absurd. Sure he's going to make some mistakes along the way, and do some really good things too. Let him do it but still support his efforts until he proves over the long haul that he isn't up to the job.

But before there's even been a single kickoff, some of you have the guy already heading out of town! And hoping he is a goner! Maybe the Prozac has stopped working and you need to boost it with a little 5HTP and Tyrosine blend?

Well.... if the rookie FO had Alphonso pegged as a first rounder, they had already had two shots at taking him in the first round.

He slid to the second round which means that he was a second round talent in a weak draft class.....

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 04:42 AM
Good point Cut and I can't wait to see what guys Like Eddie, Clady, Larsen Woodyard and Hillis, ... Jack Williams & Josh Barrett too look like this year in year two when most decent players in their rookie years make a solid leap forward!

When you really look at this new roster from head to toe and carefully we have a lot of good talent here and with a fresh new system and this added focus and discipline I think its gonna surprise a hell of a lot of folks once things really start to gel by mid-season or so.

After this second mini-camp Doom was saying in a blog how: "... everyone is dogging on the defense, I don't know what they are seeing ... what I see is a lot stronger and faster players here now and a lot more moving around and aggressiveness (on defense). I think we're going to surprise a lot of people."


Some players look bad to start but then play good. But mostly the good ones you can sort of tell early on. Barret to me moved really stiff, doesn't turn hips well, didn't really seem to have a knack for getting to the ball. But you never know I guess. IMO the fact we signed 2 safety's, drafted 2 others, means Barrett one of the first players to be cut. Probably fox as well.

Woodyard obviously showed those things that make you say man he could probably play in the NFL. He showed a knack for finding the ball, seemed to have all the speed and agility needed to play, only his size is an issue IMO.

Jack Williams likewise did nothing to make me think he is a safe bet to make this team. He will need a kick ass camp IMO and some plays on special teams in preseason and TC practices.

Larsen i think will be a good role player. He has some size and I'm betting Mcdaniels feels he can be a situational linebacker and even be a FB if needed. He probably loves the fact if he isn't going to use a FB often, that maybe Larsen could do it in short yrdage, Hillis plays RB and also a little FB. Then he may only have to carry 5 backs Moreno, Hillis, Buckhalter, Arrington, Jordan. If he really feels safe because Moreno shines, One of the 3 we signed, or even Hillis I suppose could be traded for a really low pick.

Torain who knows until he proves he's healthy. Him playing well would IMO spell trouble and kick another back off roster.

More then likely though some injuries will also help sort this group.

What would be interesting is if Moreno really kicked ass to the point giving ball to other back seemed silly. Remember when realized that with Portis? Soon he got all the carries.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 04:50 AM
Well.... if the rookie FO had Alphonso pegged as a first rounder, they had already had two shots at taking him in the first round.

He slid to the second round which means that he was a second round talent in a weak draft class.....

Well it depends how you look at it. I said before though that picks a yr away are always valued less. So unless our pick is in top 10 like you all think the 22-30 spots we will lose isn't that big.

I didn't make that up you always hear the experts and gms say in interviews picks a yr away not as valuable as a pick this yr.

So saying it was a 2nd for a first is not really how real football gms look at it.

Now if like you say we go 2-14 or something horrid then that would make it in seattles favor. But at same time if next yr Smith is a solid cornerback, starting and playing at a high level, then that evens it out IMO. Especially if the kid plays well this yr.

All we can do is see how it works out. Maybe we play better then people think. I feel this team has way less holes then last yr, and that I see an effort by the coaches to get bigger players on the field which i have been bitching about for a long time.

Broncos have some bigger bodies on the Dline, one in Ayers who should be decent. Couple big rookie FA, couple of guys on roster that haven't really played yet. The FA Ried and Fields add some size at OLB and DT. The safety's loads better and has some youth because of draft picks.

Andre Davis bigger and more physical the Webster or Winborn.

If Champ can come back strong I think the defense might be pretty good people. New D coord, lots of young player, they might surprise you.

I'm looking forward to watching preseason and seeing them fly around. I'm sure watching preseason either brings the naysayers to optimism, or the optimists to pessimism. We will see.

cutthemdown
05-07-2009, 04:51 AM
I agree with you though Blueflame trading then picking the CB Smith has the potential of being way worst then just busting a regular pick. We traded a first for it. He fails it's as bad as when we took Willie Middlebrooks.

chex
05-07-2009, 07:04 AM
Well.... if the rookie FO had Alphonso pegged as a first rounder, they had already had two shots at taking him in the first round.

He slid to the second round which means that he was a second round talent in a weak draft class.....

And yet you and others complain because we didn't use mid round picks on DL in a weak draft class? How good must those DT's be if they're hanging out in round 4 or 5 in a weak class?

Broncoman13
05-07-2009, 07:10 AM
I didn't like everything we did in the draft and what we spent on the Alphonso Smith is one of a few things that happened I wasn't thrilled with. It's a weak class and using our first in a stronger class next year is unwise. I give McDaniels some slack because he wants to get ready now and teams like the Patriots can afford to trade picks into the next draft because they aren't horrible like we are. However it's still too much.

That said, I don't want a GM that takes for need especially if he has doubts about a player. If he doesn't believe a DT is good enough to play at this level but takes one anyway because "we need a DT" then he's being irresponsible and making bad decisions. McDaniels found the guys he believes will work out and went after them regardless of position. Historically the best drafts happen this way because the good players that come out each year don't magically match up to what you happen to need at that point in time every year. So he gets props for sticking to his plan.

The only thing now is that he has to be right. Even if you have a plan, pursue it methodically and accomplish what you intended, if you're just wrong, it's no better than reaching for need. That's why we have to wait and see how he actually did, and in some sense see how who we passed on did, before we decide one way or the other.

The good news for both the pro and anti-McDaniels camps is sink or swim, we'll know this team's success will be because of McDaniels and that will make firing or extending him in two years a clear-cut decision.


This is where I'm at. I really like the Alphonso Smith pick. I really like the fact that McD is aggressive enough to go and get his guy. He wasn't shy about trading around in the draft which is a good sign. We are talent deprived right now so it made it necessary to spend our picks on current players to get them into camp and learning his system. It's not like we're the Pats or Steelers with talented rosters already, full of players that fit in perfectly with what you've been doing for the past several years.

I don't care for giving up a first in next year's class. But I certainly understand the move given the lack of talent and system fit players currently on our roster.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 10:47 AM
The point is that every team is utilizing smaller receivers as an integral part of their attack. These smaller receivers tend to be much quicker and able to get a lot of separation on the corners that are physically built to deal with larger receivers. Very rarely will the Broncos face two huge starting receivers, and in the even that they do (and in goal line situations where you might be scared of the evil jump ball), the Broncos can sub A.Smith out and put in a taller corner

The point is that unless McD goes on a splurge of drafting nothing but midget corners, your continued debate on this issue BECAUSE OF HIS HEIGHT, is retarded.

I'm going to assume that since the Broncos wanted Alphonso so badly, they have a rough idea of how they're going to want to use him to minimize his shortcomings (pun not originally intended, but I'll take it) and maximize his strengths.

That's the point.
I asked only because it seemed you had some point outside the obvious. Since you don't, consider only that the things you describe are better suited to a 3rd CB operating in the nickel defense, something that in fact he's been described as and something we probably already have. His physical measurables are less impressive than Jack Williams and Williams was also a college ball hawk, but he's faster and stronger. He also came in the 4th round...so my question now becomes...how is this guy different enough from either Williams or Goodman that he's worth a top 10 pick in a strong draft? Mostly when i think of CB's taken in the top 10 of the draft...where we stand a good chance of being next season...I think of true shut down corners with size and speed to play physical receivers. Is he any better than Foxworth was? I'm not sure he is or isn't...I just ask if he wasn't farily close to what we have already.

s0phr0syne
05-07-2009, 11:14 AM
If you think a corner, or any player for that matter, has their value determined by their "measurables" and not by how they play on film, then there's nothing else I can really say to change your mind.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 11:19 AM
If you think a corner, or any player for that matter, has their value determined by their "measurables" and not by how they play on film, then there's nothing else I can really say to change your mind.
Well obviously it's both, otherwise the NFL wouldn't bother to hold a combine to work these guys out. College ball is full of high performers who don't have the physical skills for the NFL. So your view of physical talent is obviously not shared by the NFL scouts, coaches or GM's. If production alone was enough, all those guys I posted earlier who made the all time INT list would have been all pros.

This is a case of a high performance, low physical skill set guy being taken with what might be a top 10 pick. That makes it worthy of discussion IMO. I understand why you don't want to have that discussion however.

vancejohnson82
05-07-2009, 11:25 AM
Well obviously it's both, otherwise the NFL wouldn't bother to hold a combine to work these guys out. College ball is full of high performers who don't have the physical skills for the NFL. So your view of physical talent is obviously not shared by the NFL scouts, coaches or GM's. If production alone was enough, all those guys I posted earlier who made the all time INT list would have been all pros.

This is a case of a high performance, low physical skill set guy being taken with what might be a top 10 pick. That makes it worthy of discussion IMO. I understand why you don't want to have that discussion however.

I think you are looking at the "future pick for player" the wrong way...

there's no telling what kind of a position we might be in next year and who is going to be on the board....future picks, as someone stated before, have lesser value to some front offices and I think that is the approach the new regime is taking....

I'm all for trading a future pick, which we don't know where it i will land, for a targeted guy who fits into the future....plus, we have an extra first rounder next year anyway...

by this time next year we might be talking about trading Marshall for a first round pick....or Champ might be talking retirement....or we may have our pick in the 20s.....i'm just saying hypothetically you never know what is goign to happen (except for a few people on this board who miraculously have future visions) so you take what you need in the present time

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 11:36 AM
I think you are looking at the "future pick for player" the wrong way...

there's no telling what kind of a position we might be in next year and who is going to be on the board....future picks, as someone stated before, have lesser value to some front offices and I think that is the approach the new regime is taking....

I'm all for trading a future pick, which we don't know where it i will land, for a targeted guy who fits into the future....plus, we have an extra first rounder next year anyway...

by this time next year we might be talking about trading Marshall for a first round pick....or Champ might be talking retirement....or we may have our pick in the 20s.....i'm just saying hypothetically you never know what is goign to happen (except for a few people on this board who miraculously have future visions) so you take what you need in the present time
Or we could be incinerated in a nuclear blast or be obliterated by a giant meteor. Nothing's sure, no doubt...but we can make predictions based on known factors. Considering that I posted an opinion on trading one of our 1st rounders for one next year...and people rightly pointed out that the going rate would have been a 1st this year for a second this year AND a 1st next year...it's odd that the reverse strategy is now being advocated. Next year's draft by all accounts is stronger, so if we're taking the position that a bird in the weak hand is worth two in the stronger bush...that's a philosophy that I see as flawed. I understand the thinking...I just disagree that it makes sense for a team rebuilding on both sides of the ball.

vancejohnson82
05-07-2009, 11:41 AM
Or we could be incinerated in a nuclear blast or be obliterated by a giant meteor. Nothing's sure, no doubt...but we can make predictions based on known factors. Considering that I posted an opinion on trading one of our 1st rounders for one next year...and people rightly pointed out that the going rate would have been a 1st this year for a second this year AND a 1st next year...it's odd that the reverse strategy is now being advocated. Next year's draft by all accounts is stronger, so if we're taking the position that a bird in the weak hand is worth two in the stronger bush...that's a philosophy that I see as flawed. I understand the thinking...I just disagree that it makes sense for a team rebuilding on both sides of the ball.

yea, i can totally see where you're coming from...aside from the nuclear blast theory, because Jack Williams would never let that happen

i think this was a pre-emptive strike on recovering from Champs inevitable decline in play, thats all....

gyldenlove
05-07-2009, 11:47 AM
I think you are looking at the "future pick for player" the wrong way...

there's no telling what kind of a position we might be in next year and who is going to be on the board....future picks, as someone stated before, have lesser value to some front offices and I think that is the approach the new regime is taking....

I'm all for trading a future pick, which we don't know where it i will land, for a targeted guy who fits into the future....plus, we have an extra first rounder next year anyway...

by this time next year we might be talking about trading Marshall for a first round pick....or Champ might be talking retirement....or we may have our pick in the 20s.....i'm just saying hypothetically you never know what is goign to happen (except for a few people on this board who miraculously have future visions) so you take what you need in the present time

We do know that the pick we gave up for Alphonso Smith will be at least 5 positions higher than the 37 we drafted him at, that is a mathematical certainty.

We do know there are a lot of highly ranked DTs coming out next year.

We do know that Alphonso Smith was not thought of that highly, he was apparently not ranked high enough that any of the 32 teams wanted to select him in the 1st round a year that was considered weak on top talent. This is especially surprising since CB traditionally is a position that is drafted highly and CBs traditionally shoot up the draft board on draft day.

We do know that we gave up a 1st round pick for a 2nd round player.

These are all facts, no conjectures, no expectations, no estimations or assumptions or guesses. In the light of these facts, it just doesn't seem like a great idea to me, it seems like Mcdaniels and Xanders knowing that they are on a short leash and trying to ensure some short-term success at the cost of long-term success - by drafting Smith we have made the team a little better now, but by giving up a chance to improve the defensive line or linebacker group or take a QB next year we have reduced the probability of building a competitive franchise for many years in the future.

footstepsfrom#27
05-07-2009, 12:12 PM
If you want to know how the rest of the NFL perceived this CB class, look no farther than the fact that THREE were taken above Smith...and two were considered so marginal they're looked at as possiblly having to move to safety (one of those had injury issues), and another one had major character concerns.

None were taken in the top 10...obviously...which is where we wind up taking Smith.

Cito Pelon
05-07-2009, 12:25 PM
The way this guy rolls, look for him to be traded any time at all.

That's right! That's right!

IT'S GONNA HAPPEN! OMG, OMG OMG!!!!!!!!!

AND, AND, AND, HILLIS TOO!

OMG, OMG, OMG!!!!!!!!!

AND, AND, AND, DJ TOO!

AND, AND, AND, CHAMP!

OMG, OMG, OMG!

AND, AND, AND, ROYAL TOO!

AND, AND, AND, MARSHALL TOO!

OMG!!!! OMG!!!!! OMG!!!!!!

YOU WAIT AND SEE!!!!

McDOODOOFACEPOOPYHEAD HAS RUINED THIS TEAM FOR TEN YEARS ALREADY!!

AND, AND, AND, HE HASN'T EVEN TRADED LARSEN, DJ, CHAMP, ROYAL AND MARSHALL - YET!!!!!!

YOU WAIT AND SEE!!!!!

OMG, OMG, OMG!!!!!!!!

TonyR
05-07-2009, 01:02 PM
So there are NFL receivers under 6'0"...what's your point? It's the Brandon Marshals and Larry Fitzgerald of the world he'll have trouble with. It's one thing to start a small corner, another to give up a potential top 10 pick in a strong draft to get him. Time will tell, but there are very legitimate reasons to question the move.

It's fair to question the move but I think the height issue is over played. Guys like Fitz abuse everybody. Did you see what he did against Asante Samuel, considered one of the better CB's in the league, in the NFC CG? KILLED him. But he murdered everybody in the postseason.

azbroncfan
05-07-2009, 01:45 PM
Other than Ayers they are trying to fill out the new 3-4 D with Shanny's recent drafts or cast offs. Nothing has changed on that front maybe Nolan and McStalin will have more luck than Shanny did.

Wow talk about youth on the DL! Other than Doom everyone listed on the roster are either 1st or 2nd year.

Doom is the longest tenured player with the team coming in 2006.

I find it interesting that all the DT's are over 300lbs.
96 Crowder, Tim DE 6' 4" 275 23 3rd Texas D2-'07
98 McBean, Ryan DE 6' 5" 290 24 3rd Oklahoma State FA-'08
92 Dumervil, Elvis DE 5' 11" 260 25 4th Louisville D4b-'06
65 Davis, Rulon DE 6' 5" 281 25 R California CFA- '09
64 Pedescleaux, Everette DE 6' 6" 305 23 R Northern Iowa CFA- '09
94 Moss, Jarvis DE 6' 6" 265 24 3rd Florida D1- '07
56 Ayers, Robert DE/LB 6' 3" 272 23 R Tennessee D1b-'09
90 Peterson, Kenny DL 6' 3" 300 30 7th Ohio State FA-'07
95 Reid, Darrell DL/LB 6' 2" 288 26 5th Minnesota UFA (Ind)-'09
69 Parker, J'Vonne DT 6' 4" 325 26 5th Rutgers FA-'09
75 Powell, Carlton DT 6' 3" 300 23 2nd Virginia Tech D5b-'08
79 Thomas, Marcus DT 6' 3" 305 23 3rd Florida D4-'07
93 Clemons, Nic DT 6' 6" 300 29 3rd Georgia FA-'08
91 Fields, Ronald DT 6' 2" 315 27 5th Mississippi State UFA (SF)-'09
71 Baker, Chris DT 6' 2" 326 21 R Hampton CFA- '09
99 Askew, Matthias DT 6' 5" 302 26 2nd Michigan State FA-'08


Most of our ends (other than Elvis) are listed at 6'-6" with a couple 6'-4" guys thrown in.


I think that any combo of the above will result in blocking dummies and punching bags for the opposing offensive lines. I think the pass rush should be improved with getting Elvis in a more natural position and the addition of Ayers and better coaching.